Going from 200 GB to 2 TB is pretty steep. I'd like some more tiers, maybe every 250 GB or so. I had the 1 TB plan, and I just checked. They upgraded me to the 2 TB plan. I have a number of pictures I store there, but very far from 2 TB.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Drops 2TB iCloud Storage Price to $9.99, Eliminates 1TB Option
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yep, and this is insidious. They don't make it clear that they do this. Your photos are recompressed at a lower JPG quality level, so you lose information. This is done silently, so if you later decide to download your photos to edit them, you just lost ANOTHER generation of quality.
iCloud Photo Library may be proprietary to Apple but at least they are very careful to preserve your data as is. I've even done MD5 checksum comparisons of every photo in my library to the version in iCloud, and they match. Yes, I'm paranoid.
Agreed. Considering the increasing size of pictures and backups, it's definitely needed. Plus, Apple should have the resources to supply additional space for free.
I get by with the 50GB plan. It's enough to backup 2 iPads, my iPhone along with photos and 1080p and 4K video. Once the backups get too large I simply import the older videos to my mbp. Just using iCloud Drive, iCloud Photo Library on all devices would be fantastic but not a great solution for privacy. I still prefer keeping all of the stuff on my mac local. I'll put some stuff I need on Dropbox but to let iCloud upload everything to the cloud is not something I'm ready to allow. Not just yet.
"free iCloud space continues to cap out at 5GB"
That is RIDICULOUS. These are expensive devices. There is absolutely NO reason Apple should still be doing 5GB free storage in 2017!!!
5GB was fine in 2011. But 2017? What a freaking joke.
That is RIDICULOUS. These are expensive devices. There is absolutely NO reason Apple should still be doing 5GB free storage in 2017!!!
5GB was fine in 2011. But 2017? What a freaking joke.
Yep, and this is insidious. They don't make it clear that they do this. Your photos are recompressed at a lower JPG quality level, so you lose information. This is done silently, so if you later decide to download your photos to edit them, you just lost ANOTHER generation of quality.
iCloud Photo Library may be proprietary to Apple but at least they are very careful to preserve your data as is. I've even done MD5 checksum comparisons of every photo in my library to the version in iCloud, and they match. Yes, I'm paranoid.
I don't know if I would call it insidious. Here is a screenshot from the app (see below). Yes, they do size down the file, but as other posters here (and articles) have noted - you can blow the photos up and not be able to tell the difference. The resolution stays the same under and at 16mp. That's what convinced me that I didn't care. If I did care, I would turn on Original quality - which I've considered doing but I take thousands of photos a month so I don't.
I pay for 100GB (I have 1TB because of Chromebook/Local Guides storage offers) and I'm only using 35GB of storage. I back up my photos on OneDrive, Amazon Photos, iTunes to my computer, and to Google Photos. I really hope Google Drive comes out with new storage tiers later this year or soon.
I wish they had also doubled the other tiers. That day when I go from having 199GB to 200GB I will have to upgrade to a tier that's TEN TIMES my current tier. That seems excessive, and like I'm throwing away $8 out of the $10 bucks a month it'll cost.
Maybe I'll back up my entire Mac to iCloud; might as well since I'll have the space!
Maybe I'll back up my entire Mac to iCloud; might as well since I'll have the space!
I use the free 5gb and it's plenty for my iPhone and iPad. 1.3 gb for my iPhone and 685 mb for my iPad. Leaves me with a 2.1 gb free. I do not backup photos from either device.
It should cover the storage size of the device and provide a seamless restore when necessary. Period.
I pay $7 a month for 1TB on OneDrive and get Office included. 2TB is tempting but I usually keep my OS lower based on what I need rather than what Apple wants. If I need iOS 11 for the new storage (or extensions of that) then I won't be taking it.
Currently running iOS 9.3.5 on my iPhone 6S. Just cos it works.
[doublepost=1496780642][/doublepost]
Currently running iOS 9.3.5 on my iPhone 6S. Just cos it works.
[doublepost=1496780642][/doublepost]
That's a brilliant idea. They should included iCloud storage based on your device whenever you buy a new one. Though I'm sure Apple will start to hate giving away 256GB storage packs...
Yeah I saw it from multiple sources. It's coming with ios 11 so won't be ready until Fall.
My 1TB still hasn't bumped up to 2TB even though it shows that's the plan I'm on. Anyone else's like this?
I doubt it, there are currently 700 million active iPhone users. Assuming less than half of the users subscribed to that 50gb plan for $.99. Let's say 200 million users that's $200 million monthly revenue right there. I don't think Timmy would be willing to just give that up.
So in a year you'll pay for a 2TB drive this way at the rate of $9.99/month but you won't own that drive you'll have to pay for it again the next year and the next year and the next year add infimum. That's a very bad deal. You can get personal cloud drives that you can access from anywhere and you'll own them.
iCloud Photo Library = paid (over a measly free quota, yes I know)Yep, and this is insidious. They don't make it clear that they do this. Your photos are recompressed at a lower JPG quality level, so you lose information. This is done silently, so if you later decide to download your photos to edit them, you just lost ANOTHER generation of quality.
iCloud Photo Library may be proprietary to Apple but at least they are very careful to preserve your data as is. I've even done MD5 checksum comparisons of every photo in my library to the version in iCloud, and they match. Yes, I'm paranoid.
You absolutely have the option to upload full blown resolution photos and videos into Google Photos. You'd need to buy more space juuuust like Apple.
So, your point fails in logic.
Uh no. I know how to read. In any case it is fixed now, and showing the full 2TB. Just slow rollout.
Still no family sharing though.
[doublepost=1496794580][/doublepost]
Yeah, I am using 240GB and it's ludicrous that my only option is 2TB.
Good to know! However, I'm guessing a majority of its users won't care
Interesting... this post got me thinking to MY alternative.... I have an micro-SD card I purchased for my Samsung Galaxy s2 back in 2011 for $25 (IIRC). Having experience with handhelds using storage cards (e.g. Palm OS devices with SD cards, or dumbphones at the turn of the decade with micro SD card slots), I was initially concerned that some apps wouldn't support being run off the external card. I would've sprung for a gs2 with 32 GB had it been available (only 16 GB). However, 2 things that didn't make this as much of an issue are
1) I've gotten better about not DL-ing massive numbers of apps and media
2) Photos and videos end up eating about 3/4 of all storage usage, and that was only 11 GB... of which multimedia being access from ext. storage has no issues. I'm on an LG G4, and that same micro SD card is up to 21 GB used. I'm not close to maxing it out. Even if I am, I could always just buy more of them.
Quickie price shopping says a 64 GB goes for $11 to $30. Apple charging $1 a month means it'll take a while for the micro-SD card to "pay for itself", but there are still other conveniences too, and I'd rather go with that all said and done.
It's only compressed if the photo exceeds 16 megapixels. And video is compressed if it exceeds 1080p. This is for the free unlimited storage. The paid storage has no limitations and doesn't compress anything.
I'd go for the 200GB but a tier between 200 and 2TB would be a good to a lot of people