Billing themselves as "dead simple file sharing for design and media professionals," BoxCloud seems to have a good thing going here. If you deal with a lot of clients and customers who simply aren't hip to FTP or other ways of transferring large files, BoxCloud offers a pretty simple, nay - dead simple - alternative. Featuring software clients for both Windows and Mac OS X (though when Download Squad found them last year they apparently offered a Linux client too), all you need is someone's email address to share a file of any size with them. Your lucky recipient, be they a client, friend, family member or co-worker, will receive an email with a link to download the file from your BoxCloud page. But herein lies the twist: BoxCloud doesn't host the file, so you aren't charged for space - your computer must be running BoxCloud's client, be on, and connected to the internet in order to share the file (i.e. - you host it). Their service plan then simply charges you for monthly bandwidth, not storage space, and plans start at 1GB/month for free, moving on up to 20GB for $9/month.Sure, anyone who's domain + hosting savvy will scoff at this service, but anyone looking for brainless and painless file sharing might appreciate BoxCloud's simplicity. If you're interested, take their tour for more info on how simple sharing can be.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-29-2007 @ 3:24PM
Nick said...
Thanks for the non-Apple news, needed a break from all the other relevant topics!
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 3:34PM
Nathan said...
sounds like a carbon copy of Pando
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 3:45PM
brian said...
How is it dead simple if it requires you to leave your computer on and run thier client software? If someone is the type that would need this service they probably arent' the type that's going to remember to leave this running and their computer on when they send someoen a link. Also, why is this company charging for bandwidth when you're not passing through their network?
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 3:47PM
guilt+1 said...
So. why are you paying these people anything ?
If I host the file then the bandwidth costs are mine and also those of the person downloading. The storage costs are mine alone and the cost of sending an email is negligible.
They seemingly have found a clever way to lighten peoples wallets while actively providing nothing more than a means to circumvent firewalls.
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 3:53PM
Dave Chartier said...
They create the web site that is the UI for your hosted files. They also serve as the middle man for connecting you and your file recipient; the client is part of that service, but so is connecting the dots between you two.
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 4:11PM
Scote said...
Better hope your asynchronous upload speeds are good or it's going to take your client a long time to download the file, especially with concurrent activity.
As for newbies, do you really want them using their own computer as a server?
This may work well for some, but my connection is too slow and my client files are too large to host via my home internet connection.
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 4:17PM
Adrian said...
This sounds a bit strange to me. Basically, what it sounds like is that they sell you your own bandwith.
They do charge you for all bandwith you use _on your own computer_ over _your own internet connection_. I'm not sure if they tunnel all data through their servers but as long as your not behind a NAT that wouldn't make much sense.
They do offer a caching option to temporarily store your files on their servers, though.
I'm anything but against simple file sharing but this payment scheme seems a bit strange to me.
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 4:19PM
Rubbinz said...
I use MediaFire.com - No "client" software, no fees, and no limits. You can't get any simpler. BoxCloud = DOA.
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 6:05PM
Ben said...
Pando is not quite as simple in that it requires the recipient to download and install the Pando client and use it to receive the file. But most folks should be able to follow the instructions to do so. I'd rather use Pando because it senses whether sender and recipient are on a local network and employs a direct connection to transfer if they are, or hosts the file on Pando's servers if not. (And, at least so far, it's free.)
Reply
1-29-2007 @ 6:30PM
Isko said...
I get that they made an easy to use U.I. and they want to charge for it. And hey, the 1gb free plan's not bad.
I can definitely think of few persons that I've had to send files to and in the end, it was easier just to snail mail the files on cd.
Wish they had an option to host the files on your own server instead of leaving your own computer on for the whole time.
Reply
1-30-2007 @ 1:25AM
Paris said...
why would anyone use this as opposed to rapidshare, megaupload or any of the many free services that do this without the hassle of needing your machine to be running and online?
Reply
1-30-2007 @ 2:21AM
Patrick said...
I also think that Pando is the better choice.
Greetings
Reply
1-30-2007 @ 11:51AM
Ash Maurya said...
Ash (from BoxCloud here)...
Just clarifying a couple of points made:
1. BoxCloud is not a P2P or web based application but a p2web application which is both. As a result, we do tunnel all traffic through our network to be able to connect the browser with the target machine where the files reside. We are going to support direct P2P connections if both sides have the client which will not be counted as bandwidth usage.
2. BoxCloud was really designed to simplify iterative collaboration in environments (like graphic design) where there is a lot of content churn (rapid creation/feedback/revision cycles) - without having to upload multiple revisions of the same files, or forcing others to download a p2p client. You just work on your desktop like you always did.
3. The "online" limitation is something we are working to eliminate over time through a combination of server caching (already available) and swarming across other nodes that have the file.
Reply