Talk:OneDrive/Archive 1

Archive 1

Reference

The link below reffering to the active x drag and drop feature do not work and I can't find anything like it on the site. Should removes that info imo.

Is this true?

The service currently offers 1GB, with a maximum upload file size of 50MB. Up to five files can be uploaded each time. Optionally, an ActiveX tool can be installed to allow drag-and-drop uploading from Windows Explorer.

If it is true, a link should be provided. nunocordeiro 19:32, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it is true. Just go to the upload page to verify (Cannot add a link as it requires logging in first). --soum ^talk 08:50, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

The 1GB storage space is referenced from here and here. The official team blog should also mention the ActiveX drag-and-drop uploading feature (here). Maximum upload file size is stated within SkyDrive itself, however, requires you to log-in first, hence there isn't any links provided. --Pikablu0530 10:56, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Live Drive

Is this the Live Drive stuff? Then the articles should be merged. --soum ^talk 06:26, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

According to LiveSide.net, Live Folders and Live Drive are two different things. Live Folders is actually codenamed "SkyDrive" whereas Live Drive's codename is....."Live Drive". See here for more info. Pikablu0530 09:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thats a lot of Drives. :P --soum ^talk 09:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Actually, some sources I've found—and placed on Windows Live Drive—suggest, that LiveDrive has been rebranded to Windows Live Folders. I suggested to merge the articles. What's your opinion? --Kubanczyk (talk) 12:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

After checking some more sources (mainly MS blogs), I'm not so eager to do so. Sources are too vague on this one. --Kubanczyk (talk) 13:14, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

My instinct tells me that LiveDrive is more like FolderShare rather than SkyDrive (as Mary Jo Foley point out, it probably IS the same service). As to whether LiveDrive is SkyDrive or not, there are sources out there that indicates both arguments, and basically it's a huge branding mess. However, according to Microsoft Japan's powerpoint slide back in 2007, SkyDrive and Live Drive seems to be two distinct products. I'd choose to leave the article as it is right now (and don't merge) as no conclusion can be reached. --Pikablu0530 (talk) 16:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Is the folders.live.com link correct? It goes to the default Apache on RHEL page!!! --soum ^talk 09:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Definitely correct. Windows Live Folders was "accidentally" put online for a while around few months ago and that is the correct address to access it. Even the newest post at Liveside.net still contain that link - but can only accessed internally at Microsoft. Pikablu0530 10:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Page History

I made the following edits when I wasn't signed in by mistake: 19:40, 9 August 2007 83.216.132.69 (Talk) (2,570 bytes) (→Updates - Renamed Skydrive.) (undo)

If you have a problem with it please let me know. Thanks, GoddersUK

GoddersUK 19:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Eligible Citizens

Under the History section it is mentioned as "Shortly after on August 9, 2007 Windows Live Folders was renamed Windows Live SkyDrive and the participation was expanded to testers in the United Kingdom and India". I am from Sri Lanka and I am using the service for months. I think this service is for every one though I am not sure. Need to fix this.--Umapathy (உமாபதி) 23:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Like BT Digital Vault?

It looks to me that this has some similarities to BT's Digital Vault, ie: this is competition between Microsoft and BT. Is this true? If so, might it be a good idea to put this in? Memassivbeast (talk) 19:20, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Can SkyDrive be used as web space for HTML files?

Can someone upload their HTML and JPG files to SkyDrive and then redirect a domain name to skydrive so when people go to the domain name it loads the web pages from SkyDrive? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.204.219 (talk) 16:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Transfer limits

Are there any limits on how much data I can trasnfer to/from my SkyDrive every month? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.124.238 (talk) 18:30, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

No. There's no monthly transfer limits. The only limit is that individual files are limited to 50 MB and you have a storage space of 25GB. --Pikablu0530 (talk) 04:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Privacy

Does anyone know if Microsoft is maintaining user privacy with this "Live SkyDrive sync" thing? The big advantage of using "Shared folders" was that you could transfer, say, pirated music or such, without having to really worry about big-scary-microsoft watching you. But now that the only way to share massive files is by "sky drive" sharing, that means illegal stuff of users that they wanted to share could potentially be seen and reported. Any news on Microsoft's stance on this? There is no wealth like knowledge, no poverty like ignorance. - Ali ibn Abi-Talib (talk) 20:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Question about Google

Does Google have an equivalent service to this? 58.168.72.78 (talk) 10:02, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Google offers Google Docs. With this service, you can only upload documents (.doc, .txt, .rtf, etc.), spreadsheets (.xls), and presentations (.ppt). There are limits on the sizes for each of these. Like SkyDrive, you can edit them directly online using Doogle's versions of Word, Excel, and PowerPoint, or download them to work on. You can also share these files with other people —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcoryh192 (talk • contribs) 23:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Icon

I've actually found an icon image with the same resolution, but with correct alpha transparency (for the glow of the yellow orbit ring). It can actually be found from the new Windows Live Essentials installation, it's an official icon file. I actually wished to change it myself, but I do not have sufficient user rights to do so. For anyone interested please contact me if you can't find the icon file.

KheeChun (talk) 01:15, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

New Icon

Microsoft is going to make new icons for all his windows live web applications. We already have seen the new hotmail icon. Now microsoft has the new SkyDrive icon. Here is the new icon: http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/6341/windowsliveskydrivenewi.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by CarlosJJ (talk • contribs) 11:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

New icon (2)

https://secure.shared.live.com/FprkicNf-ps32vEVmIdcKA/Images/Cloud_Sync_96.png —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.81.84.149 (talk) 15:03, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Public Reception?

Does somebody not notice that there are NO comments on public reaction to SkyDrive? I've noticed a lot of people online who really don't like SkyDrive (e.g. http://readmystuff.wordpress.com/2009/07/24/why-windows-live-sky-drive-sucks/)

Anyways, this wiki page seems biased on how amazing SkyDrive, nothing mentioning it's slow upload/download speeds (lost my source for this).

Any comments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.213.59 (talk) 05:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Find a reliable source. Only then, we can have coverage. And please sign your comments too. Fleet Command (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I tried adding a link to a page showing how to circumvent SkyDrive and it was undone. I got a "sounds like hate-mongering" comment for my efforts. I was ready for all sorts fo reactions but "hate-mongering"? Urger48400 (talk) 07:33, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes and it was for all intents and purposes, hate-mongering. The only critical mention of Windows Live SkyDrive in it was that it "Should be disabled"! Why? No mention at all. That's what we call subliminal propaganda.

And by the way, you tell me, why should someone "circumvent" Windows Live Skydrive? What's the good of doing this? Is getting trapped into the 10MB limit of email attachments a good thing? How about making e-mail reading orders of magnitude more costly mobile phone owners?

Fleet Command (talk) 15:08, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

As a newcomer I thought that this talk page was “for discussing improvements to the Windows Live SkyDrive article” and that it was "not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject"; I didn’t know that we are allowed to discuss the merits of SkyDrive here. First, and to answer the question as to why anyone would want to circumvent SkyDrive, my answer is that it’s because SkyDrive can’t be disabled. (The external link http://www.kanyak.com/noskydrive.html does not say and never said that it “should” be.) Second, and since our goal is to improve Wikipedia, mentioning that SkyDrive can’t be disabled and that this is by design would be one improvement to the Wikipedia Skydrive article; showing readers the way that Microsoft itself has provided to turn SkyDrive off would be another. Third, it seems to me that gratuitously accusing someone of "hate-mongering" falls within the scope of "personal attacks", which we're supposed to avoid. Urger48400 (talk) 07:28, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Official announcement for Wave 5 release

Here it is:

http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/Features/2011/jun11/06-20SkyDrive.mspx

Fleet Command (talk) 09:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks! --Damaster98 (talk) 13:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Dubious

Unlike the statement in this article, both http://explore.live.com/windows-live-skydrive-about-faq and http://explore.live.com/office-web-apps-control-permissions claim the maximum size is 50MB and not 100MB. -212.143.128.190 (talk) 09:50, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

salem alikom kife halake labase ghaya — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.101.87.68 (talk) 21:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved Favonian (talk) 12:07, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

---

SkyDrive → Windows Live SkyDrive – Procedural nomination. Was moved from Windows Live SkyDrive to SkyDrive on December 12 with this rationale:

In some areas of the Microsoft website etc. it's being called Microsoft SkyDrive, sometimes it's being called Windows Live SkyDrive, and sometimes just SkyDrive. So SkyDrive is the best name as there is no confusion. See [1].

FleetCommand reversed that move today with the rationale MOS:TITLE, which I reverted, given that the name has stuck for several weeks and thinking the mover hadn't seen the previous rationale. Pnm (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. Keep at SkyDrive as the common name, or move to Microsoft SkyDrive which is the title used on the product's main page. – Pnm (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
• Comment: How does MOS:TITLE apply here? – Pnm (talk) 02:41, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
  • Per FleetCommand, he meant WP:TITLE, title policy in general. – Pnm (talk) 00:27, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
• Similar to Hotmail (the official name being Windows Live Hotmail), I don't see an issue with the title SkyDrive. Per WP:TITLE, it is recognizable with no ambiguity, natural (readers wouldn't think SkyDrive mean something else), it is precise (describes what is in the article), concise, and consistent (with Hotmail). Whilst this is not a proper measure, when I perform a Google search for SkyDrive, the top results all relate to Windows Live SkyDrive rather than anything else. Just my 2 cents.--Damaster98 (talk) 06:22, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Source problem: SkyDrive.com latest version

Hi.

The article specifies a four-part version number for www.skydrive.com (e.g. 16.4.8014.815) and a latest release date but does not specify a source for either. I propose that either a reliable source should be given using the footnote style or else either of the items that fail to present one be deleted.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 14:53, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I don't see an ongoing dispute about this? If there isn't a source for the information it should be removed, that's generally uncontroversial? — raekyT 20:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks. That's what I thought too.

The problem was, there is a lot of reverting going on. In one instance, {{Citation needed}} tag was removed and replaced with an HTML comment that read: "Go to the web site and look at the source in your web browser". I thought, well I am willing to, but you have not cited a source for me to look in my web browser! Please cite a source and I will look it up. I don't want to be a revert button abuser but sometimes I cannot decide whether the removal of a {{Citation needed}} is a content dispute or a removal of maintenance template without resolving the problem. I thought perhaps if I started an RFC, everyone can speak his mind.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 06:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. The source of information has been added using footnote style. By the way just to clarify (and to do myself some justice given Codename Lisa's comment above contains factual inaccuracies), the actual proper {{Citation needed}} tag was never used in the Codename Lisa's edit, the information was simply removed from the article. Instead, what I have done was to include a HTML comment with an explanation of the source of the information, and this explanation did in fact provided the link (i.e. the source) which can be looked up. However, subsequent edits by Codename Lisa and possibly other users have further removed the information, and in none of these edits have the proper {{Citation needed}} tag ever been used. Nevertheless, the source has now been added using footnote style as Codename Lisa has suggested. Damaster98 (talk) 07:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Actually, you are referring to a different edit of mine in which I removed unreferenced info. But I digress. The point is, {{Citation needed}} is just a template for the period of dispute and editors are not obliged to use it at all. Unreferenced info can be challenged and removed. (At leas two other people in this discussion are saying the same thing.)

As for the reference you have supplied, I think it should be seriously checked against WP:NOR for validity. Perhaps I will open a noticeboard case in a few days. For now, this RFC can close.

Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

I have two suggestions. The first is that we could comment out the version number until a source is found, and the second that we leave the version number in place and add a citation needed tag. Cloudbound (talk) 13:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Email Integration

Reference #23 in this section is a broken link. Also the first two points are not currently correct. - Hotmail / Outlook is not integrated with Skydrive - there are no options to store docs and photos from Hotmail to Skydrive. Srowatt (talk) 06:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

• References have all been fixed. Plus the first two points are correct, you are able to upload files directly to SkyDrive using Hotmail/Outlook.com. --Damaster98 (talk) 10:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Software version again

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Can we just remove any nonsense "versions" and "release dates" from main infobox? They aren't really helpful - they are just versions of the web page itself... Mobile users cannot even "verify" this info (no way to "view page source" on mobile Safari) and it is irrelevant to app users, both mobile and desktop, who don't even have to use main web page... Same goes for all similar cloud services. 173.68.110.16 (talk) 03:28, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

• Endorse. Hi. Assuming that you are referring to the SkyDrive.com infobox, I have three reasons to endorse:

1. The way the version number is discovered is original research. Simple test: Remove the version number but leave the footnote. Then, tell someone layman to go find it, using the footnote as a clue. Why, do it yourself now.
2. Release date is outright unverifiable. Even if a secondary source publish such date, it would be the date in which it has noticed a change, not an actual release date. (The actual release date could have been long before that.)
3. Version number is in violation of the fluid nature of this web site. It changes constantly and does not have one fixed state.

I believe this change should be made to all Windows Live articles because they too, have version numbers.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 12:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

• Endorse. Since you ask, I think Lisa's points sound good. JonRichfield (talk) 12:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
• Endorse per all the reasons above. Only if and when the apps for Windows, Android, etc have version numbers should they be mentioned somewhere, but probably not in the infobox. _W^\|/_haledad (Talk to me) 02:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi. You needn't worry about the software: They have their own infoboxes further down in the article. (Of course, since you are at liberty to worry, you can worry about it in separate topic, if you know what I mean. ) Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 08:06, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

• Endorse Microsoft changes the website automatically, which means that the secondary source records the time when they 'detected'/were notified of the change and the primary source, as usual, is not compatible with Wikipedia's referencing/sourcing policies. In addition, as Lisa also mentioned, the version numbers are constantly changing, hence cannot be "accurate" once updated again by the developer(s). Of course, this applies to web sites, not necessarily downloadable programs. --JustBerry (talk) 22:48, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not yet OneDrive

Hi.

I noticed a change by User:TheIntersect and User:EuroCarGT in the article today. One of these changes were to change the URL from skydrive.com to onedrive.com. Unfortunately, I had to revert this change because onedrive.com does not work in my region yet. It says:

OneDrive is coming soon.

Get ready for an even better place to store and share your favorite things across all your favorite devices.

OneDrive is everything you love about SkyDrive and more. And it's coming soon.

Give us your email address and we'll let you know when OneDrive is here.

skydrive.com, however, still works. Please note that per MOS:COMPUTING, we have no mandate to change the redirect that works. So, please do not hurry.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 15:56, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

@Codename Lisa: Thanks for notifying me! And yes, it's not OneDrive yet. ///EuroCarGT 15:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello again

After studying sources, I have decided no semblances of OneDrive exists as of yet, and the name change was premature. I am restoring SkyDrive but I am not deleting OneDrive info from the article.

Best regards,

Codename Lisa (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

---

One.com Could Sue Microsoft Over OneDrive Name – Report. Softpedia.

That's for people who doubt the proven wisdom of WP:CRYSTAL.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 19 February 2014

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Pikachu Bros. (talk) 19:59, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

---

SkyDrive → OneDrive – OneDrive is officially online Asiaworldcity (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

SkyDrive

Could we recreate skydrive to tell people about that service before it was renamed please. 94.7.128.0 (talk) 16:11, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

List of languages

Hi.

There seems to be a disagreement as to whether we must list languages supported by OneDrive in the article. This list had existed in the article for a long time and is sourced but WilliamJE deleted it yesterday saying it is not necessary. He contents that:[2]

Unnecessary detail and consistent with other MS related topics- Windows 7, Windows Vista, MSE which don't list all languages. Windows Vista Service Pack 1 section mentions 31 languages. Where's that list?

I am afraid I see multiple problems with this reason:

1. Other Microsoft topics do list languages, including Office 2010, Office 2013, Microsoft Security Essentials (that's right!), Microsoft Expression Web, Visual Studio, Microsoft WebMatrix, Microsoft Expression Studio, etc. Other non-Microsoft topics also list languages, such as Adobe Photoshop, Acronis True Image, etc.
2. There is no rule against having a list of languages in Wikipedia. On the contrary, there is rules in favor listing them: WP:FACR requires all articles nominated for FA to be self-contained; i.e. cover everything related to that subject. So, I say in fact, we should add them to those articles that William mentioned.
3. "Consistency" is an informal fallacy here; there is no rule that says if something is absent all instances of the same genre must also be deleted. To give an example of absurdity, one can extend this fallacy by saying because Wikipedia does not have an article on Software X (insert the name of your favorite software title here) it must have no article on computer software at all. Don't you find this ridiculous?

Of course, this list was originally within the infobox. I brought it out 2.5 years ago (on 14 August 2012) because the infobox had grown to ridiculous proportions. Damaster98 later audited my edit. But if anyone is interested, we can certainly talk about it.

I am inviting people involved with this article to this discussion via ping, in the order to size of the contribution: Damaster98, MusikAnimal, Indrek, Jasper Deng, ViperSnake151 and FleetCommand, can I please have your input? And please don't restrict yourself to keep it, remove it or move it to infobox. Please feel free to explore alternative avenues.

A related issue

I normally comment on content, not on the contributor unless the contributor becomes a problem himself. Well, I think 3rd time is the charm. This is the third time I am having a dispute in William and in all three instances, he has responded my BRD revert with a counter-revert and accused of me of attempting to take the ownership of the article. In this case, after preaching me about WP:BRD in his talk page on 10:56 (UTC), he ignores his own advise and breaches BRD on 13:49. When I protest, he accuses me of WP:OWN. Now, am I really doing something wrong? If I am, I really like to know.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 03:47, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse. Keeping a list of languages is okay; that's the prevailing consensus through editing as shown by your own examples. But since you are a template editor, consider adding the same construct in infobox software to infobox website. Also consider notifying WikiProject Software. Then, list languages in the infobox. As for the editor's behavior, he is clearly in violation of WP:BRD both here and in Internet Explorer 1. Since WilliamJE has a huge block log, I'd say you don't worry about his WP:OWN rants. And while we are at it, he is feeding you total bullshit: Merger discussions are not held in AfD. Fleet Command (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

• Endorse. There is long-standing implicit consensus for including the full list of languages, and Codename Lisa's examples clearly show this article isn't an isolated exception. The infobox might be a better location for it, though (hidden by default, as in Office 2013) - I don't think this information is quite important enough to take up so much space in the main article text.

As for the accusations of WP:OWN, I can't say I've seen any such behaviour on Lisa's part, in this particular article or others. Indrek (talk) 12:21, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

OneDrive for Business

The handling of OneDrive for Business feels confusing... It seems to be a completely separate product with a separate codebase and protocol (seemingly from Microsoft Groove legacy), but info about it is intertwined with the normal OneDrive version. (Such as the "The current storage limit for OneDrive users is 1 TB for Office 365 paid subscribers or 5 GB of free storage." comment in the introduction)

Info in some parts are just plain inaccurate for OneDrive for Business, like most of the "Client applications" section. Edit: It seems like they are converging though.... MoHaG (talk) 07:45, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:OneDrive/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: David Eppstein (talk · contribs) 20:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

This article has multiple valid [clarify], [citation needed], and {{lead too short}} cleanup tags, some dating as early as 2014. In addition the entire "Download as ZIP files", "Photos and videos", and "Regional availability" sections are unsourced., It is not yet ready for GA review. (See Wikipedia:Good article criteria, "Immediate failures", #3: "cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid". —David Eppstein (talk) 20:38, 11 March 2017 (UTC)