donwload site
what's webhard?
Compared to the following clouds, media playback in mobile environments is advantageous. Especially regarding videos, the next cloud must be downloaded all together, while streaming. Just to stream! I have to install another app again. Cloud alone is not enough to stream.
Faster than the next cloud. About 20%.
When you open a document with a cloud viewer, it breaks less than the next cloud (but breaking itself is already a problem).
Web app is supported. It's rudimentary, but it is possible to write. However, the thing is that the document format is a bizarre format, such as for example .ndoc, which makes it extremely incompatible.
File sharing through the URL (but this is as far as another cloud is concerned).
Webhard
It includes a smaller capacity compared to the next cloud.
In comparison to foreign cloud services, it boasts poor service quality.
When compared to next cloud, it is very disadvantageous for music playback. Continuous streaming is possible only for several selected sound sources. The next cloud only needs to be in a folder.
You must share a URL which means you can't share music files or videos.
According to the report, you will find a saying that N drive looks like a local drive when installed, but only it happens like a local drive, which is no not the same as the folder synchronization setting. It's even worse for computers in the first place when external programs play tricks on them. It's far better to just tidy up the synchronization folder.***
It is very specialized in playing music. In particular, it's the only cloud that may play sound sources within an environment similar to MP3 players we are acquainted with. Although each song has some buffering, it seems to play around 192kpbs continuously, let's assume that communication is in good shape in a 3G environment. Needless to say, in reality, it's often take off at that point)
It includes a large capacity. This is a significant advantage when considering domestic cloud services all together, which have low quality of media access in cloud services.
You can substitute the finish drive above. In particular, in case a picture is contained in a document, it is rarely opened properly.
Streaming songs often cuts off (however, not often) due to communication issues with the cloud, not Internet speed problems. Personally i think like it's about once every two hours. And if you listen to high-quality sound sources, it gets buffered often, or if you are in a place where the 3G environment isn't smooth, it gets cut off more often. And when it's in that state, you must find the path of the folder where the song was playing and play it again.
The only way to share is folder sharing. Only some documents or presentation files are for sale to file viewing. Except for those points, there is nothing to say even if it is almost a webhard level.
Foreign Cloud Comparison (Google Drive, Dropbox, Box, Skydrive)
Google Drive
It exerts tremendous power on paper documents. In particular, even without an office program, Google Drive can cover it somewhat. Not fancy ppts or fancy excels, almost any simple document is OK.
It is advantageous to reflect the progress of work in the mobile environment. By establishing only offline views, the files you work on can continue being reflected in the cloud instantly. This is a very convenient feature for sharing files with other users.
It is easy to connect with other Google services such as for example Gmail.
Unless you upload documents directly to the Google drive but write them on the Google drive web app, the capacity of the file will not take into account cloud storage (what can you mean, if you just use the web app, the capability of the Google drive is infinite).
Now, photo media access is strong at the dropbox level. You can flip through photos and videos can be played right away. 웹하드순위 However, the loading time seems to take a little longer compared to the dropbox. I feel it), nonetheless it doesn't bother me.
There are the most apps that may be connected. In a desktop environment. Various connection apps allow various operations in the web environment without installing programs using the pc. It's a bit of a problem that the app doesn't connect at all on mobile, but it's the best in the desktop environment.
Upload a little pdf file and change it to Google Docs format. It can then be stored again in MS Word format or something. However, it is only possible with pdf files of 2MB or less.
There is no bandwidth restriction in name. There's a testimony that it's a block after a lot of writing, but it's not stipulated by company policy.
If you are using Google Docs web app, you can save documents indefinitely, but if you save them indefinitely, it's the same as once you lose your Internet connection, you're going to sink and use MS word, right?)
Google Docs web app, cloud-connected web app, support for editing files using a variety of programs, but it is still crude compared to office programs used on computers.Could it be obvious?)
Dropbox
It exerts its strongest power in media viewing. Photo folders? Could be flipped smoothly (Domestic cloud services require a specific amount of buffering time for every photo). However, if you wait a bit for the dropbox, the photos in a single folder are loaded entirely. While looking at Photo A, Photo B is loaded and scrolling is possible without the blockage. Video? Beyond streaming, you can freely specify before start of playback. It's the best in the world in terms of media reading.
There are various method of increasing capacity. Camera upload settings, invitation of friends, events at the company level, etc.
The speed is relatively good. It's a lot faster than the Box and doesn't work with Google Drive.
The file capacity limit which can be uploaded from a free account may be the largest. 300MB.
The bandwidth of the free account is larger than that of the Box. It really is updated by 20GB per day. It's practically infinite unless you are going to share large files.
The starting capacity may be the smallest. Two gigabytes of dirt.
Price compared to capacity may be the priciest cloud service. Dirty bastards...
There is a saying that changes in documents cannot be reflected in real time when working on documents.
Word documents shouldn't flip different files like picture documents.
The dropbox itself cannot be documented.
There are the most compatible apps in the mobile environment. To be able to work on a document, you can choose the interface you want through the app drive and focus on it leisurely.
Regarding document files, simple document inquiry is really a convenient axis because previews are given. Unlike additional.dropboxes, if you can find multiple Word documents in a folder, Word documents can also be flipped on the file or file, as is seen in the photo file.
File sharing support is fairly good. This box allows anyone who manages or creates a website to talk about data conveniently with little use of the net page's resources. However, the bandwidth of the free account is 10GB monthly, which is quite small.
Slow. Not paid people.
Media access is very disadvantageous. It's even worse than Google Drive, which says it's disadvantageous above. It's easier to just do it on some type of computer than pay attention to it for a test.
The uploadable file capacity limit may be the smallest. 100MB. Free account only.
In a mobile environment, real-time documentation is rarely supported.
If you don't install Boxeditor, the documentation will undoubtedly be written with an extension that can only be written on Box (it works, so it's much better than Dropbox, but it's less than Google Drive).
It had been recently updated (on 22 February?). Media access is currently quite convenient. Especially photo files. But the pace is still a bit slow.***
Skydrive
The writing function is very powerful. Many cloud services offer Web apps. But Skydrive's is the most similar to the MS office documenting environment we've often used. And there are also the most supported handwriting, even though it is four-legged.
The basic capacity is rather good. 7GB. Well, it isn't that strong a difference.
It is no exaggeration to state that the interface of mobile apps is the most backward cloud service ever.