Because you’re comparing apple to oranges, even if it seems like the same service, is a tiny portion of what google offers.
Google sells it’s suite as a whole. Gdrive ties into you email, drop a file and it links to drive, calendar, sharing permissions, Enterprise/Organization settings, including everything its proprietary technology (sheets, docs, slides, Photos etc…) can do with Drive.
Of course google wants to push you to the premium tier, and doesn’t need to offer as good of a deal to do so because you already get so much for free. I’m not arguing it’s not more expensive, but people pay for all that convenience from a “trusted” brand that 99% of people know how to use.
I meant value purely as in $/TB without factoring in all the other properties.
You can get object storage for $6-$7/TB/month from the likes of Wasabi and Backblaze.
For a more “fair” comparison, you can get Onedrive for $6/TB (+M$'s office suite) or 2TB for $10 at Dropbox, so $5/TB.
Though I guess Google does have a little more cost effective plan for $10/2TB aswell that I didn’t know about.
For reference: Google’s 100G and 200G plans are $20/TB and $15/TB respectively. I’d call a 3-4x higher price “really bad value”.
For me, the big differentiator is Google photos, I find it very effective and easy to use. I will take the price hit for that convenience.
Because you’re comparing apple to oranges, even if it seems like the same service, is a tiny portion of what google offers.
Google sells it’s suite as a whole. Gdrive ties into you email, drop a file and it links to drive, calendar, sharing permissions, Enterprise/Organization settings, including everything its proprietary technology (sheets, docs, slides, Photos etc…) can do with Drive.
Of course google wants to push you to the premium tier, and doesn’t need to offer as good of a deal to do so because you already get so much for free. I’m not arguing it’s not more expensive, but people pay for all that convenience from a “trusted” brand that 99% of people know how to use.