Agree with consumer experience

[marcossmith]

I agree with ACarneiro in his topic.

Now the prices are very good, but storj decided to be only developer network.

All the people like me, who wants to store his backups, and participate in network are out. Duplicati, filezilla connectors dont make sense, you only has 50 GB to store.

But, what about developers. If I want develop a product, I have 4 connectors, Android, Net, Swift , C. Go and a python wrapper around go.

So developers are a bit limited to this technologies. But its worsts. Let me explain.

If I want to do a dropbox using storj, imagine that I need to send directly access grant to customer, I cant, I need a middle server to be secure. All customers shares the same access grant?. How is supposed to share the same access grant to all customers, or I need to create manually one per customer.

Imagine that on customer share a file public and consumes a lot of bandwith.

I need an api, to create projects and buckets, and need to put limits in buckets.

Its a great product, but marketing decisions cant be dangerous.

[utropicmedia-karl]

Hi @marcossmith -

There are actually many connectors the community has provided - you should check out Storj - Third Party · GitHub as nodejs, typescript and rust also exist, along with a number of connectors for other applications.(Pydio, cPanel, etc.). If you need to manage access grants you can use a number of the bindings.

As for a better end-user experience, there are so many clients out there now. We’ve tested many S3 compatible clients and found the experience very straight forward. I feel Storj is positioned for technologists, like many other successful software companies. Netapp, for example, doesn’t sell to consumers. Neither does AWS.

I think there can be a nice strategic discussion around selling technology to end-users. Many of the high-growth companies with consumable technology target other technologists, additionally, companies in this space often focus on B2B. Lots of great discussion to be had around this topic!

[BrightSilence]

I have a bit of trouble determining your intention with this post, so I’m going to try and pick it apart a bit.

My initial impression was that this was just a response that belongs on the other topic you are linking to. And I think the 50GB limit is sufficiently explained there and should be discussed there if there are any further questions.

But I think there are some actual separate questions here that are worth discussing. Though I’m not entirely sure if this describes a hypothetical or whether you have actual implementation questions for something you are working on.

While I won’t be able to address the specifics from the top of my head, I think I can answer some of the things you are referring to.

@marcossmith

If I want to do a dropbox using storj, imagine that I need to send directly access grant to customer, I cant, I need a middle server to be secure. All customers shares the same access grant?. How is supposed to share the same access grant to all customers, or I need to create manually one per customer.

Uplink and libuplink allow you to create and manage access grants as well using the uplink share function. So customers don’t need to share a single access grant. These access grants can be limited to specific object paths, so you can assign each customer their own object path and create the relevant access grant for them.

@marcossmith

Imagine that on customer share a file public and consumes a lot of bandwith.

I need an api, to create projects and buckets, and need to put limits in buckets.

So I think you’re saying you want to create quotas per customer. You could of course implement that in your own code for the project. You definitely shouldn’t be creating projects per customer though. That’s not the intended use of projects. Projects is more to separate your dropbox clone from your streaming service and your own system backups in a large organisation that runs multiple projects.

I’m not sure if it’s already possible to set a quota on buckets or even specific object paths. That might be a nice addition if it isn’t yet possible.

I hope that was at least a little helpful. It might help to clarify your intentions with this post.

[jocelyn]

I agree that it seems like this is a separate - and worthy - discussion to have. Thanks @marcossmith for starting it. In order to keep it productive, it will help if we can clarify the specfic points. The reason I say that is becuase when I bring back feedback to the company, specfic feedback is easier to act upon.

That said, I also believe in the value of brainstorming. So if you want to toss around general ideas prior to moving to specific ideas, I’m in support of that too

[jocelyn]

Following on my last comment, I agree with what Brightsilence said. You probably dont want to be creating projects on a per-customer basis because you can handle the need for clean managemnt in other ways. I think I remember another thread about this. If I can find it will edit this post and drop it below for reference

ETA: I think this may be relevant, let us know however:

Multiple access grants (user access) for same Bucket/Prefix/Permissions

Hi, I’ve been playing around with uplink/tardigrade and have started using the access.Share functionality in the uplink go library. What I’ve read and noticed is that for any combination of Bucket/Prefix/Permissions the serialized access token is always the same. I was wondering if there was any way to create multiple serialized access tokens for the same combination of Bucket/Prefix/Permissions. The application is for a medical data project. Where the buckets would be patients and the access …

Tardigrade Only Option for Access Grants Instead of API Keys

I’m having a minor panic attack looking at a new change in Tardigrade. The API keys are no longer what is granted and only access grants. Which now for one need passphrases, and two, are no longer stand alone API keys. These are granted from what? An API key linked to my account? Our users should have stand-alone top level access that is irrevocable by no one other than themselves. We don’t want to be the master control for our user’s data. My biggest question here is: Is the access grant a …

Sharing Restricted Access with Prefix using uplink GO

Hi all, I’m trying to create a shared access with a bucket/prefix. I’m able to create a shared serialized access. I try to then use that serialized access to call to upload and I get “Unauthorized API credentials”. It’s worth mentioning that the upload works fine with a bucket/prefix when I use the serialized access created from the tardigrade api token. It’s also worth mentioning that when I don’t send in a prefix to the share, with only a bucket, I’m also able to upload. Here’s my code for t…