I am witnessing a steady decline in Disk Average Month across all my nodes. Anyone else? At this rate, there will soon be nothing left.
Too few customers, too many SNOs. Deletions occur almost daily, and I observe that data is hardly kept for a week before being deleted again. and whether you win or lose races
6 Likes
You want to be looking at three, six and 12 month to see your growth. Daily, Weekly and monthly are two volitile
1 Like
Monthly samples are stable enough to show if you’re gaining or losing. It looks like the network has been growing the last few months - other than that huge deletion the second week of Feb.
Or at least it looks like North American nodes are still slowly growing: maybe European nodes see something different?
Crypto ICO money part is over.
We moved to another club called AI.
That club will also soon close.
Then we will Uber home and have a very bad headache (recession).
Over all these years, there was only one steady fact: storj pricing for customers was never competitive. Sure, there might be some crypto fools that fell for the “distributed” lie, but other than that, there were no customers. 60PB is nothing.
Not even the announced Backblaze B2 price increase from 6 to 7$ is enough to change that.
2 Likes
I also see (very) low growth in Europe. The nice growth we observe on storjstats appears to be fueled by select network.
3 Likes
any optimized configuration can help? or debugging tips?
guys I think somehow I don’t get new data?
European IT is IMHO less vulnerable to hype. Plus with the recent madness happening in the US, many are turning their backs on the US.
Even for SNOs in europe like 80 percent of traffic is coming from US1 satellite and this hasn’t changed much over time. I don’t count on europe or asia.
My expirience in EU for the past 3 years: after year 1, your stored data per IP goes to a flat line. So what you get in the first year is what you end up store for the next 5 years, maybe, with a verry slow increase. You could get some extra in the year 2, but after that, nothing. I tend to believe that 2 years are the maximum backups lifecycle.
It is not correct to compare storj with conventional participants in the race to bottom, let alone backblaze, who nobody should use ever, you can find my old posts for why
Storj offers something nobody else does: distributed by default, very fast throughput to data from any point on the planet.
Maybe there are not many who needs that, but those who do — don’t have alternatives. Well, there are half-measures, like replications and paying double and triple.
Some usecases are only available with storj — like upload 20TB of data at 3 gigabyte per second in U.S. and immediately download it in EU, without wasting time on replication. Go try that with Backblaze
I don’t think price is or should be the reason people choose storj. Therefore they can hike price and people who need what they offer — will continue paying.
Once you start competing on price with bottom of the barrel bargain providers — you negate and devalue all your advantage.
3 Likes
While I agree this usecase exists, do you think that this is what this customer requires?
There are many usecases and reasons for Storj. Narrowing too much and focus only on one industry and low global visibility are part of Storjs marketing problem.
I fully agree. Storj has more than one selling points, that’s even more reasons to not participate in the race to the bottom on price.
I’d say — that nobody is made aware that they want.
This is also:
It dosen’t mean anything. If we had 500 PB free and 250 PB occupied, you would say the same.
Only thing that matters is the occupied space from one year to the next. Is it increasing? Is it decreasing?
I remember 2 years ago we had like 20 PB occupied, now we have 58 PB. I would say Storj is a wanted service.
4 Likes
Yes, they are leaving it to the competitors. Like:
3 posts were split to a new topic: Comparing CDN speed