This looks great. However, 5 Gb is the same amount of free storage as is given to every user on iCloud, so you won't save much space on your phone by being a free user on Loom. On the other hand, 50 Gb costs $48/year on Loom and close to $100 on iCloud. Another alternative is everpix.com, which offers unlimited storage for $49/year.
Hi, co-founder of Loom here. Thanks for the feedback.
The reason Loom saves space compared with iCloud is that Loom stores your original photos entirely in the cloud, and not on your device. Loom caches smaller versions of these originals on your phone for fast browsing, organizing, and sharing, and then you can quickly access the originals if you choose.
Everpix is a great service and more affordable than Loom, but the main difference between Loom and Everpix is that we store your files in their original size and resolution, untouched, so if you ever need them, you can get them. Additionally, Loom supports RAW and video uploads.
How would you say you guys compare to Flickr which offers 1TB? I've tried your service out here and there, but not sure where the value was compared to an iPhoto/Lightroom library in dropbox/gdrive/etc or to flickr's absurd space limit. Since you're here, could you go over how you think you differentiate yourself in the space?
It would be more accurate to say that there is a lower bound on dilution with convertible debt (if the debt converts at the valuation cap) but there is no upper bound on dilution (if it later converts at much lower than the valuation cap).
I've been using Loom for the last few months for photo backup and I've been really impressed with their improvements since then. Can't wait to see what they'll be bringing out next.
Except for the 5GB cap, it looks impressive. For me there is a much simpler alternative -> auto-backup to Google+ (available on iPhone/Android,iPad)
Pros: UNLIMITED, available on all devices, social sharing with circles and already fits many of our gmail workflow. No new app to learn and teach others. Not to mention, unlimited videos.
Cons: 2048px max size - but for capturing everyday photos how much larger do we need?
Loom Difference:
Looks like loom share a smaller local copy for instant offline access, Google+ can mimic this to a large extend due to caching (and with wifi ALL images are available)
Congratulations !. With great raise, comes greater responsibilities.I hope this might be a great inspiration to the team and they just rattle the stars !
I realize this is a day late, but will Loom support sqlite? I need a library that has:
* Read
* Write
* Callback (to sort out paradoxes when two or more devices update the store independently offline and need to merge)
It's possible to do this with CoreData, but poorly, with a high burden on the developer to learn the entirety of Apple's APIs and no way to alert the user as to what it is doing under the hood, which causes the app to hang for minutes or even forever until the managed object context says it's ready.
21 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 51.1 ms ] threadThe reason Loom saves space compared with iCloud is that Loom stores your original photos entirely in the cloud, and not on your device. Loom caches smaller versions of these originals on your phone for fast browsing, organizing, and sharing, and then you can quickly access the originals if you choose.
Everpix is a great service and more affordable than Loom, but the main difference between Loom and Everpix is that we store your files in their original size and resolution, untouched, so if you ever need them, you can get them. Additionally, Loom supports RAW and video uploads.
It only does photos and videos, not documents, data and mail/calendar/contacts.
What is normally the level of dilution after such a round?
Pros: UNLIMITED, available on all devices, social sharing with circles and already fits many of our gmail workflow. No new app to learn and teach others. Not to mention, unlimited videos.
Cons: 2048px max size - but for capturing everyday photos how much larger do we need?
Loom Difference: Looks like loom share a smaller local copy for instant offline access, Google+ can mimic this to a large extend due to caching (and with wifi ALL images are available)
* Read
* Write
* Callback (to sort out paradoxes when two or more devices update the store independently offline and need to merge)
It's possible to do this with CoreData, but poorly, with a high burden on the developer to learn the entirety of Apple's APIs and no way to alert the user as to what it is doing under the hood, which causes the app to hang for minutes or even forever until the managed object context says it's ready.