I've been an avid Foldershare user for a while now and really like it. That being said I hate their few but niggling limitations (the 10,000 files per share being the biggest one for me).

I just installed Live Mesh and have to say that I think it's rather slick but we'll see if it lives up to the hype.

The service seems to share more than a passing resemblance to Foldershare so I decided to see if others have found this to be the case and to find out what the differences really are.

I found this article: Skydrive, Foldershare, and Live Mesh - hendrikch.com - Hendrik Christian Blog on Daily Life and got to thinking about it. So here's my response to Hendrikch (which I will also email to him):

Hi Hendrikch,

Great summary of these disparate yet related services. I worked for MS for several years and I think the reason MS has so many disjointed offerings is that no one really is a "master of ceremonies" in the way Steve Jobs rules Apple with an iron fist. It really is a company with too many VPs, too many Directors, and too many General Managers to have a coherent strategy. Now, they've bucked this trend before (see: Xbox), but there are still too many examples of these approaches that each get customers 80% of what they need and overlap about 75% but none get us completely there.

Now that these things are out there, I believe everything will coalesce around Live Mesh (I really have no idea since I'm no longer a Microsoftie) which will integrate foldershare & skydrive.

Here's my dream service:
-- No file count limits (foldershare limits you to 10,000 files)
-- No file size limits (I think one or more of the services limit you to 2GB)
-- "Smart" live desktop that watches what I use on the PC and uploads those files and things that seem related. For example: if I listen to a song a lot, it would find all of the playlists that song is in and upload the songs "near" that one in the playlists (or the entire playlist if it is small enough).
-- Unified sharing center. "Share this folder with..." one email addy, one email domain, multiple addies, everyone, facebook friends, etc. Also a really nice UI for those that choose to browse photos on live mesh rather than other services.
-- "Super Sync" - "Mirror this folder structure to..." facebook, myspace, flickr, windows live, smugmug, photobucket, kodak, etc. AND keep them in sync (e.g. if I upload something to flickr, notice this and mirror everywhere else.)
-- Remote Desktop of course (Live mesh has this, but I use logmein still)
-- Browse other machines without sync (Foldershare has this)
-- Full, unlimited backup in the cloud for $5/month (I use Mozy for this now).

So I would do pricing like this:
Free unlimited syncing (foldershare)
Free remote desktop (logmein)
$5/month unlimited backup (mozy)
$5/month unlimited sharing(sky drive)/super sync/unified sharing center

So you see, we're about 80% of the way there on each of the services...just need to snap together the bits of each together into one big service. I'm actually in the processing of writing my own super sync service for all platforms that will keep my gazillions of photos and home videos sync'd to flickr and other services (since flickr is blocked in China and my wife's family is there and needs to use other services to access our photos).

I never understood the logic behind the idea of a Microsoft and Yahoo! merger. I mean, what does each bring to the table?

Microsoft brings a few cash cows, buckets of cash, and an ailing online service. Yahoo on the other hand, brings over a lot of eyeballs, some cool bits like flickr, delicious, and others, and a lot of duplicated services (WL Mail = Y! Mail, WL Messenger = Y! Messenger, WL Search = Y! Search, WL Maps = Y! Maps, etc). Anyway, it's an interest idea that they could merge, but I'm not sure what it would do to slow down Google. If anything, it'll slow down the newly joined-at-the hip "Yahoosoft!" I mean, let's take two very large bureaucratic companies with overlapping services, mash them together, and watch the ensuing politcal firefight ensue.

Anyway, I hope these two giants will take a good look at why Google is winning. It's certainly not the breadth of services or the even the reliability of them as I've experienced first hand. No, they are winning for two simple reasons:

1) Search: accurate. They've built the better mouse trap
2) Syndication: They allow you to make a few (or quite a few) bucks on your own blog running on your own server that you can do whatever you want with.

That's it folks. Those are the two reasons that Google is winning. Smashing Microsoft and Yahoo together will NOT get you these two things. The only two things that Microsoft, Yahoo, or Yahoosoft (or Microhoo, or Mihoo!, or Moohoo, or...I can go on for days) can do to beat Google are:

1) Search: make it more accurate than Google.
2) Syndication: get off your "walled garden" wall and let people syndicate your ads on their own site with their own servers that they can do whatever they want with. Yahoo figured this out eventually, but it is most likely too late. The other way to do it is to offer more cash than Google is willing pay. That should win you some converts (until Google ups their payout too, of course).

There you have it folks...no fuss, no political war with clashing cultures ensuing. Just a way to really win over Google. The question isn't if they can merge, because we know they can. The questions really are: does it matter? and will it help? The answer is most likely: no.

Big ups to Ars Technica for sparking this rant: Yahoo-Microsoft merger talk resurfaces

Windows Live Mobile Throwdown
Originally uploaded by titaniumtommy.

So which is better? Without a doubt, Microsoft's was the winner.

Even just comparing the mapping and traffic capabilities, this matchup could have been a bit uneven. We were running WLS on a Windows Mobile phone, which gave it a "native-app" feel, because it was a native app. Google Maps on Java ran like Java always does. Painfully

I've been tinkering with Windows QNA for some time and I must say it really is a neat service. It's rooted in google answers, but it offers video game style pointage for your efforts rather than cash. I dunno, maybe those points will be good for something in the future?

Windows Live QnA: