Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Nirvanix comment

Received today 29 July 2008 in response to my email regarding the posting on the Nirvanix blog. Details on yesterday's blog at:
http://nirvanixusers.blogspot.com/2008/07/nirvanix-silence.html

---Email from Nirvanix to Luzo Orbit
Mr. Orbit,

Nirvanix just posted the full accounting of our story on our blog today. The claim made by "Charlie Jackson" on the TechCrunch article comments section is both suspect and untrue. I tried to follow the blog but there appear to be no authentication process for message posters so anybody can take any persona it seems. What is most disturbing, however, is that no one from TechCrunch ever called Nirvanix for an interview. The entire "final story" on TechCrunch was predicated and syndicated based on that single post. This is the same thread that brought us to some "Charlie the Unicorn" video on YouTube which is the point where it became farcical and we just stopped reading. Your blog "Nirvanix Users Blog" uses this very TechCrunch article for its foundation and therefore is both inaccurate and libelous.


As for TechCrunch article quoting the "Charlie Jackson" post, Nirvanix was not even incorporated in June of 2007. As our blog points out, the Storage Delivery Network(TM) did not go into general availability until October of 2007.

Please see our post for any additional information: http://developer.nirvanix.com/blogs/nirvanix/default.aspx

Best Regards,
Jonathan
---end of email

The following is a response also received today to a second email I sent appealing to Nirvanix to help resolve the problem of access to the files it holds.

---Email from Nirvanix to Luzo Orbit
Mr. Orbit,

and to The Linkup's own website where it The Linkup counters the former customer rep
claim where it states:

"Additional information (Updated: July 11, 2008 @ 5:45pm):
An update to answer several questions that we have received:
1. The only files that are available for download are the files that are currently in your The Linkup account.
2. Nirvanix cannot provide access to any additional data or assist with accessing your files. Please do not contact them.
POSTED BY TEAM LINKUP AT 12:41 AM"

Lastly, Nirvanix is painfully aware of the hurt that people are feeling from MediaMax's closure and it is made worst by the powerlessness to do anything about it beyond what we have stated on the blog today.

Best Regards,


Jonathan
---

I have replied to these emails as follows:

---Luzo Orbit to Nirvanix
Dear Jonathan,

Regarding your two emails, let me first point out that Charlie Jackson made a similar post to The Linkup blog to that on the Techcrunch site, though comments have since been deleted from there. While Techcrunch may not have contacted Nirvanix, I did twice explicitly asking for a response and received none. Now that you have replied I will add this to the blog.

If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting the deletion of files took place before Streamload (renamed as Mediamax) span off the customer front end (with the Mediamax name) and rebranded as Nirvanix. Is that correct? If so, it seems to me that in taking over the servers and the storage responsibility for data belonging to customers of Streamload/Mediamax, Nirvanix also has responsibility for this troublesome legacy which, at the very least, gives you a moral responsibility to help recover the data that was not deleted and, ideally, completing the failed recovery programme initiated by Streamload/Mediamax.

I am pleased that you are not denying the claim by John Hood, Communications Director of Mediamax, that it is up to Nirvanix whether it provides access to the Mediamax system. You instead say the company 'counters' his claim, which I hope you can see is a very curious state of affairs. As it is no doubt easier for you to contact Mr. Hood about this than it is for me, can you please ask him to retract this comment if it is not true with an explanation as to why he was mistaken. May I suggest that you ask him to send this message as a reply to a past email he has received from me so I will know it is authentic.

Regarding comments on The Linkup website to which you refer, the company has not responded to any of my past emails. As their office is across the road from yours, perhaps you can prompt them to do so with an explanation as to why their Communications Director misled users, if that is indeed what has happened, and an explanation as to why Mediamax/The Linkup is apparently refusing to provide Nirvanix with access to the Mediamax database. It is difficult to see any practical or legal reason why they should not assist Nirvanix in reuniting people with their data, to which Nirvanix was entrusted.

Can you indicate whether Nirvanix will allow people to access the data held on your servers if the legal issues can be resolved?

Can you indicate whether Nirvanix has made any effort to resolve this alleged legal obstacle or will do so by, for example, visiting the Mediamax/The Linkup office in the way I suggest above?

Luzo
---Email ends

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

We all lost files through this.. but come on!! Do you people not have a life? How much time are you going to waste to get your anime, porn and illegally obtained copyrighted music back? Do you think that you would have a case at all, when this is what the bulk of the files are? If you want to open yourself up to investigation for copyright infringement, be my guest but I have had enough of this stupidity and know when its time to cut my losses.

Luzo Orbit said...

How come all comments like this seem to be anonymous? Read some of the stories posted here of families losing photos of loved ones because the BACKUP service they entrusted them to was not worthy of the name. Read the reports of business that lost customers because they could not download the files. Read of the student who lost his PhD references.

Then shut up.

Anonymous said...

Oh, the lawsuits are coming for sure, unless Nirvanix can restore all the Mediaxmax files to Mediamax paying customers very quickly. Patrick Harr, Greg Bohdan, Geoff Tudor, Adrian Herrera and other former Mediamax officials should start attending to this problem immediately, or Nirvanix doesn't have much of a future in the cloud computing industry. This horror story is going to go viral.

D. Ortiz said...

Not sure if I remember this correctly, but didn't mediamax file for bankruptcy? If so, what does that mean for their assets (ie database, application, etc...) Do they still have control over their assets or could this be the reason they aren't able to give us access to our files?

Chris Parker said...

Hey all, I’ve been lurking around for a while trying to figure out if I’m ever going to get my files back. Thanks for all the efforts you’ve put in trying to figure this nightmare out!

From what I’ve read, I think I get it now. Nirvanix is like a bank holding 2-key safety deposit boxes. Both keys need to be present to get into the box. In this case, we hold a key (our user names and passwords), but MM/TLU also holds a key. Nirvanix can’t let us get to the files without both keys and MM won’t let us use the key they have.

Is anyone trying to get hold of MM to get their key? I really hope this elephant drive thing is real.

Anonymous said...

A class action suit that divides up Nirvanix's assets to pay off the victims of Mediamax sounds good.

IceAge said...

Well done luzo orbit for a great email back to Nirvanix. Getting TLU and pointing out they are across the road, to retract their comments would be a step forward.

Unfortunately John Hood no longer works there if I remember one of his statements.

If people really want their files back in 8 days I would suggest a plea to Nirvanix and TLU to share the front end and retrieve the user files back. Charge if they want. But to make an effort would appease the situation

Jabash said...

This is what I have been saying for some time. It seems like Nirvanix is allowing access but for some reason whoever controls MM will not reactivate it. To me this is the key question now. Who controls the MM frontend. I assume it is the people at TLU and I have a feeling they have just cut their loses and run and noone is interested in making the effort to do this. Some money and manpower would be required. As far as we know TLU has shut their doors and everyone is home working on their resumes. Even though Nirvanix is phyisically close that doesn't mean they can go over and get the MM frontend.

Jabash said...

Who ever this person is saying we need to 'get over it' is an idiot. What ever he or she thinks they are the pathetic person posting when they have no interest in what we are trying to do.

JD said...

great job Luzo

It is remarkable to read that in june 2007 a storage problem occurred. Patrick Harr was still in charge at that time. July the spin off from Nirvanix and in October 2007 the launch of Nirvanix.
About 90% IT-projects are delivered too late and out of budget. So between april 2007 (decision to split off nirvanix) and october 2007 they had 7 months to build a new company, hire people, invent a new storage system with hosts around the world, test and launch this. Quite impressive to do this in 7 months.
My speculating thoughts are that this was already being built and that the storage problem, accidental deletion was caused by this preparation and only caused the splitoff to happen even sooner
The sad thing is that Nirvanix didn't take responsibility in retrieving the files and resolve this matter

Anonymous said...

I think everyone should read this: http://developer.nirvanix.com/blogs/nirvanix/default.aspx

Nirvanix clears up all this nonsense.

Luzo Orbit said...

Look 'anonymous', John Hood of Mediamax had the decency to own his comments, so why not you?

It is not nonsense that people still do not have access to the data that is on Nirvanix servers and would be accessible if the Mediamax front end is restarted.

Until the Nirvanix blog explains when that will happen it clears up nothing.

Diane said...

I'm leaving my name since people who choose to post as anonymous tend to get attacked. I did read the post and Nirvanix stated that they cannot legally access the mediamax front end. This makes sense to me since they are not the same company (yes, maybe they were once the same company but once you split off from another company and the assets are divided - however that may be, you no longer have legal rights to whatever belongs to the other separate company). I have been following this post since I have lost files and am anxious to find out how to get them back.. but I am disheartened to see how this has turned into more of a witch hunt than a productive dialog about how to retrieve our data. It seems that we should be trying to get answers from Mediamax (and although John Hood once mentioned that Nirvanix had the files as you can see on their site they now claim that is not the case - so how is it that John Hood owned up to his comments?) I am a business owner and depend on the graphics I had stored for my business. I don't want to be attacked by the anti-nirvanix posters on this site by giving my full name but am happy to communicate directly with you Luzo if you have any questions as to the authenticity of my comments. I do not feel that Nirvanix is to blame for this and am really getting tired of what seems to be a bunch of baseless posts out to damage a company rather than productive ideas about how we can get our data back.

Luzo Orbit said...

Diane, thanks for your post. I don't much care whether Streamloads transformation into Nirvanix was a plot to ditch customers or was for entirely innocent reasons.

What does matter is that Nirvanix has peoples data and while it is not part of the solution for reuniting people with it, it is part of the problem.

So far the most Nirvanix has offered is to provide access to files that can be reached through The Linkup front end until 8 August. That's it. People have good reason to be concerned what will happen with their data after that.

It may or may not be legitimate to pass the buck to a company that has gone bankrupt and whose executives can no longer be contacted. I've added links all over this blog to the Nirvanix comments so people can read those. But it is not the main point. Getting access to the data on the Nirvanix servers is. Nirvanix has to be part of the solution.

People have even offered to pay if it will help with a solution. I am confident that Nirvanix will eventually engage with the owners of the data it holds in a more constructive way to resolve this issue.

There are broader questions as the security of anyone's data in cloud storage systems if they deal with intermediary companies that can disappear overnight, losing access to their data. This is something people are well advised to check when entrusting their data and it is something legislators should perhaps also investigate.

Diane said...

Thanks Luzo. I certainly do appreciate the fact that you have spearheaded this mission to get our files back and do hope to see this continue in a positive, constructive manner. I must say that it was really disappointing to see other posters planning to send letters to Nirvanix's customers with "The goal: To have Nirvanix customers running for the hills, until they issue an immediate apologies and carry out all possible effort to retrieve our files.". I was especially unnerved to see that poster generate a letter on Nirvanix User Group letterhead. I think that is bordering on libelous and for one will have nothing to do with that form of negative and dishonest conduct. I entrusted my data with Mediamax - not Nirvanix and will be very happy to engage in whatever constructive actions necessary to retrieve our data from the rightful holder - mediamax/linkup. Please keep us posted on what you find out. Best, Diane.

IceAge said...

With reference to the letter being sent out.

Normally I would agree with Diane on this one. However having seen and experienced SS/MM/TLU customer care and business ethics I feel it is the only way forward here. Why?

TLU, for what ever reason, lost our property. If we had just been good customers and dealt only personally with them via email, TLU would still be in business and none of us would no any better other than 'something' happened to my files. An apology and lets move on.

Unfortunately for TLU they were a bit behind in the times since the last time they lost everyone's files during MM. Since 5 years ago the internet and people have become community based. This has led to a new support infrastructure people can participate in. Blog and websites can now be set up outside of a company's domain to discuss issues. Many companies see this, and participate with open blogs themselves. TLU even did, until they backed themselves into a corner and blocked all their customers from gaining feedback. Hence this blog was used by free users.

There are other site out there up to no good along a similar vain. Just type in Paypal reports and the top 4 listed websites are all run by the same group scandalizing paypal and then not so subtly offering another service. This is not happen with this blog, not with what is happening here.
I have nothing to do with Luzo, nor do I know anyone here. However I am very happy to be a part of something that took back our rights that TLU took from us, along with out files. Without this blog, make no mistake about it. TLU would still be running. And, as history proves, in another 4 years would change names and loose all files again.

My argument is that laws need to be changed to protect peoples data on online storage companies. READ the ToS of these companies that you pay for storage and you will find you do not have any rights if your data goes missing. Nothing. The laws about warehouse storage companies going on fire and destroying our property make sure these companies are insured and that we can be compensated. With online storage this does not exist. Yet the data can be more valuable than whats in a warehouse.

Companies like TLU and Nirvanix who are not clear about how our data is handled, or are responsible for its loss, damage or privacy need to be held accountable. Otherwise we might as well bend over and pay them to 'do' us over for their pleasure. No thank you.

Change the law pertaining to online storage companies.

Luzo Orbit said...

Iceage, personally I would prefer it if Mediamax/The Linkup was still running. I've paid for its service until March 2009. Several users of these blogs spent time helping Mediamax to develop the new file managing system and would have liked to see something for that effort. It was Mediamax who messed things up, with a sudden and premature switch over to The Linkup, where they lost half of the files that hadn't been deleted when Streamload was transforming into Nirvanix. Great if people were alerted not to sign up until the system was shown to work, though I recall John Hood saying that they weren't trying to recruit new customers and even stopped billing old ones because they weren't offering a functioning service.

Having launched a system that didn't work, they should have gone back to the Mediamax front end as people were asking, even if only for the month they gave people to download files.

Instead it looks like we'll have to pursue them through the courts to get access to the front end and persuade Nirvanix not to delete the files it holds until it can be restarted. As it stands we have just over a week to persuade Nirvanix.

Tom Bassett said...

I think that is bordering on libelous and for one will have nothing to do with that form of negative and dishonest conduct.

It isn't negative - I'm trying to do something POSITIVE - retrieve the files that Nirvanix either deleted or is blocking access to. And it is NOT dishonest - every word I have said has direct roots in quotes from official Nirvanix/Streamload/Linkup/Mediamax sites. It's John Hood and Charlie Jackson who've brought this ideas into the public, not I.

In fact, I'd welcome a libel suit from Nirvanix, but I can 100% guarantee it will never happen. Do you know why?

1) They'd have to open up their records and make their employees available to the discovery process, during which time the uncomfortable truth would come out into the public eye - that they knew their ship was sinking, so they built a new one called Nirvanix, and let their customers and their files drown.

2) A suit would make them unable to go ahead with their plans to delete/block access forever to our files. Because those files would be now considered evidence, they'd be compelled to preserve them and make them available to us.

3) They'd open themselves to a countersuit for slandering our good name - have you noticed that when we complain, some shill comes forward and says that we're all porn-addicts and software pirates? That is SHAMEFUL behavior. Our pain doesn't matter because we're all criminals, is what they're saying. I don't know about anyone else, but I lost many unreplaceable personal recordings and images of trips I've taken through the years.


Listen, they're not gonna get away with this. I don't know how, but I'm gonna make sure they don't. You can't just screw up, screw your customers, then start a new company and jump over there and say "Hey, we're not related to them!" It doesn't fly.

I am going to go ahead with my letters idea, warning Nirvanix clients what they're getting into. Luzo, this is your site, so if you don't want me using the "Nirvanix Users" letterhead, say so and I'll create a new user group for Nirvanix victims to rally behind. But I can't see any other way - can you?

Diane said...

Iceage, You make some very good points in your post, however, I have to wonder - if Nirvanix is to blame for this situaiton then why aren't any of their other 400 customers complaining? From their post: "Nirvanix currently manages a multi-petabyte network for its over 400 business customers on the Nirvanix Storage Delivery Network. We have multiple safeguards and checkpoints against data corruption and potential loss, including continual MD5 hash checking, dual writes of files in a single node cluster (aka, localized redundancy of files), replication of files across geographically dispersed storage nodes and backup of all systems. The Nirvanix SDN is built on a new and completely redundant, world-class infrastructure from Cisco, Intel and Seagate. Our storage nodes are located throughout the world and are co-located in Tier 1, SAS-70 certified facilities. We also utilize exclusively tier-1, multi-homed bandwidth for our network backbone across the SDN. We are also the only ones in the industry to provide a 100% SLA that results from the ability to geographically disperse data across clustered storage nodes in the U.S., Europe and Asia."

Tom, I have followed your posts as well and believe me, I understand how you feel losing precious data. I just feel it is dangerous and irresponsible to publicly attack and try to do damage to a company that, it seems to me, isn't responsible for the mediamax failure. I may have missed something so I guess I just need some clarification - why is it that you feel Nirvanix wants to block access to our files? What do they have to gain? Don't you all agree that if we can somehow get Mediamax to reinstate the front end perhaps we would be able to retrieve our files? Shouldn't this be the path we take at this point since time is of the essence?

Back to Iseage - while I do agree that the online community gives us a voice and some "muscle" so to speak - I am very much opposed to using that in a negative and destructive manner. I own a small business and find it very unsettling to think that one of my competitors could possibly take to the internet and start spreading rumors and lies about my company (not that I think any of you are a competitor, but you know what I mean). Something like that could take me down in no time & so for that I am very sensitive to this topic. Obviously Nirvanix isn't a small home-based business like mine but I still find it very unsettling to see the continual barrage of attacks when they have clearly disputed the allegations against them on their blog. I read their blog several times (non techie here so it took a few times to sink in), and I have to believe there is truth to what they have posted.

That said, I will join forces if the plan is a constructive one. If everyone chooses to continue on this path I will find another way to fight for my data. Your loss... this board could use a little feminine touch.

Tom Bassett said...

I just feel it is dangerous and irresponsible to publicly attack and try to do damage to a company that, it seems to me, isn't responsible for the mediamax failure.

According to statements from a Charlie Jackson (former Mediamax board member), Steve Iverson (former Mediamax president) and John Hood (former Mediamax head of customer service), Nirvanix and the launch thereof is directly responsible for the failure. Hood, for example, says Nirvanix engineers did it by accident. Iverson merely said that the problems were "caused by" the launch of Nirvanix.

why is it that you feel Nirvanix wants to block access to our files? What do they have to gain?

I'd guess 2 reasons:

1) To restore access would be an admission that they are more closely entwined with Mediamax/Linkup/Streamload than they admit. The clean slate they're trying to get for themselves would be forever tainted.

2) To open up the system to allow MM/SL/TLU users to get their files - IF POSSIBLE, would make a mass of relieved users FLOOD the Nirvanix system trying to get the files they thought were lost for good - possibly slowing or bringing down the system temporarily - as well as costing Nirvanix god knows how much in bandwidth costs. But by masquerading as a completely separate entity, they have an excuse not to let users get their stuff, and can blame it on the company THEY USED TO BE.

Don't you all agree that if we can somehow get Mediamax to reinstate the front end perhaps we would be able to retrieve our files?

That'd be great, but MM employees say it is now in Nirvanix's hands. If what Nirvanix says is true, that they have no way to get the files (which I doubt, remember they lied to us before per John Hood), then what I hope would happen is that Nirvanix prez Harr would simply walk across the street to the MM office and say "Hey, since you're not gonna be using it, can we borrow the front-end you made so we can satisfy those thousands of customers you and we screwed? Thanks, man."

But it doesn't make any sense.

Here is what they would have us believe, from the official stories:

1) Streamload, behind the scenes, was planning to split into two companies - TLU and Nirvanix.
2) So, they designed the Nirvanix system. They also designed a front end for it.
3) But while transferring the data to the new system (Nirvanix), someone screwed up. MM says a Nirvanix engineer is to blame - Nirvanix denies this.
4) They split off - TLU kept the front-end, but Nirvanix kept the system.
5) Most of the employees who were with MM went over to Nirvanix.
6) But somehow - even though the software was made by the SAME people for the SAME system which is for the SAME company, which then split off - they can't either build a new one (BS) or get temporary access to the existing one (also BS).

They're just liars, all of them - they think that we're stupid, they portray us either as disgruntled bloggers who don't have their facts straight (thought we got those facts from their official company blogs!) or as music and software pirates and porn addicts. They're scum, and I'm convinced the only way to get justice is to hit them where it counts - the pocketbook.

diane said...

"According to statements from a Charlie Jackson (former Mediamax board member), Steve Iverson (former Mediamax president) and John Hood (former Mediamax head of customer service), Nirvanix and the launch thereof is directly responsible for the failure. Hood, for example, says Nirvanix engineers did it by accident. Iverson merely said that the problems were "caused by" the launch of Nirvanix."

And Nirvanix claims that they are not responsible. Who to believe? I guess my money is on the company that is not directly responsible for going out of business and losing my files.

To open up the system to allow MM/SL/TLU users to get their files - IF POSSIBLE, would make a mass of relieved users FLOOD the Nirvanix system trying to get the files they thought were lost for good - possibly slowing or bringing down the system temporarily - as well as costing Nirvanix god knows how much in bandwidth costs. But by masquerading as a completely separate entity, they have an excuse not to let users get their stuff, and can blame it on the company THEY USED TO BE.

Maybe I read the blog incorrectly but it seems to me that the old MM data is on the old Streamload servers, not the new Niranix servers so I don't think allowing us access would have any bearing on their current system - from their post: "The files that were transferred into TLU can be downloaded through August 8, 2008. Those files that were not transferred remain secure in the old Streamload/MediaMax storage system; however, access to those files requires the MediaMax application front-end and database - both owned by MediaMax, Inc"

what I hope would happen is that Nirvanix prez Harr would simply walk across the street to the MM office and say "Hey, since you're not gonna be using it, can we borrow the front-end you made so we can satisfy those thousands of customers you and we screwed? Thanks, man."

If that's possible then great. I'm not in the technology business but I suspect it is not as easy as asking to borrow the front end though. And, if Mediamax is blaming Nirvanix for their problems I would have to think their business relationship is probably contentious at best.

They split off - TLU kept the front-end, but Nirvanix kept the system.

Which it seems is where the old front-end and our data resides. Nirvanix also built an entirely new system which is what their current business is based on (or did I read their blog incorrectly?)

Most of the employees who were with MM went over to Nirvanix.
6) But somehow - even though the software was made by the SAME people for the SAME system which is for the SAME company, which then split off - they can't either build a new one (BS) or get temporary access to the existing one (also BS).


Again, not a technical person here but I would hazard to guess that it's not that simple to build a new front end. I could be wrong but it would shock me if that was the case. As for your second point - yes... that's where we need to go with this.

I personally have never felt that Nirvanix thinks I am a porn addict or scum. I am also not so sure how you are convinced the other posters on this site are "shills" (thanks for the new word - had to look that one up). Please don't take offense to this but when I read that post I did a little halleluiah under my breath... so maybe, just maybe, that's another mediamax user that is just tired of the witch hunt.

Tom, I'm not trying to dig at you or tear down your beliefs. I just come from the school that you get more bees with honey. Let's go after this in a positive way and see if we can't get access to our data before the ever looming deadline.

Ok, now I'm really signing off so I can get some work done.

diane said...

Clarification - I was talking about the anonymous user who linked to the Nirvanix blog, not the first poster. Definitely not ok with attacking other posters on this board.

Katie said...

Trying to remain polite, Diane, you are either a naive, 'pie-in-the-sky' individual with you 'bees with honey' comment, or you work for Nirvanix and have been charged with monitoring and shepherding this blog. I believe the latter is more likely. *awaits your protests otherwise*

You can whitewash it all you want, but Nirvanix is extraordinarily responsible for what happened to all of us, and although they do not have any legal responsibility towards helping us recover our files, they do have a moral one. But, they are well demonstrating that they are (and why not? They all worked for the same company mere months ago) cut from the same cloth as the individuals who left us all to flounder (and have stolen our money) at MM/TLU. We were ignored and vilified, regardless of how nicely we pleaded to be helped. 'Honey' will get you absolutely zilch from Nirvanix...wake up.

Just because a company advertises that it will safely and securely store files (sound eerily familiar to anyone else here?) doesn't mean that will happen. We are correct to warn the rest of the online community against anyone who has shown such recent incompetence as Nirvanix/Streamload/MM/TLU...or whatever guise they care to cloak themselves with currently. This is no 'witchhunt', which implies that the innocent are being unfairly persecuted. These Nirvanix engineers are hardly innocent. They have shown rampant incompetency in the recent past and there is no reason to think that they will improve in the future. How many 'Oops!' from someone are you willing to tolerate before you, too, finally get fed up?

These people are not the types to respond to any form of reason. They have demonstrated in the past that they are pig-headed, secretive, and not all that smart, and really, don't work all that hard. (Anyone else notice that they wouldn't answer any emails over weekends? Wouldn't want to spend any time helping desperate customers on their own personal downtime, would they?) Customer service was less than a joke, it didn't exist. These are not the kind of people that respond to anything other than a big stick over the head, legally.

diane said...

Hi "Katie"

What a nice way to end my day. No, I do not work for Nirvanix (and can speak directly with Luzo, owner of this site to dispel that false accusation if he so desires). So, I guess you can call me a "Pie in the Sky" individual who tends to take a positive outlook on life and situations when many will look for the hidden conspiracy theory or black lining wherever they can. I am actually starting to wonder if this site isn't full of mediamax "shills" who are looking to place the blame on anyone but themselves. I didn't come on this board to start a war but rather to find a way to work together with some seemingly intelligent individuals on getting access to our files.

Where was I when everyone was in on this emailing campaign to Nirvanix over the weekend... and what exactly did you expect them to do for you when they have already stated that THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS to the front end? Maybe I am naive for reading and believing the Nirvanix post but it looks like they have built a successful company and are now dealing with the failure of one of their customers, and now as a result thousand of angry customers of said company.

I see it is just in your nature to want to go on the attack - as you are now coming after me, another wronged customer of Mediamax. I am here looking for solutions, not a fight. It's a shame that you want to try to make this into one.

CSyL said...

I support Tom's idea of sending the letter, at least thats better than just sit down and watch while our files are being reduced to nothing. Unfortunatedly, there are just a few ways in which customers can make themselves heard by companies like TLU/Nirvanix that operate over the Internet.

I really dislike the "conspiration theory" that has been roaming this blogs saying that SL/Nirvanix planned this from the start, but you have to admit that everything turned out "too well" for Nirvanix to be just a big coincidence. If you remember, before SL and Nirvanix split they had two types of customers: 1) Small companies and private users (with huge amount of small-size files) and 2) Big users like universities and corporations (with many big files). To put it simple, the small users (us) were like dead weight over them. We had very cheap suscription plans, but holded a lot of space in their servers. As far as my limited knowledge alows me to understand, this was the reason for splitting into 2 companies. The profitable customers will stay with the new one (Nirvanix) and non-profitable ones will stay with MM/TLU (and we were destined to die with it).

The whole splitting business bewteen SL/MM/Nirvanix/etc wasn't ilegal, but is, in the end, inmoral. It shows that the people in charge of Nirvanix didnt care bout small customers and looked for a legal way to get rid of the excess baggage. Just an exit to their storage/garbage problem. So now we have Nirvanix. Diane mentions how many customers and petabytes Nirvanix has, and all the "safeguards and checkpoints" against data corruption they implement in their network, for whatever that means. The question is, will they do the same to their customers when some of them become, as we did 3 years ago during SL, dead weight for Nirvanix? Thats where Tom's letter kicks in and will inform Nirvanix users what kind of problem they might be getting into. Just dont get the wrong idea, it wont bring your files back. But it's moraly correct to spread the word when you see bad practices as MM/SL/Nirvanix/...

Anyway... obviously, Nirvanix has NO intention to help with the remainings of TLU, in the end, thats why they splitted years ago! For them we mean loads of files to be indexed/mainteined/kept with small or no profit. Still, I will join any letter or effort to keep fighting for my files and my rights as a paying customer.

IceAge said...

One thing is certain from reading all the recent posts. People have really have to lay off the individual 'prodding' It gets us nowhere. Yes prod anonymous comments if they repeatedly post. But if someone is introduced here, there really shouldn't be any retaliatory remarks. It makes for good reading, but not constructive. Though it did make John Hood throw a wobbly. Just my two cents.

Diane, in regards to you comments about protecting your business from competitors who could set up a blog like this and try to put you out of business.

Again I refer to the Paypal sites and these people are trying to do that. But, more specifically to the small business user. I have a website. If someone makes a complaint about my website, lets say copyright. I have to prove it's my work or otherwise remove it. Three strikes and I am out. My host will suspend my account. Now a certain spammer type tried this when I banned him from making spam comments on my site. He reported that a photograph was his. My host gave me a warning to take it down. It was my photograph and it took one month to prove to them it was. In the mean time under a different user name the spammer did the same thing over two more occasions. It took a while to convince my host and figure it out for myself. A real pain. And still I technically have two strikes against me. For what? A guy with a grudge. So when it comes to online destruction of someone else's business there are other ways to go about it.

Nirvanix Servers are used to store our data. TLU MM SS all claimed great storage data banks and equipment as well. In fact I recall TEAM LINKUP Specifically addressing a question about their equipment and stating they were using brand new servers and that was not the issue.

I could build a website tonight offering web storage, and list lots of technically sounding equipment like cloud server etc and through up photos. Yet have nothing but a cheap Chinese 100 GB hard drive plugged in to an aging IBM. Take some some money, and run.

A lot of people are angry about this situation. As am I. I lost money, time, and personal materials thanks to TLU. If Nirvanix has it in their storage I would be happy to pay them for access to it, and end this.

Nirvanix is linked to TLU, I don't care. Putting them out of business will not do much. They will pop up again. Changing the law will make a difference.

In 8 days we will loose our data on the Nirvanix Servers. After that they will say it's gone, and nothing can be done. I hope some of the people here do not launch a campaign based on that. Has anyone asked Nirvanix if they would give us paid access and arrange for TLU front end to be connected up temporarily? Or at the least to delay the deletion until this is settled?

I hope after the 8th people focus on getting the law changed, it's the only way forward.

Anonymous said...

I see someone with the ip address of 68.15.28.125 and using the email address of jas@yahoo.com, who just happens to be in the San Diego area, is trying to get to get Nirvanix's point of view across by getting blogger's to publish his comment containing a link to the Nirvanix Blog about how we have written un-truths about the company.

If what has been wriiten is 'inaccurate and libelous' then why haven't they threatened anyone with court proceedings?

I'll tell you why, because they haven't got a leg to stand on.

The interesting thing about the Nirvanix blog is, guess what....you can't add comments!

Where have we seen that before?

Sorry Jas I won't be publishing your link, as I can't help but think your from Nirvanix or are connected in someway.

The link I am referring to makes great reading especially the part that says, and I quote

"We sincerely sympathize with the frustration and anger that this announced closing has caused their users"

Hmmmm, no you don't, and you didn't give a toss when you ignored our emails, took our money and lost our files.

To all the people posting comments that are all for a softly softly approach in dealing with these people, you are deluded.

The people connected with Streamload - Mediamax - The Link Up and Nirvanix that knew what was going on are nothing but scum, and I for one hope they rot.

Dave.
wordpress.partyoflife.

Tom Bassett said...

I see someone with the ip address of 68.15.28.125 and using the email address of jas@yahoo.com, who just happens to be in the San Diego area, is trying to get to get Nirvanix's point of view across by getting blogger's to publish his comment containing a link to the Nirvanix Blog about how we have written un-truths about the company.

Good detective work with the IP address, Dave. It got me to investigating, and Luzo, you might wanna do a brief article on Nirvanix propaganda efforts.

I have received pro-Nirvanix comments from three different people, Nick, Eric, and Darren, at 3 different IP addresses, but all using THE SAME EMAIL ADDEESS!!! I published them all because I seldom check on those type of things - but now, combined with yours, I see the pattern.

That IP address Dave posted is indeed a San Diego IP - I'm in San Diego and mine also begins with 68, but I guess they wised up and used TOR or something to fake their IPs on the others (but again, used the same email address!) I don't really use Blogger - is it possible to see the IP addresses of commenters on THIS blog? If so, you might see the pattern too!

Dave, what username did the person on your blog use?

Luzo Orbit said...

It is possible to disable the option for people to leave anonymous comments. I have no problem with anonymous ones per se. When I have been critical it is because of what has been said.

ISPs aren't tracked when people leave comments.

It seems obvious that the pointers to the Nirvanix blog are coming from people linked to the company, hence my response above.

I don't understand why whoever is so impressed by the Nirvanix blog anyway. There is nothing there that is inconsistent with even the most extreme conspiracy theories. It seems they expect everyone to be amazingly impressed that the deletion took place in June 2007 and Streamload split into Nirvanix and Mediamax in July 2007.

The section on the blog: "Are Nirvanix Inc. and MediaMax Inc. the same company?" actually adds to suspicions as it admits that Streamload was so weighed down with old data and inactive or non-paying customers that it was making a loss.

That's the problem that Nirvanix hasn't grasped. If there was a conspiracy to split off legacy customers and then wind up the company to delete their files then everything it says happened would have happened. Read it again:
http://developer.nirvanix.com/blogs/nirvanix/default.aspx

At present its public answer to the question: "Can Nirvanix help me retrieve MediaMax files that are not available on The Linkup?" is "No." Followed by a paragraph of justification.

If that said: "There are obstacles we are trying to overcome in the following ways..." imagine how different things would be.

Until Nirvanix has posted that on its blog, I'd suggest these anonymous pointers to it are doing the company more harm than good.

Anonymous said...

Hi Tom,

Sorry Tom, I didn't spot any wordpress username tied in with the comment.

They have tried a couple of times and I guess they will try again so I will keep an eye out for it.

Has anyone heard anything from Iverson?

I sent him an email the other week along the lines of how I hate to see people fail, but he got what was coming. I haven't heard anything back.

Dave.
wordpress.partyoflife.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the comment supporting my idea that being 'soft' on Nirvanix only indicates that the person supporting it is a little 'soft' in the cerebral lobes, Dave. :)

I cannot imagine someone who truly was hurt business-wise by this entire mess not being righteously angry, but wanting to be all 'conciliatory' about it. Nirvanix is just going to look at someone with an attitude like that and just laugh. These are people who couldn't give a rat's a$$ about injured customers unless life is made difficult for them, and then they might sit up and take notice.

It doesn't surprise me at all that they are playing 'games' on blogs, and I doubt that this one has been immune to that, if you catch my drift.

Katie
(sorry for the 'anonymous' post...not sure why it didn't log me in under my usual name)

Luzo Orbit said...

This is to alert you that there are newer postings on this blog. See the side panel.