Gmail lets you email attachments up to 10GB with Google Drive integration

Google is adding a new feature to Gmail that lets you use Google Drive to send large files as attachments. How large? Up to 10GB.

That’s about 400 times larger than the 25MB limit on traditional Gmail attachments.

Gmail Drive

When you’re composing an email, you’ll now have the choice of hitting the paperclip icon to attach a small file or the Google Drive icon for larger files.

Google provides Drive users with up to 5GB of disk space for free, so if you actually want to send a 10GB file you’ll either need to pay for more storage or buy a Chromebook — since that will net you 100GB of extra disk space for 2 years.

Or you could just upload your files to SkyDrive, Dropbox or another site and paste a link into your email message like you probably do now.

 

  • http://twitter.com/EricSeale Eric

    And yet /nobody/ does gpg right.

    Shameful.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/2QX2SCA5SRCHM4THFINJYM43AY Mike W

      Because (a) people don’t typically send personally sensitive information via email and (b) people aren’t typically that paranoid about their emails falling into the wrong hands.

      It’s estimated that there will be half-a-trillion (with a “t”) new email messages being sent *every* *day* by sometime next year. That fact, in itself, shows just how unlikely it is that anyone (even with an automated system) will be poking around in your personal email looking for something they can use against you.

      If anything, being one of the few to use gpg to routinely send emails could single you out as a possible person of interest to who knows who…

      • http://twitter.com/EricSeale Eric

        I don’t use gpg for email.

        Public companies encrypt offsite backups for example and yet consumer encryption tools are in the stone age.

        The CPU overhead is not bad. Seems easy enough to encrypt everything all the time, even if there are flaws in trust or algorithms.

      • http://rationaldreaming.com/ Mike

        Ok – sorry for the misunderstanding. I think the same issues tend to apply with storing data in the cloud too though. I’d be willing to bet that the vast majority of the files people store on Google Drive do not require encryption to protect the owners from harm — i.e. they do not contain any information that would be harmful to them if hacked — and when I mean vast majority, I’m thinking of well over 99%.

        I agree that ideally all your remote data should be encrypted, and I also understand why Google would not want to encourage it unduly (they depend on access to unencrypted data to provide services they can charge for) but unless encryption is added as part as the basic operation of GDrive (or perhaps as a paid upgrade) then it’s simply too much of a hassle given the very low risk involved of anything getting out that will be harmful to you.

        Once your Google account is hacked, which is really the only likely way your cloud data would be compromised, then I suspect you’re already in a bunch of trouble.