You're probably right - unless in "other solutions" you include things like ext2/3, HFS, FAT32, NTFS etc.

I guess my (badly made) point is that if you're complaining about the resilience/reliability of and app that uses a cloud based storage solution, the alternatives aren't limited to other cloud based storage solutions. If you want to fix the problem, fix it - don't just trade it for the same problem with a different service to blame and some unknown difference in risk.

There are _many_ greybeards out there who've seen and solved (properly) all the problems with hard drive based storage, and can easily explain the difference between raid, backup, and archive. They will debate the requirements for onsite vs offsite backup and archive, they will have opinions about how many spindles and how many different models and brands of drives to use. They'll have war stories of the time they heard of a file system recovered from an errant root "rm -rf /" with nothing more than a vim window available to use.

_Those_ guys will do a better job for you that Evernote or Dropbox or GoogleDrive or ...

Have there been data loss stories about Google Drive?

(I'm a google employee, but I'm interested as a recent heavy user of Drive.)

Given that we don't know the number of active users of either service, I think it'd be difficult to draw any conclusions about their relative failure rates [based on horror stories.]

If we assume google counts Drive users the way they count Plus users, it probably has a stellar track record. :)

At the very least, there are stories about Google Account loss, which while perhaps not technically being "data loss stories", are in effect exactly the same thing.

I don't remember the details, but a friend got badly burnt a couple of years back with some "known problem" where switching from free to paid googleapps accounts made _everything_ disappear...