Dropbox Founder Wants To Build the Next Google

ColdWetDog writes "The Dropbox file storage and synchronization service has managed to attract 50 million users and $250 million in venture capital. The founder of Dropbox, Drew Houston, says he is determined to build the next Google or Apple, not to sell out to them. Even for a guy whose paper valuation is around $600 million, it seems like the best he could hope for is another Facebook-level company — file storage isn't that sexy. I wish him luck in his bid to remain independent. I'd rather see Dropbox remain fairly agnostic with regard to other Internet services."

Comments

Tough sell

[bonch]

Dropbox has figured out an elegant solution to a vexing problem. With the explosion of smartphones and tablets, people have more devices and more apps than ever before. How can they get access to the latest version of all their stuff — photos, music, videos, documents, spreadsheets — no matter what device they are using and no matter where they are?

Apple addressed this with the free iCloud, Google of course has its own cloud storage services, and even Microsoft has the free SkyDrive, so I'm confused as to why the article considers this a vexing problem waiting to be solved when it was pretty much the theme of 2011 for all the major platform vendors. Lots of venture capital doesn't mean something is going to take off--the lesson last year was the Color app, which got $41 million of first-round funding in March only to immediately flop on release months later.

Re:Tough sell

[tidepool]

They are all, somewhat, 'tied' to a company and a product line. Sure, many things are cross platform, but I'm sure to get complete smooth functionality, you should be using the respective product line.

A 3rd party that could make *everything* sync up, without any snafu's, and offer a solid consistent UI on any device, would easily be the best solution.

Storage and, more important, remote access, is at the tip of the ice-burg at the moment. I can't imagine where it will go from here, but it'll move and fast.

Re:Tough sell

[bonch]

It is true that they are tied their individual platforms, but that could also be considered their primary advantage over DropBox. Everyone who buys an iPad automatically benefits from iCloud integration, for example.

Re:Tough sell

[ColdWetDog]

It is true that they are tied their individual platforms, but that could also be considered their primary advantage over DropBox. Everyone who buys an iPad automatically benefits from iCloud integration, for example.

I don't want it tied to Apple's limited world view of what is good or bad. I don't want it tied to Microsoft's bizarre implementations. I don't want it tied to Google's manifold desire to sick advertisers on me.

I just want it to work. On OS X at home. On Windows at work. On Linux, BeOS, CP/M (well, I give that a pass) or whatever. The vendors all have an agenda which, so far, hasn't jibed well with mine.

Re:Tough sell

[Joce640k]

Yep. The barrier to entry for "dropbox" type applications is very low.

I have zero emotional investment in Dropbox. All the files in my dropbox folder are on my own hard disk. If a competitor offered me more disk space or whatever I could switch over in minutes.

Re:Tough sell

[tidepool]

Also a valid viewpoint. But, I imagine, unless you are someone who ONLY buys apple products (we know who we mean); Or only google products, etc it's still going to leave someone hanging.

Decentralized storage isn't so much about the storage, as it the universal aspect of connectivity: From any device, to any device, with zero 'hacks' to make it work. The general consumer wants it to 'just work', regardless of device. (To be truthful, so do all people, geeks and hackers alike; we're just willing to do something about it as opposed to simply walk away and view something else to purchase).

If they can truly pull that off without a hitch, they could be in one very solid position. It seems like each 'new feature' from apple involves a forced upgrade of hardware: Ie, a SMALL example is upgrading to iCloud sync on a computer with an ipad2 no longer allows you to fully sync all things from a 2nd gen iPod touch. (Not my hardware, just a stupid example). Options are buy a new iPod touch, or disable iCloud. You can't tell me this isn't on purpose, and it's the stuff that, if provided another option, consumers will only deal with so much before the eventual 'screw it'.

Re:Tough sell

[bonch]

But DropBox has an agenda too--they want to be the next Google. That means your files and information will become a product for the real customers: advertisers. You can never escape an agenda, and if the effort to avoid that agenda outweighs the convenience the agenda provides for you, then you're acting counterproductively against yourself.

Re:Tough sell

[Surt]

You can't escape an agenda, but a company could be run that sold services directly to customers, with a contract forbidding advertising / any sale of personal data. Their agenda could be to make money by selling you a service and not selling you out.

I think when someone builds the next facebook and offers an ironclad contract forbidding any sale of personal data, I'd probably be willing to pay $5 or so per month for the service.

Re:Tough sell

[Solandri]

Dropbox just resells Amazon's S3 storage service. They have a slicker interface, but the heavy lifting is all done by Amazon.

Re:Tough sell

[turbidostato]

"Dropbox just resells Amazon's S3 storage service. They have a slicker interface, but the heavy lifting is all done by Amazon."

Which is a very clever side of the Amazon's bussiness case.

Amazon surely bills a little bazillion to the likes of Dropbox or Netflix, so as long as the "new thing" happens to deal with them, the more successful they are, the more money ends up in Amazon's accounts.

But then, for each Netflix there are a thousand of wannabies that all will do is losing their shirts -but even them will move part of their money to Amazon's accounts.

So the end result is that Amazon wins always without taking the risks.

Very clever indeed.

Re:Tough sell

[PCM2]

Dropbox has been around for years thats why...noob

So has WinZip.

Re:Tough sell

[whereiswaldo]

I think when someone builds the next facebook and offers an ironclad contract forbidding any sale of personal data, I'd probably be willing to pay $5 or so per month for the service.

Indeed - I'd pay to not have my data pimped around. I don't know what vendors' single-minded fixation with free+advertising is all about.

Re:Tough sell

[Riceballsan]

why vendors obsession is in it is obvious. for every person like you who would rather give money than information, there are roughly 1,000 people who would gladly let everything about themselves leak out to the public rather then spend $5 a year. Every privacy fiasco done on facebook/google or any other site has had little to no impact on the number of people subscribing, and usually loses less than 1% of the current subscribers even for the big issues. Now look at how many people went into an extreme panic when the fake rumors of facebook charging money sent all of it's users into a mass panic. I would bet that if facebook charged say 15 a year, within 3 months they would become myspace and G+ would become facebook.

Re:Tough sell

[Darkness404]

Because most of the internet wants free stuff. Sure, there is a small subset of the population who /really/ wants something enough they'd pay for it, but for the majority of people on the internet, free works.

Most people simply will not pay, they will go to a free site. The average internet user doesn't care about the advertisements, after all, that's what adblocking and hosts files are for.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazon is still a wannabe Netflix.

Re:Tough sell

[Columcille]

iCloud != Dropbox. Apple was a lot closer with iDisk, though that was not as efficient and elegant as Dropbox. iCloud does not offer a solution anything like Dropbox.

Re:Tough sell

[icebike]

You can't escape an agenda, but a company could be run that sold services directly to customers, with a contract forbidding advertising / any sale of personal data. Their agenda could be to make money by selling you a service and not selling you out.

Actually if the idea is to make money directly from its users, that's fine and dandy. Beyond that, any plans to sell my data or even the fact that that I have data is out of the box a non-starter for me.

The fact that Drop Box can break the encryption any time they want/need is pretty much a non-starter as far as I am concerned. The fact that they lied about it initially is another black mark. At least Google tells you right up front exactly what they can and will do with the content of your email.

SpiderOak promotes zero knowledge storage. They have no way to break the encryption and couldn't do so in response to a subpoena if they wanted to. Windows, Mac, Android, Linux. And their fees are half of what Drop Box wants. In addition it can keep iterations of your data if you wish, so you can roll back those changes in your spread sheet one by one.

I just don't see what Drop Box has to offer in regard the topic of this post, Without breaking its basic promise to keep your data private, they have nothing to sell other than space. You won't get to be of Apple's size or Google's omnipresence just supplying disk space that can be had by government agencies without even going for a warrant.

If they want to convince me, change their system to a zero knowledge system in which they can't hand over the keys to anyone because they don't have them. They need to pick up the tab from the mobile carriers for data syncing mobile devices. Trying to build a cloud storage empire that gets shared with police is not likely to be all that successful in the age of data caps.

Re:Tough sell

[vakuona]

I don't think that's what the founder meant when he said he wants to be the next Google. It looks like he means to establish a successful company that stands alone, rather than selling out to the highest bidder.

However, I think they do have a tough sell. As Steve Jobs put it, they don't have a product, they have a feature. Once could storage is built into every device you can buy, and that storage is not drop box, they cease to be relevant.

Re:Tough sell

[TooMuchToDo]

This is nothing new. You know who got rich during the Western US gold rush? Those who sold the tools, not those prospecting.

Re:Tough sell

[yogijp]

Which is why it is so costly, dropbox did not build the infrastructure. I was about to go with a paid plan from dropbox, but once I checked the price of Google Storage, dropbox seemed ridiculously expensive. Dropbox charges $10/month for 50 GB. Google charges $20/year for 80 GB (starts at $5 for 20 GB, goes all the way upto 16 TB). Seemed a no brainer to me. I use InSync (https://www.insynchq.com/) which gives the same sharing capabilities. I ended up getting 1 TB storage from Google.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Dropbox just resells Amazon's S3 storage service. They have a slicker interface, but the heavy lifting is all done by Amazon.

Not to mention they have the inherent security issues from Amazon as well. I guess this is OK as long as you don't mind having your data dumpster dived. If you don't hold a key, your data is exposed. Also the use of SSL(TLS) is susceptible to certificate compromise and man-in-the-middle attack that is currently plaguing the Internet. Asking the average user to use client-side encryption is out of the question, the average joe is not going to implement TrueCrypt. All of the encrypted data in one location is subject to brute force attack. Even Dropbox's blog states, "Dropbox manages encryption keys for you," sure - maybe you'd like them to watch your house and car keys too.

Re:Tough sell

[Weezul]

DropBox also offers zero security. Isn't like he couldn't offer anything. He just chooses not to. Fucker.

Re:Tough sell

[Kalriath]

Are you referring to WinZip in general, or your own specific evaluation copy?

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Dropbox is garbage. They don't offer much in the way of free space, their pricing scheme is a joke and they don't even support WebDAV.

Box has them beat on every account. Hell, even Microsoft Skydrive is better if you just need some free space.

Re:Tough sell

[ILongForDarkness]

Yep and they have nice things like the ability to set limits on the sync, drop and forget syncing (I think iCloud has that too though I don't think google has (skyDrive?)).

Future: media sharing perhaps? I seem to recall a article somewhere talking about how their software is very efficient in the backend, built their own storage jbods, lots of deduplication etc. Say they can get an agreement to become a digital library for ebooks and music. Might be tough with Apple and Amazon in the mix but if they could get something together with the right holders they could offer a DRM layer on top of their existing sharing system. A platform agnostic iCloud that obeys media rights (both a good and a bad thing, but good business I think).

Re:Tough sell

[Runaway1956]

"I have zero emotional investment in Dropbox."

That ranks among the things that makes a rational man ask, "WTF?"

Alright, so maybe you would care to list some of the things that you do have an "emotional investment" in?

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

I couldn't. Dropbox is the only one who seems to be on all my mobile apps. And none of my mobile apps have a generic "enter your own settings" option.

Re:Tough sell

[saleenS281]

MS supports OSX and Windows with their syncing app. Asking vendors to support operating systems that have basically 0 market penetration like BeOS or CP/M is not only unreasonable, it's ludicrous. Why on earth would you want someone to waste programming cycles natively supporting an OS with 0 userbase vs. patching/adding functionality to the application for OS's people actually USE???

Re:Tough sell

[justforgetme]

Why is winzip relevant in cloud storage?

Re:Tough sell

[donscarletti]

Plenty of stuff I'd imagine. Slashdot's full of fanboys debating why the console they bought is the best, most people stick to one vendor for OS and cars, because their products feel right.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Because winzip has been around forever too, but when was the last time it was relevent?

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

If you cant use it across all your devices, independent of platform, its useless. iCloud or SkyDrive dont even work on android, the dominant smartphone platform. Hell, iCloud doesnt even work on the dominant PC platform. Hence they are irrelevant and useless. Googe has cloud stuff for photos or email or music in the US, but nothing comparable to Dropbox or Box. Maybe you only have Apple devices or MS devices, but you are in the minority.

Re:Tough sell

[Pascal Sartoretti]

I just want it to work. On OS X at home. On Windows at work. On Linux, BeOS, CP/M (well, I give that a pass) or whatever. The vendors all have an agenda which, so far, hasn't jibed well with mine.

Have a look at Ubuntu One. It still (yet) lacks OS X support, yes, but Canonical's agenda looks much better to me than Apple's or Google's.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't forget Megaupload as well. While Kim is a big on the dodgy side, his Empire, if you will, is growing pretty large and the new projects they have coming soon seem to be pretty attractive.

I'll wish them all the luck in the world though. They are going up against giants who have other branches that can fund these services very well. Even to the point of paying customers to use it rather than the reverse.

GetPaid2Use isn't very popular, but it has been done before. Even Microsoft used it on Bing recently if I remember correct.
Still makes me wonder why they stopped it. If they kept the rate sustainable, and had a max per day, they could have gotten a lot more people using their search engine.
And in a way, it wouldn't be so bad since you are technically helping Microsoft complete their advertising, so you should be rewarded a bit. (okay I'm stretching, still)
Maybe even make the rate dependent on how many people used it. Early adopters get paid more. That would be a great incentive to have used the search engine.

Re:Tough sell

[Mannfred]

Out of interest, how does SpiderOak support shareclouds (i.e. sharing of your information with others) if they have no way of decrypting your data? Does the action of sharing a file decrypt the data locally on your machine and then reupload it non-encrypted, or something else? Their FAQ did not cover this question.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

What would be cool top me is if DropBox or someone else found a way to integrate more completely several services that are stand alones now. For example: XMarks, Plaxo and DropBox as a single service. Or is there and I have missed it? Being another Google? Noway.

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

In the '90s, every Windows user installed WinZIP (a few even paid for it!). Everyone distributed zip files and WinZIP was the tool for opening and creating them. It wasn't a sexy market, but it was a solution to a problem that a lot of people had, and it was the tool that everyone used (except warez d00dz, who preferred rar). The, Windows came with the ability to explore zip files as if they were normal folders. The need for WinZIP dropped from almost everyone to practically no one overnight. The same thing happened on the Mac with StuffIt - OS X can natively open a variety of archive formats, so there is no need for a third-party tool.

Fast forward a decade, and DropBox is in the same position in the cloud storage market that WinZIP occupied in its own market. Everyone who needs to share a couple of files with a friend or colleague uses it. But now operating systems and other services are coming with some cloud storage, so there's less need for a third-party service.

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

That's the point of using open protocols. The service should not support the operating system, the service provider and the operating system provider should both support the same protocol. For example, if you have a WebDAV server running somewhere then pretty much any modern operating system can mount it.

Re:Tough sell

[dumeinst]

Checked it out. No free Desktop client hardly makes for a viable replacement for mass use.

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

That's not quite the same. The tool sellers had a little risk, but not a huge return. You can sell spades to 1,000 prospectors, but the one who strikes gold will probably make a lot more than you. In contrast, users of Amazon's S3 pay Amazon more the more that they scale up. Amazon is not selling them something at a fixed price, it is selling them a service that takes some percentage of their income. If an S3 customer becomes successful and their revenue goes from $1,000 to $1,000,000 then Amazon's income also increases by a factor of a thousand.

Re:Tough sell

[saleenS281]

So you haven't actually used any of the services then? Because they pretty much all have an API for third party programmers to program to. It generally helps to know SOMETHING about the product before you bitch about features you THINK it doesn't have.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually that was a very good analogy.

The tool sellers had a little risk, but not a huge return.

Are you talking about S3 or the gold rush here? It obviously fits perfectly for both.

You can sell spades to 1,000 prospectors, but the one who strikes gold will probably make a lot more than you.

You can sell servers to 1,000 entrepreneurs, but the one who "strikes gold" will probably make a lot more than you. Again, you prove that this is a great analogy.

In contrast, users of Amazon's S3 pay Amazon more the more that they scale up.

Actually they pay less. Who would use a business that got costlier at larger scales?

Amazon is not selling them something at a fixed price, it is selling them a service that takes some percentage of their income. If an S3 customer becomes successful and their revenue goes from $1,000 to $1,000,000 then Amazon's income also increases by a factor of a thousand.

Are you serious? Is this trolling? Are you a kid?

I would genuinely be interested to know how you could believe this.

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

In contrast, users of Amazon's S3 pay Amazon more the more that they scale up.

Actually they pay less. Who would use a business that got costlier at larger scales?

No, they pay less per unit storage, they pay more in total. Once they're using more than 5000TB/month, it the amount per unit storage stays constant. To ask your question in reverse, why would Amazon offer a service that they got paid less for the more you used it?

Amazon is not selling them something at a fixed price, it is selling them a service that takes some percentage of their income. If an S3 customer becomes successful and their revenue goes from $1,000 to $1,000,000 then Amazon's income also increases by a factor of a thousand.

Are you serious? Is this trolling? Are you a kid?

I'm quite serious. I'm oversimplifying slightly, of course, because the per-unit amount does decrease from $0.140 / GB / month to $0.055 / GB / month as the amount stored (although you're still paying the higher amount for the first TB month). The amount that Amazon makes from Dropbox is likely to be several orders of magnitude more than they make from, for example, tarsnap.

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

That's not the same as supporting an open protocol. That means you need to write a client for every {service, platform} pair. With an open protocol, you need to write one client per platform. Before you make snarky comments, it generally helps if you know what you're talking about.

Re:Tough sell

[Dixie_Flatline]

Wouldn't Apple be the least likely to sell your data? I mean, they've GOT what they want: you on their platform. They don't need to sell your data to anyone—frankly, it probably runs counter to their own interests if they do. If you've already bought into their platform, they'll try to treat you well so you don't jump ship to some other platform, and that's it. Google and Dropbox don't have any other way to monetize you than to blitz you with ads or sell your data because they've got nothing else to sell.

Re:Tough sell

[modmans2ndcoming]

Google does not sell your data....They sell your demographic to advertisers...which means: "Mr Advertiser, I can show your ad to 18-25 year olds who enjoy and like to stay up past midnight." and the advertiser purchases that demo for its ads.

Re:Tough sell

[Mannfred]

SpiderOak promotes zero knowledge storage. They have no way to break the encryption and couldn't do so in response to a subpoena if they wanted to.

I just tested this service as follows:

1. Uploaded a massive file to a private share folder - deliberately uploaded this from a machine on a slow connection (took approx an hour).
2. Added this folder to a public share folder
3. Fifteen seconds later disconnected the upload machine - certainly not enough time for it to reupload the file unencrypted.
4. One minute later downloaded the entire file to another machine on a fast network connection.

See the problem? In spite of them claiming to have zero knowledge of user data their server must've decrypted the file remotely in order for the file to be available in the share straight away. Who's to say they can't decrypt the rest of your data once they have your private decryption key? I hate to say this but their claim of 'zero knowledge' doesn't seem convincing.

Re:Tough sell

[saleenS281]

An open protocol will NOT allow you to write one client. You're asking for a single standard platform, which is idiotic. I don't want ten different platforms that offer identical services. I want them all to innovate and compete. ALL of the platforms mentioned so far already utilized open PROTOCOLS to function. What they don't offer is identical services for those protocols to access. Meaning you have a specific API per platform. Dropbox and MS operate on HTTP/HTTPS, both OPEN protocols. So again, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and you clearly haven't spent a second actually looking at the services before making comments that are completely inaccurate.

Re:Tough sell

[dzfoo]

However, iCloud and iOS in general are moving towards a solution that will make a service like DropBox irrelevant. When your applications abstract their files as data objects, and the user does not need to interact with a file system at all, there is need for a file system synchronization service.

          -dZ.

Re:Tough sell

[janeil]

Damn right I paid for winzip! As well as many other shareware titles, why not send some $$ to people doing good utilities? People spend $5 on a cup of mocha latte supremo but won't reward an excellent app, it's sad.

Re:Tough sell

[blackraven14250]

Your SpiderOak data is readable to you alone. Most online storage systems only encrypt your data during transmission, meaning anyone with physical access to the servers your data is stored on (such as the company's staff) could have access to it. Or, even if your data is encrypted during storage, your password (or set of encryption keys) is often stored along with your data, thus making its easily decoded by anyone with local access to those servers. With SpiderOak, you create your password on your own computer -- not on a web form received by SpiderOak servers. Once created, a strong key derivation function is used to generate encryption keys using that password, and no trace of your original password is ever uploaded to SpiderOak with your stored data. SpiderOak's encryption is comprehensive -- even with physical access to the storage servers, SpiderOak staff cannot know even the names of your files and folders. On the server side, all that SpiderOak staff can see, are sequentially numbered containers of encrypted data. This means that you alone have responsibility for remembering your password or 'Password Hint' (which you can create to help you remember) allowing SpiderOak to create a true 'zero-knowledge environment' – keeping your data as safe and secure as it can possibly be.

It seems to me that they're generating the key on the client. The username is provided to give access to the files and folders on the server, but it's encrypted on the client end, which is uploading the files themselves, organized into numbered folders, and something like a text file that has the info "001" = "Photos", which is also encrypted before being sent.

If I'm understanding this correctly, it means that if I mistype my password, I may start uploading files with a different key than is used by everyone else under the account, and royally screwing things up.

Re:Tough sell

[dkf]

However, iCloud and iOS in general are moving towards a solution that will make a service like DropBox irrelevant. When your applications abstract their files as data objects, and the user does not need to interact with a file system at all, there is need for a file system synchronization service.

I've been hearing this for over 20 years, and it remains largely BS. Oh, at some levels of abstraction it's somewhat true (though it's more that people move to "dataset" rather than "object") but by far the most common level involves files and directories and has done for years. It seems to be an abstraction that people like.

The big problem for iCloud is that the world is heterogenous. Not everyone uses Apple's products, and that's not about to change. Platform-agnostic clients don't have nearly as many problems with the baggage of other systems from the same vendor.

Re:Tough sell

[Surt]

You'd think so, and yet their EULAs let them do it. So while it might not be in their interests right now, as soon as some PHB in the management structure sees it as a way to make a quick boost to earnings ...

Re:Tough sell

[TheRaven64]

I didn't use WinZIP much, I usually used pkunzip from the command line. My father tried to pay for PKZip, but they didn't have any mechanism to take payment from people in the UK, and he didn't have any mechanism to make payments in US dollars back in the '80s.

Re:Tough sell

[dzfoo]

Have you even seen an iPhone or an iPad? There's no user-accessible "file system." Going by its popularity, that seems to be an abstraction that people like.

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Your machine supplies the decryption key. Decryption happened on their server using your key when you said to share it.

No problem here.

Re:Tough sell

[Thing 1]

They don't need to sell your data to anyoneâ"frankly, it probably runs counter to their own interests if they do. If you've already bought into their platform, they'll try to treat you well so you don't jump ship to some other platform, and that's it.

In my case, this didn't bear out. I had an iPhone 3G (not 3GS), which Apple allowed to be upgraded to iOS 4 (they could have restricted the upgrade). When I upgraded, the phone became unbearably slow. Searching, I found that others had this issue, and most opined that Apple behaved in this manner to "convince" users to upgrade.

This user was convinced; however, now I own an Android device, which is far more functional.

Re:Tough sell

[Ooki]

The nice thing (tm) with dropbox is that it is OS agnostic. I can have my files synchronized on all of my platforms - easy. With me being on *nix/win/android/mac platforms (at work/uni/home) it really pays of that dropbox is not requiring me to stay on one OS at all. To make the case with WinZip, if the included zip extractor found in the operating systems where so that you could only open "windows zips" on windows, and so on. Then WinZip would still be in great shape!

Re:Tough sell

[Anonymous Coward]

Desktop clients are so retro. Who needs a client when Box supports WebDAV? I use it as though it were simply another folder on my PC.

Re:Tough sell

[Tymst]

The parent make the best point I've seen in a long time.

Re:Tough sell

[Ginger Unicorn]

if the server is doing the decryption, then all you have is their word that they won't access your decrypted files, or allow authorites to sniff their network for encryption keys. I thought the idea is that the client does the encryption/decryption, and all the server sees is encrpyted blocks.

Re:Tough sell

[Surt]

I don't think the average user uses adblock/hosts. And worse, those tools do nothing to protect you from the real privacy invasion.

Re:Tough sell

[randyleepublic]

SpiderOak needs to have an "accident".
- DHS

Re:Tough sell

[nasirg]

Thanks,some great data here keep up the good work. I actually allow for a more creative comment as I’m a bit out of my depth but I will be checking back here for further updates. online vhs online toys and games

On their way..

[Anonymous Coward]

They've already somewhat emulated Google's whole get really big and popular then do some questionable stuff to tarnish your image to the point that while you retain most users, you lose a lot of the blind fanboyism and trust... thing.

And I largely agree with the summary.. the kind of service dropbox offers isn't in the whole "world changer" league. Unless they diversify I don't see them getting there with file storage.

Re:On their way..

[Joce640k]

We live in a digital age. Sending files to other people seems like the single most obvious use of the Internet, but it's a strangely unsolved problem...

Obligatory XKCD: https://www.xkcd.com/949/

Re:On their way..

[Anonymous Coward]

I believe we have a more important unsolved problem: Most consumer internet connections can only upload at under 1 Mbps. It's painful to send any large file at that rate.

Re:On their way..

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a problem that has multiple solutions.

Re:On their way..

[Joce640k]

Painful? Why?

Nobody's forcing you to sit there and count the bytes as they get sent. This sort of thing is why background tasks were invented.

Re:On their way..

[Anrego]

I think people have started working around the problem is the main reason.

Photos is the best example.. who "sends" anyone an image file any more? Everyone posts it on some service.

Documents are generally small enough for email.

Music and video: torrents, youtube.

It's only every once when someone has a large non-standard file to send you do you realize that there is actually no simple way for a non-geek to do it.

Re:On their way..

[houghi]

I see the funny, but it should be +5 insightful.
How do you get photo's from friends that are non-technical?

Most of them insist on burning CD's, making the handing out of images a bitch. Luckily most of my friends don't have a Facebook account, so no solution there and even then I would not be able to see it.

Even though all have a provider that gives them web space, a tool like lAlbum is still too hard to use. And this is just about photo's, not about sharing anything else.

Re:On their way..

[Anonymous Coward]

Bought a new Seagate Goflex Home desktop 2TB NAS for Mom, it plugs into the WIFI router. Mainly for use with Time Machine from laptops over wifi.
Seems to work okay even on Lion.
http://www.amazon.com/Seagate-FreeAgent-GoFlex-Home-STAM2000100/dp/B003STVG80
However this is cool, it lets you have 5 accounts each of which includes a public folder.. and you can share files through the manufacturer's web portal.
They provide a GUI which is not quite fall down easy to use, but this makes more sense as long as you are willing to put your hard drive on the Internet.
Though everyone even Mom uses Dropbox because it is so easy, easier to use software on local storage that is under your control - no publishers going to remove books from your library and so on, no 50GB limits - this makes sense to me if you have an always on connection already.

file storage isnt... data mining is

[decora]

having spiders crawling over the private data of tens of millions of people could be incredibly lucrative. not only to sell to businesses, but to sell to the various governments of the world who are interested in spying on people. every year the governments of earth spend billions collecting and gathering data on people to analyze 'security threats'.

now, that data is being collected for them. facebook is a good start, but it's mostly just trivial personal stuff. here, at a file storage site, we have the big fish. spreadsheets from companies, investigation reports from corporate analysts, stock trading information, debt trading information, etc etc etc.

Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

SpiderOak is a heck of a lot better (and unlike dropbox is actually secure). Of course with additional features it is a little more complex but that can be easily solved in time.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[ColdWetDog]

Why is at a 'heck of a lot better'? (Curious as to your thinking). From a brief perusal of the site, it seems to be similar to Dropbox albeit with end to end encryption. That's nice - I get around that by storing the data that I think needs to be encrypted in password protected sparsebundles (on OS X). Seems to work just fine. Much of the stuff I have on Dropbox could be shared openly on the Internet with the only downsides of confusing a whole bunch of people.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

Much more flexibility regarding what is synced (I don't need a dropbox directory, I can pick and choose directories or even individual files on each machine to be synced).
Your solution to security is fine, except I want to be able to access my data on windows, linux, osx, android, and ios. It is also just easier to know everything is encrypted rather than needing to mentally track what should be as well as have to worry about opening sparsebundles (or opening truecrypt volumes, etc).

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[swalve]

Honest question: what is insecure about Dropbox?

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless you encrypt everything you store there they have access to it. It isn't encrypted on their servers in any way (unless you do it before you upload it, which few people bother to do.)

That being said, I use it and don't especially worry. I just don't use it for anything valuable without encrypting it first. Most of what I do use it for is basically free stuff or text files for games I play that no one would be interested in. Hell, I'm barely interested and I created it!

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Anonymous Coward]

Much more flexibility regarding what is synced (I don't need a dropbox directory, I can pick and choose directories or even individual files on each machine to be synced).

Ubuntu One does the same with a free 5GiB and I love that it's already built-in so I type my credentials into a new installation (every release cycle) and it's synchronising (on my Android phone too).

It is also just easier to know everything is encrypted rather than needing to mentally track what should be as well as have to worry about opening sparsebundles (or opening truecrypt volumes, etc).

I don't like that security principle. Why should everything be encrypted? Why should your family photos have the same security level as your plans to ______ or source code for project ________? They shouldn't require the same credentials to access and the latter shouldn't even be in "The Cloud®".

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

They don't use client side encryption, and can decrypt your data on their side if they so choose. Almost a year or so ago, they had a couple of hours where (due to a botched code deployment on their side) anyone could log into any dropbox account using any password. The fact that they CAN decrypt your data (in addition to apparently having very bad testing procedures internally) means that someday they may decide to follow Google and Facebook's model and troll it for information for targeted advertising, selling to whomever, etc.

They claim their employees need to be able to have access to your unencrypted data to comply with government regulations but this does not pass the smell test at all. SpiderOak and Wuala both use client side encryption and do not have access to your data.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

Ubuntu One isn't available on OSX which knocks it out for me.

And I happen to like that security principle. Why shouldn't everything be encrypted? If I desire stronger encryption (or a different passphrase) for more sensitive stuff I can encryption them in a truecrypt or other container. But it isn't hurting anything to keep them encrypted and makes it more transparent. Except for performance (which isn't an issue here) what possible argument could there be for NOT encrypting everything?

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[leehwtsohg]

Because one of your secrets is how many secrets you have.

Who said "I don't like any of your secrets, but I will fight to the death for your right to have them" ?

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[TooMuchToDo]

Ok, so the reason Dropbox doesn't do encryption? It would break their model. They leverage the fact that they only need to store a file once across their entire platform (AWS S3), but can "charge" multiple people for that space utilization. Encryption would break this de-duplication ability, and hence cost Dropbox more money in S3 storage costs.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[robot_love]

I've tried SpiderOak a couple of times because the client-side encryption is a massive selling feature.

However, the interface is convoluted, to say the least. It's frustrating to have this massively complicated application to just synchronize a directory, when Dropbox, for the most part, doesn't have an interface at all. I want to point SpiderOak at a directory and forget about it. Unfortunately, I can't. And after several weeks of worry (and several lost files), I always end up back at Dropbox.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

I didn't have that experience at all, it was just pointing it to a directory (or four) to back up and forget about it. Where it gets complicated is syncing across machines since ou basically have to define a link (this directory on machine A links to this directory on machine B). Without doing that you are just backing up to the cloud (which is also nice, as that is one of my primary uses of it and I didn't like that dropbox until recently forced you to have all files stored on all computers in your "cloud").

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

I would understand that better if Dropbox were not twice as expensive as other comprable services that DO client side encryption.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Electricity Likes Me]

It's the S3. Other people setup there own storage and data centers, whereas Dropbox is always reselling Amazon.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Electricity Likes Me]

I think that's a great a feature though - if you use a couple of different machines with different platforms, being able to map what goes where would be super-handy.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[ColdWetDog]

Thanks. Interesting. That would allow me to look at the sensitive data on Windows if I needed to.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[TooMuchToDo]

THIS. Backblaze? Their own datacenter (well, a datacenter in SF where they built their own gear). SpiderOak (and Nimbus.Io, a subsidiary about to do S3-style storage with higher latency but to be used for archival purposes)? Their own datacenter. Apple? Google? Of course, their own datacenters.

S3 is GREAT to prototype your concept. But once you start to actually *use* it and scale out wildly? Not so much (from a cost perspective; from the tech side, it works very well).

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[afabbro]

SpiderOak is a heck of a lot better

Where DB has pulled away from the pack is integration. Virtually every iOS app that supports cloud-based storage supports DB. Not nearly as many support SugarSync, Spideroak, etc. Phones are one example - there are certainly others.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[SpzToid]

Have you tried SparkleShare for DropBox-like integration? It looks like, and works like dropbox. In terms of a GUI it is really hard now to think of any difference with DropBox; I can't. I wrote more about it in another comment here: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2621608&cid=38704028

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Lazy Jones]

Wuala both use client side encryption and do not have access to your data.

Wuala warns you (or did in some version of the T&C) that law enforcement agencies might force them to deploy a client update to you to turn off (or compromise otherwise) encryption. I guess there's no 100% safe haven in this area, unless you use an open source client without automatic updates ...

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

That kinda sucks. Still happier with SpiderOak it seems.

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Anonymous Coward]

I remembered the name dropbox the first time I saw their video. What are hte chances I can recall, what was it, spideroak, tomorrow...

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[finkployd]

Good point, but I tend not to select distributed storage solutions only on the name. If I did, I would have easily gone with "clownfucker storage"

Re:Not even the best options in their own space

[Lazy Jones]

From SpiderOak privacy policy:

We will disclose your Personally-Identifiable Data if we reasonably believe we are required to do so by law, regulation or other government authority [...]

From SpiderOak Service Agreement:

You may use the Services only for lawful purposes and solely in accordance with this Agreement and any other specific terms of use, rules or policies, as may be provided by SpiderOak from time to time, that may be applicable to any particular portion of the Services. You may not store, transmit or share through the Services any material, or otherwise engage in any conduct that: violates or infringes the rights of others, including without limitation patent, trademark, trade secret, copyright, publicity or other proprietary rights; involves uploading, posting, emailing, transmitting or otherwise making available Selected Data that you do not have the right to make available under any law or under contractual or fiduciary relationships (such as insider information, proprietary and confidential information learned or disclosed as part of employment relationships or under non-disclosure agreements, etc.); [... and a lot more stuff ... ]

Question: if they are truly "zero knowledge", why would they care? They cannot identify infringing data anyway, if it's true. Furthermore, we know that being in the US, they will have to comply with government requests to access your data and they are not allowed to tell you. Also, while IANAL, their terms offer many loopholes, such as the possibility to employ (very) weak encryption in cases where some 3rd party desires access to your data. Therefore I'd trust Wuala more, it's based in Europe, where such secret subpoenas are (AFAIK) not possible. For people who have an absolute need for "privacy" (or for breaking the law, which in some free speech-impaired countries is very dangerous), there's still Freenet, which can be used as a (cumbersome) file storage...

Make it So

[retroworks]

I'm in. Go for it.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[Shikaku]

You're free to use Dropbox with Truecrypt you know. The initial upload will be huge if you make it use up all your space but syncing will be fast afterwards.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[mvmortier]

Rofl! A little paranoid

"file storage isn't that sexy."

[John Hasler]

Almost as boring as Web searching, in fact.

Re:"file storage isn't that sexy."

[bonch]

I don't really get that comparison. Search is far more sexy because it parses the content of the web and the information people are genuinely interested in.

Re:"file storage isn't that sexy."

[Anrego]

As I recall, google actually had a hard time getting investors early on because no one thought there was any more money in search. It was seen as a mundane, solved problem.

Re:"file storage isn't that sexy."

[qxcv]

"File storage" may not be sexy, but "social cloud file storage" is.

Re:"file storage isn't that sexy."

[am 2k]

As I recall, google actually had a hard time getting investors early on because no one thought there was any more money in search.

That was probably correct. After all, they're not selling search, they're selling advertisement spots.

Re:"file storage isn't that sexy."

[Anonymous Coward]

spot on. google isnt search, its a massive advertising company.

No chance

[Anonymous Coward]

Dropbox has no future in personal cloud storage with OS makers addressing these features in house. One look at their forum which once bustled with communal good will and it is obvious that they have abandoned the home user for more lucrative team accounts.At $125 per user per year, it's a much more viable business model. Although I suspect it won't be long before another company steps in to provide cheaper licences in return for host your own storage solutions.

Just fix the DropBox client already!

[jomcty]

I would settle for him to just fix the Window's DropBox client so that when I upgrade it, it installs in either one centralized directory or updates to client installed in my profile instead of another user's profile.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[unity100]

do i need to redirect you to the 'fuck song' ?

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[Anonymous Coward]

A little paranoid? He's not wrong.

Check out Kinects terms of service, and what they can do - by default, you agree to let them use pictures taken by the device of you using it in advertising. This is a CAMERA IN YOUR TV WATCHING YOU USE IT.

Smartphones... Were you around for the CarrierIQ debacle? Independent auditing of the code in these portable, always on, always connected devices just isn't going to happen, and even if there are people with morals inside the companies making these devices its not going to be hard for the bad guys to sneak a back door into millions of lines of code. And on a whole other level they're trying to sneak back doors into cryptographic standards(I forget the details, use google, this stuff is all out there)

Now we're being asked to rely on companies giving us access to great big machines in the sky - to trust that these companies aren't watching and recording every single action, that those actions aren't being analysed and aggregated, and most importantly of all - they won't ditch you like a hot potato and leave you high and dry when you find something so wrong you can't walk away from it. Look how all those companies ditched wikileaks.

Secret FISA requests? Indefinite detention? This guy isn't paranoid - thats the fucking scary thing.

File Storage isn't sexy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell that to the guy I just got done trying to help that lost 10 years worth of writing because he had never though to back it up ;)

Re:File Storage isn't sexy?

[melted]

Shoulda used a Mac. Time Machine is a godsend.

Re:File Storage isn't sexy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shoulda used a backup solution. Time Machine is a godsend.

FTFY.

I don't know why people thing having a mac is analogous to solving a backup problem unless the obvious point is that Apple thinks it's customers are stupid and need to hand hold everyone.

Re:File Storage isn't sexy?

[Chelloveck]

Given that the grandparent wrote about a guy who lost 10 years of work because he didn't know to make backups, I'd say Apple pretty much nailed that one.

Business model?

[Lazy Jones]

I'm a Wuala user myself, so perhaps I've overlooked something - but how does Dropbox hope to earn money? By selling additional disk space or turning the free accounts into paid ones once people begin to rely on them?

Re:Business model?

[Anonymous Coward]

By data mining... just like any other web 3.0 company.

Re:Business model?

[swalve]

It looks like they are using the shareware model. Give the home user just enough (2gb, right?) to make it attractive, and they are in the door. Offer higher priced services for the business user. Its pricing looks to be a slam dunk for the small business who needs more than a USB drive hanging off of a desktop, but can't afford to develop an in-house solution. You can have 2tb of space for 10 users for $1350 a year. Always backed up, version controlled, available anywhere. Very difficult to get even close to that (with access anywhere, mind you) in house. You'd probably pay the employee setting up and maintaining it that much (2-5% of one employee's time? Very likely.), and that's before you buy the hardware.

Re:Business model?

[gnapster]

Never heard of Wuala before, thanks.

I am incredibly amused by the fact that the introductory video shows backup to the Wuala servers and Wuala cloud as if they are two separate places, and storing in both places is what makes the storage redundant. :c)

Re:Business model?

[TooMuchToDo]

Only 4% of Dropbox users pay for their service, and Dropbox is already highly profitable. I would take that almost as a guarantee that storage prices for Dropbox-like services will be driven down if they're *that* profitable with so few paying clients.

Re:Business model?

[am 2k]

I'm a Wuala user myself, so perhaps I've overlooked something - but how does Dropbox hope to earn money? By selling additional disk space or turning the free accounts into paid ones once people begin to rely on them?

As far as I've heard, they're already in the black by selling additional disk space.

Re:Business model?

[swalve]

And checking Amazon's S3 pricing shows that it seems to be impossible for them to make money if they are using S3 for backend. How the hell are they doing it?

Re:Business model?

[TooMuchToDo]

Deduplication and chunking. They break files into 2MB chunks and then shove those chunks into S3. How many unique chunks does it take to represent all of the data they're syncing? Not sure, but the math shouldn't be too hard to do if so inclined.

Example: Grab a very popular torrented file; throw it in your Dropbox directory (make sure its a big file, 500MB+). Watch how it goes from hashing to synced in under 5-10 seconds. Dropbox hashed it, notes it already has a copy, and tells your box not to sync it up ("already have a copy brah!"). This is the beauty of their business model. The curse? Anyone can do what Dropbox does; it is not magic, it just takes the resources and time to do it.

Re:Business model?

[kcitren]

How many unique chunks does it take to represent all of the data they're syncing

2MB = ~ 2^2048000 possibly combinations, which is a pretty huge fucking number of unique chunks.

Re:Business model?

[amaiman]

They removed that feature quite a while ago (the 5-10 second "upload" because the file hash matched another user)...People found a way to game the system to get files they didn't already have (by just distributing the hashes for popular files), so Dropbox disabled the feature (they promised it would return, but it never did and they no longer answer support questions about it). They still do de-duplication internally, though, so that's how they can afford the storage; there's just no benefit for the end-users anymore as far as upload times (the extra uploads to them don't cost anything since Amazon EC2 and S3 don't charge for incoming bandwidth, so they can hash the file on their end before storing a redundant copy.)

Re:Business model?

[TooMuchToDo]

My understanding was that they still did only hashing if they had the file already, and would pick random bytes of the file to hash to ensure it *really* was the file they have in their backend storage. I'll have to test tonight with a download.

Re:Business model?

[swalve]

I am surprised there is that much duplication out there!

Re:Business model?

[allo]

i think there is still potential for massive file sharing:
everyone puts some files in his dropbox. Then you share your files scripted with somebody else, he copies the file serverside (so no real up/download happens) into a non-shared folder, then he leaves the folder. repeat this steps, later on log into your dropbox and get a lot of files, noone really needed to upload for you (again).

Re:Business model?

[allo]

just think about everyone hosting their music collection on dropbox.

Re:Business model?

[amaiman]

My understanding was that they still did only hashing if they had the file already, and would pick random bytes of the file to hash to ensure it *really* was the file they have in their backend storage. I'll have to test tonight with a download.

It will still do the upload de-dupe within your own account. So if you upload a file, and then rename it and upload another copy, that will still happen mostly instantly. If you're going to test it out, make sure to use two separate Dropbox accounts.

Re:Business model?

[Smerta]

2MB = ~ 2^2048000 possibly combinations, which is a pretty huge fucking number of unique chunks.

Wouldn't it be more like 2 ^ (8 * 2 * 1024 * 1024) -- the 2048000 vs. 2 * (1024 ^ 2 is just me being pedantic, but the bigger point is that each byte has 256 potential values.

If they were 2 byte blocks (not 2 MB blocks), there would be 256 ^ 2 possible permutations. 3 byte blocks, 256 ^ 3. 2M blocks, 256 ^ 2M, or 2 ^ (8 * 2M).

Anyway, it's still a huge fucking number.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

Is that really true? I thought I remad somewhere that the smallest chunk DB would upload is 4 megs. There's no way that'd sync fast on DropBox.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[mvmortier]

Oh well :D Just makes me glad I don't own any of these devices and I use DropBox only to share files with friends (just easier than explaining them how to set up their NAT rules and stuff).

Google already sells storage

[TeriZip]

You can buy Google storage for a fraction of the price of Dropbox and use a sync client like Syncdocs. There's no real customer lock-in in this space, so its real easy to switch if a competitor offers more space.

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[easyTree]

I use a 5GB TrueCrypt file synced via DropBox but it seems to create conflicted versions way too easily, despite switching machines at a low rate. I'd love to be able to see more details of the syncing process so that I can figure-out what's happening. For now, moving the frequently-changing information into a smaller 500MB file seems to have reduced the conflicts. Anyone have any tips on getting more information on the syncing process?

Great Idea

[inglorion_on_the_net]

Great idea! I want to build the next Google, too!

Re:My My My Music makes me so hard

[TooMuchToDo]

2MB is the smallest chunk Dropbox will hash.

Where's in-browser editing?

[werewolf1031]

I just wanna be able to log into my Dropbox from a browser on whatever random PC is available (usually one at work), edit my plain-text files from within the browser, and be done. None of this having to download them, edit them, and upload them again goofiness.

Why is this so easy for others (eg. Google Docs) but Dropbox can't pull it off?

Other than this glaring annoyance, I do enjoy Dropbox's convenience. Mostly.

Re:You want freedom? I'll give ya fuckin freedom!

[ColdWetDog]

Alternate universe post?

what about the password/security issues w Dropbox

[jsepeta]

Any journalist worth his salt would have immediately responded to Mr. Houston, "If you want to be big like Google, you can't leave all your users' files unprotected for a day because one of your staff turned off the passwords."

If you want to play with the big boys, you need to wear big boy pants.

Christ I hope he doesn't - epic failures

[dbIII]

Since they had the epic failure of producing something even less secure than the FTP of twenty years ago I really hope they don't pollute any more of the net until they get their act together. There's plenty of other solutions that actually work but spent their money on function instead of an massive and expensive PR blitz to sell a product that is, to be quite frank, very well polished shit. It's only that polish that gives them a service better than any ISP on the planet can provide.
So here's my advice, if you are thinking of using DropBox for anything you don't want to see on the front page of the local paper then use Google to search for something just as easy to use but far more secure than browsable without an username or password (now that was a truly epic failure).

a thumbs up: for SparkleShare/GIT free open-source

[SpzToid]

Try the free open-source SparkleShare software and roll your your own cloud 100%. That would trump any cloud provider option if this is your concern, since all the disks and PCs are under your ownership and control. (Although you are correct in your technical arguments, for sure. I also like SpiderOak.)

SparkleShare is essentially a DropBox clone in terms of a GUI, which extends to recovering older versions with a right-click. It looks like DropBox, and it works like DropBox too. But it is just a scripted GIT environment. In fact if you already have a GIT Repo hosted on a server (or service) somewhere, SparkleShare is easily configured to wrk with it. Here's how you start from scratch, assuming you already have PGP keys shared with the server:

At the server, create a new, empty GIT repository:
git init --bare NEWREPOSITORY.git
At the workstation:

Normally, you might use something like the following commands to work with GIT. (these are not necessary if you use SparkleShare)

git clone ssh://user@example.com:port/home/user/NEWREPOSITORY.git
cd NEWREPOSITORY.git
git clone ssh://user@example.com:port/home/user/NEWREPOSITORY.git
The SparkleShare config:

Add Hosted Project...

Address:

ssh://user@example.com:port

Remote Path:

/home/user/NEWREPOSITORY.git

This document explains how to add a layer of encryption, (which also works to secure services like DropBox btw: https://github.com/hbons/SparkleShare/wiki/Encrypting-your-files-before-transfer

In real-life, those directions aren't so hard are they? But let me tell you now in real-life, I formatted this nicely in html and slashdot has been torturing me for 20 minutes as I tried to submit it well. Plain text option worked best, eventually.

Re:a thumbs up: for SparkleShare/GIT free open-sou

[SpzToid]

This is a corrected section of text, just to be clear. The last line has been corrected.

...Normally, you might use something like the following commands to work with GIT. (these are not necessary if you use SparkleShare)

git clone ssh://user@example.com:port/home/user/NEWREPOSITORY.git
cd NEWREPOSITORY.git
git pull -v

I don't understand the business model

[Demonoid-Penguin]

Admittedly I've never used the product because I have multiple, free 8GB email accounts and I just right-click and choose "encrypt and email" from the drop-down list. But I*1 can't see how they can make real money - seems like they'd need a much larger percentage of paying users, and even then the margins look small.

Mostly I'd be thinking the business would die overnight if a certain large platform agnostic company offered a free version. Or do they have some strategy stronger than public relations (like patents) to ensure long term viability?/p>

*1 But then, I wouldn't invest in Facebook on long-term basis either.

SipderOak vs Jungle Disk

[glodime]

I've been evaluating different secure backup and Sync and sharing options. I've been intrigued by SipderOak and Jungle Disk services. Have you and opinion about how they compare?

misconception

[drolli]

> file storage isn't that sexy.

That is one of the biggest misconceptions i heard. Providing completely scalable, secure, transparently controlled, distributed, flexibly archived, fast, and reliable file storage in a *cheap* via the net *is sexy*.

However, i think it will be implemented by others and there will be a lot of competition.

Re:misconception

[DragonWriter]

Don't think "file storage" - think what you can do with it. I can, for example, envision a very nice web-app like business model where you store HTML5 apps in the Dropbox cloud and can, with the click of a button, make a personal copy and execute that, with storage and all in a nice bundle. Something like that would eat the cake of the flash games sites and many others.

So, essentially, you'd just be syncing the HTML5 local storage? You could do that (providing that browsers expose where that is in a way which makes it practical), but from an app developer perspective, the very small amount of extra work of persisting user data to a more traditional server (which then lets you use some of it, in the case of games, for shared leaderboards and social features) woud seem to be worthwhile in most cases. What's the case -- for developers -- for using something like dropbox to sync web apps?

Re:misconception

[Tom]

Local installation, local data and offline mode, cross-browser.

Greed is contagious.

[Nyder]

Another example of Greed.

Dropbox is doing well, really well. I'm sure most of use would be more then happy to start something up that has a paper value of $600 Million.

But no, that isn't good enough, I need to be like google.

What happened to the days of finding a niche, making some decent money and being happy? A profit is a profit. You don't get a better spot in the afterlife because you have billions of dollars instead of millions of dollars.

I watch Treasure Island remake the other day, and it got me reminding about the moral of that story. Which is greed (gold fever) makes you crazy stupid and you will bring everyone down with you during your pursuit of it.

A company that made a commitment to privacy...

[ibsteve2u]

...might do well. Something like "In the event we sell out to a larger firm, we will so advise you and give you the opportunity to destroy your data before any external party can access it; we will resist all government intrusion to the limits of the law; we will forbid even our investors from accessing your data; we will never sell your name or your data - any of your personal information - to a third party; we will ask you before we solicit your interest in other products we may offer in the future; we will remain above politics and never take an action designed to advantage one ideology or another; we will not replicate your data beyond what is required to secure your data for your use; we will immediately destroy all traces of your data to include your contact information upon validated request (hence the requirement for two email addresses and double-confirmation of intent to destroy); in the event that government or a third-party accesses your data through illegal means we will immediately inform you as soon as we become aware of that fact; in the event that a legal effort to access your data becomes apparent to us we will so inform you; we will provide you with the means of encrypting your data so that it is unreadable even to us....".

Me, I look at "the cloud" as a surefire way of compromising yourself and your business...particularly if the corporation is publicly-held. I have seen no indication that selling shares enhances the ethics of a business; quite the contrary.

misconception

[Tom]

file storage isn't that sexy.

Neither is search - before Google made it. MP3 players were a niche market until Apple made it sexy.

Don't think "file storage" - think what you can do with it. I can, for example, envision a very nice web-app like business model where you store HTML5 apps in the Dropbox cloud and can, with the click of a button, make a personal copy and execute that, with storage and all in a nice bundle. Something like that would eat the cake of the flash games sites and many others.

Dropbox future

[davide marney]

Drew Huston wants his service to become the Internet's file system. What would that look like? A lot of the features you'd want are already in Dropbox: cloud storage, privacy (at least from other users), 30-day versioning, and de-duplication. What's missing are APIs to get to your content without the clumsy requirement to sync locally first. That'd be something.

Re:Dropbox future

[dkf]

What's missing are APIs to get to your content without the clumsy requirement to sync locally first.

You mean like you get from the dropbox website? Like you can do already (with some files publicly available by default and others requiring you to approve their being shared)? Or were you thinking about something more sophisticated like being able to relocate computation to be in close proximity to the data at rest out there on the Cloud? (That sounds easier than it really is; in reality you have to have exactly the right kind of computation to be able to do that.)

What will definitely remain true is that to compute with the data, you'll have to bring the two together somewhere, to transfer to a different device (physical or virtual) you'll have to move the data around, and to see/visualize the data, you'll have to bring it (or samples of it) to where you are. Those are fundamental.

Why use Dropbox????????

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been a Dropbox user for a while now... Love the service, etc... But... it's just way to expensive!
Recently, I've discovered these guys: https://www.insynchq.com --- They pretty much offer the same type of service... althoughm they user google storage in the backend... End result is: Way cheaper! They only have Mac and Windows clients, at the moment though, but in their support page they are already mentioning a Linux, Android and IOS client, for this year!

Re:Why use Dropbox????????

[allo]

is this officially supported by google? Otherwise you may just lose your files, when google shuts this abuse down.

The only possible way to stay the company you wish

[Assmasher]

...is to stay a private company. If you capitalize through an IPO or become public in some other (there are obscure ways to do this) fashion, you're unlikely to retain your values for long.

You actually become legally beholden to maximizing shareholder value. You really can be criminally prosecuted for not doing something unethical that would have generated relatively substantial revenue.

Taking your company to an IPO *is* selling out.

User Side Dropbox Encryption NOW!

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe if Dropbox had user side encryption I'd care. Instead, Dropbox data is only encrypted at the server side, meaning that citizen surveillance nitwits can look at our data, with the approval of Dropbox, any time they like. IOW: Dropbox does NOT provide user privacy.

Thankfully there are great ways to create our own user side encryption to thwart this nastiness, no thanks to Dropbox. :-P

Insynch

[gozar]

I've been testing out Insynch (https://www.insynchq.com/) which uses Google Docs as your data store. $5 will get you 20gb of storage from Google a year. It works pretty much like Dropbox, and can sign into multiple Google accounts at the same time. Linux client is supposed to be released soon, and as soon as it is I'll be recommending Insynch to people over Dropbox. There is also the rumored Google Drive, which if it ever comes to fruition will eat Dropbox's lunch.

not sure about this

[Anonymous Coward]

Dropbox is a great tool. It's created a stable service independently and as a platform.
However what defined google is it's rate of innovation, a major reason for it's growth.

Re:Tough sell IzArc is my favorite

[lsatenstein]

Winzip is nice but not universal. I therefore switched to izArc, which appears to handle more diverse compression algorithms, including winzip, rar, lzh, etc.

Re:Tough sell IzArc is my favorite

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to use IZArc, but it has so many horrible bugs that I switched to the official 7-zip client. One of the most obnoxious IZArc bugs is that it won't add or extract empty directories. Another one is that it sometimes misses files, such as hidden files.

Re:Tough sell IzArc is my favorite

[dave87656]

I use tar and xz on linux. Best compression I've ever seen.