Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

wetzler.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#61

Post by wisty »

jseliger wrote: post #50
axiom wrote: post #12

Dropbox was a YC company, which meant they had quite a bit of free press and access to a lot of valley connections. I would imagine that had a lot to do with their success.

Notice this too, on the marketing front: we had issues getting the press excited at launch. We built a fantastic Windows client. 3 years ago, everyone was running Windows . We were so excited to show the press, yet they all had Macs. Walt Mossberg wouldn't write about our product because it was PC only. Months after we hired our PR agency, we found out that they had never even used our product... because they too onl…

One of the quora comments notes the difference between B2C and B2B.

B2B needs lots of features, a great sales team, and can be Windows only.

B2C needs a great simple UI (which may one day have lots of power features tucked away, hopefullly after A/B testing), lots of press, and multi-platform is a big plus.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#62

Post by roel_v »

jseliger wrote: post #51

This reminds me of something I read earlier: After I left Syncplicity, I ran into the CEO of Dropbox and asked him my burning question: "Why don't you support multi-folder synchronization?" His answer was classic Dropbox. They built multi-folder support early on and did limited beta testing with it, but they couldn't get the UI right. It confused people and created too many questions. It was too hard for the average…

This is an interesting concept. Anyone have further reading material on this Zen aesthetics / ma thing? Googling these words is leading me to many yoga shops in Massachusetts ;)

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#64

Post by htsh »

larrik wrote: post #5
jcromartie wrote: post #3

This guy already said it best: http://www.quora.com/Dropbox/Why-is-Dropbox-more-popular-tha...

Thanks for linking to the original. There's some real gems in here from the founder of Syncplicity. For instance, not having a Mac client meant that the tech press wouldn't touch it. Then, they wouldn't write about it. That's pretty enlightening.

Also, imho, having a Linux client early helped quite a bit with gaining street credibility amongst hackers/nerds. I know this is the reason I started using it instead of competing services.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#65

Post by anto1ne »

marketing, marketing, and marketing.

I use dropbox forever, was in the closed beta, and at that time I was using win. And until today I never heard about syncplicity, even though I know and tried similar services.

It's not about features, platforms, or whatever. I've seen the worst product succeed only because of marketing.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#66

Post by jodrellblank »

MrDunham wrote: post #10

Yet again someone showing how important it is to stay simple. I can no longer count the number of companies I've talked to who imploded under the weight of their own features.

Perhaps if you just focused on the counting instead of all the other stuff you're doing...?

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#67

Post by brown9-2 »

jacquesm wrote: post #19
thomaswmeyer wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only for content that's explicitly placed in your "Public" folder, not for anywhere else in your Dropbox.

Yes, hence the 'that are not shielded'

Then no one should think it's such a "secret stash", should they? I think using this term is what confused people.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#68

Post by z92 »

jacquesm wrote: post #24
sfphotoarts wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it seemed that you were trying to imply the dropbox's content (not just the public portion) would be visible to anyone. I am glad this was clarified.

No, definitely not, it's only the public folders and not the rest.

'not shielded': implies that one has to do extra work to shield those. Default is not secure scenario.

'public folder': implies one has to do extra work to make those files public. Default is not public.

I was wondering which one describes Dropbox situation correctly.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#69

Post by theBobMcCormick »

robryan wrote: post #49
theBobMcCormick wrote: post #8

Looking at products like Dropbox and Evernote, not to mention everything going on with iPhone/Android apps, I can't help but thing that they provide a bit of a counter to the conventional wisdom that native "fat clients" are dead. The people I know who use Dropbox basically never use the Dropbox website except to sign up and to download the client. The client is the magic, not the website. It makes me wonder what oth…

Without the website though to compliment it dropbox would have been less valuable to me, although still the best syncing solution. There have been many times at uni or at someones house where the website interface has come in very handy.

I'm certainly not doubting that not having a website at all would be a loss. It just fascinates me how much of a gain it is for some services to have a great local client.

Re: Why Dropbox Succeeded and Syncplicity Didn’t

#70

Post by markstahler »

I started using Syncplicity. The reliability of the service was very poor in the beginning (I remember a week long down time) and I seem to remember some issues getting a computer to Sync again when it is reformatted and given the same computer name. The issues were enough to move me to Sugar Sync where I was a paying customer for 12 months. Their service was satisfactory but they removed my plan (10Gb for $25) from their offerings. I moved to Dropbox where I have 6gb for free. Not sure how Dropbox is making money (all the people I know and have referred are free users) but I will enjoy it while it lasts. Certainly Dropbox is providing the best service of the three.
Post reply on HN