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

Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 466 posts

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#351

Post by runtime_terror »

zhyder wrote: post #331

Aside from the issue of platform owners (Apple, Google, Microsoft) offering storage sync as an integrated feature, which others have pointed out, the other reason growth is limited is that filesystem storage and sync thereof has become less critical over time. Our apps increasingly do cloud-native walled-garden storage: docs in Google Docs / Notion / Confluence, mocks in Figma, etc. And code was cloud-native with ver…

I'm sure there's also some number of users (like myself) that don't like the idea of a large company having access to their unencrypted files.

I also found Dropbox just started take on more and more bloat in what seems an obvious attempt to compete with Box and others.

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#352

Post by rcbdev »

microtonal wrote: post #54
postalcoder wrote: post #19

I think I've spent more on dropbox, lifetime, than most other subscriptions (it's also the first service i thought was worth paying a subscription for). I still pay for it. Drew built a great service. On the other hand, I can't think of a single new feature they've introduced since 2011 that matters. All I care about is packrat and good syncing. Is there anybody that loves anything they've built in the last fifteen y…

All I care about is packrat and good syncing. For me that and end-to-end encryption (I know it's supported for teams now). Instead they just added more annoyances over time. Every time I logged into the web interface, I would get stupid upselling advertisements (maybe don't badger your paying users with that nonsense)? I replaced the official client by Maestral years ago, because they switched to embedding a web brow…

Why not just use VeraCrypt containers with DropBox until this man of colour that you are scared of leaves their elected office? That way, your files are E2E encrypted via FOSS tooling.

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#353

Post by runtime_terror »

insanitybit wrote: post #345
plasticsoprano wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

E2E is supported for specific types of folders available only to teams but the admin has to enable it and that folder has to be used. You can't apply it team wide to all users. It's a very poor implementation.

If you want E2E, encrypt your data yourself. By far the simplest, safest solution to the problem.

Simplest? How so

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#354

Post by tacticalturtle »

robotresearcher wrote: post #251
wombatpm wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People say this, but the cash is returned only if you sell. A dividend is cash in pocket plus the stock.

The dividend is taxable ordinary income. The increased share value is not taxable until sold, and then it’s capital gains; usually a much lower rate.

In most cases dividends are taxed at the capital gains rate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_dividend

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#355

Post by tonymet »

insanitybit wrote: post #344
tonymet wrote: post #319

what are they building?

The agent, sync engine, file storage (and custom hardware for it), ACL system, file previews, etc, are all highly complex projects in their own rights that Dropbox actively works on and maintains.

wasn't that all completed in 2006?

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#357

Post by devsda »

RigelKentaurus wrote: post #278
guhcampos wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that bad though? Think about it. If you're paying all your bills, all your wages, and you have a strong product that people enjoy, and you're able to compete in the market - maybe not gaining any ground, but at least not losing any either - why change? Of course I moderately understand the market pressures at work, but at some point in the human civilization journey we'll have to be content with something instead…

It's not necessarily bad, but in tech, not actively growing is tantamount to shrinking. Organic customer churn and attrition means that you're just a few years away from irrelevance. If DBX wants to stay a stable tech company, it should figure out a way to go private.

> It's not necessarily bad, but in tech, not actively growing is tantamount to shrinking.

Dont we frequently complain that the primary driver behind ensittification of products is the need for perpetual growth at any cost.

I understand the need for growth but if the market is saturated and profits are stable, then may be thats a signal that they need to innovate or branch out into other/adjacent tech without making it worse for their existing customers. But leaders take the shortcut.

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#358

Post by farfatched »

makeitdouble wrote: post #349
pishpash wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's mobile devices not having user-facing files as first-class citizens. The mobile era started just as Dropbox started to solve a computer era problem. Bad timing.

I'd argue Dropbox became as big as they are thanks to mobile taking off. In a computer only world there are myriads of other solutions, elegant or not. Most work computers were permanently plugged into network shared folders, and would have over the VPN access for on the road salesmen etc. Home users mostly didn't care about cloud storage or shareable folders, those who did could get away with ftp (basically supporte…

They were a transitional technology.

Re: Dropbox CEO Drew Houston to step down

#359

Post by robotresearcher »

tacticalturtle wrote: post #354
robotresearcher wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The dividend is taxable ordinary income. The increased share value is not taxable until sold, and then it’s capital gains; usually a much lower rate.

In most cases dividends are taxed at the capital gains rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_dividend

Good correction, thanks. For completeness, that’s dividends on stocks, but not dividends on bonds, which are treated like interest.

In any case, dividends are taxable in the current year, and unrealized stock gains are not.

In case the difference doesn’t seem like a big deal, consider that if you die without selling the stocks, your heirs inherit them at the prevailing price, and no one ever pays tax on the gain they made between when you bought them and when you died.

Rich people who need neither dividend cash or stock sales to pay living expenses prefer not to get dividends so they can pay very little tax.

This enormous loophole for the rich brought to you by your US representatives.

Post reply on HN