1. Integrates with an existing, open ecosystem
2. May have open-source clients, but server is closed source and does not federate
3. Pretty UI and good marketing
4. VC funded
1. Integrates with an existing, open ecosystem
2. May have open-source clients, but server is closed source and does not federate
3. Pretty UI and good marketing
4. VC funded
I actually think that this played a non-trivial part in Android getting early traction - similar dynamic to Gmail where tech people got excited about it eventually "my friend who's good with computers recommends this" becomes a factor.
Not the exact same formula as you formulate above, but I think there are parallels to draw.
Embrace, extend, and extinguish, and all that.
Fortunately, I've decided to go with Openmoko instead back then. I'm so glad I did.
Really sad because I personally recommended it too, and was hoping these things would work out somehow. Lesson learned: they don't. The next messenger I will promote with my friends would be one without the server at all.
If the writing is placed on the wall (the marker cap is open right now) then replacing each of Keybase's features with existing technologies won't be difficult -- just time consuming, which is why they have market fit.
If Keybase completely shuts down, I have hopes the team will be able to convince Zoom to let them pack up and release parts of the server code not being shared with Zoom's products.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extingu...
the trend exists because "pretty UIs" and usability are actually valuable features to users, and the existing open ecosystems tend to fail at that aspect.
VC Funded™