In general, not sure if we should keep posting this about every Dropbox mention. Comments like this is hardly intellectually stimulating and might fit better at Reddit rather than HN.
I smiled.
This 'news' isn't either, yet it keeps getting posted without moderation. I think it's better left in the Dropbox forums.
Enterprise software doesn't support feature X.
User requests feature X, gets told no.
User posts to a news site, to try and get more votes for feature X.
Dropbox clearly has a lot more going for it than "it's managed FTP!"
Here I was thinking that most Dropbox customers (at least the ones that pay big money) were on Windows, but maybe I'm wrong. Since you seem to have insights into Dropbox's userbase, could you share the raw numbers you're sitting on? Percentage wise of course.
Now is it as significant as windows users? I’m sure it is not. But it seems silly that a major tech company would just dismiss it altogether.
Macs are ~15% of the market, and Apple silicon is a subgroup of that which will gradually increase until it makes up virtually the whole group over a timespan of several years (basically, how long do people keep machines running). It will never be the only mac platform unless you mean supported platform, which will still take quite a few years.
So no: Macs, and Macs on Apple silicon, are a part of the market, but they're a fraction and a fraction of a fraction.
In some places. In others no. Depends on the industry really, and country.
> But it seems silly that a major tech company would just dismiss it altogether
We don't know how Dropbox's userbase looks like. If most of their profits come from large enterprises on Windows, then they will focus on those users mostly, since Dropbox is a company and companies always (most of the time) just follow the money.
Well, more than that. They recently discontinued intel MacBooks, entirely.
Part of it's enduring quality is how we can all relate to being so retrospectively wrong like this (I know I can! A/B tests are a constant reminder). I think bringing it up now and then is a gentle reminder to keep a positive community :)
Mounting (s)ftp(s) and using it as a local folder does some things, but fails at the basics. Eg, if I upload a 50gb file (and actually manage to get it to upload all the way without crashing), how can I checksum verify what I uploaded without it costing me 50gb in downloading and time?
There's plenty more edgecases, but suffice to say, there's a reason why tools like rclone & rsync exist - copy and paste does not cut it for a lot of uses, especially when mixing large files, remote servers and (even good) internet connections.
Stupid, out of touch, unrealistic.