Kicksend (YC S11) goes free. Send unlimited files to anyone.
venturebeat.com
venturebeat.com
My guess is that they would try to become so useful, then try to either:
a) up-sell (something) or
b) get bought by someone who finds them useful or
c) start to threaten Facebook with a new file/photo-sharing network and get bought
After all, YC will invest even if you don't have an idea. So what's the big leap if you have a mediocre idea and they manage to tie you up and then steer you to another idea with a little investment?
"prevent them from getting into the hands of other angels/vc's."
I'm going to pay you a complement here to get you out of your bad mood.
Your team is a perfect example of what I meant. I went and took a look at clutch.io. It looks beautiful and it's obvious you and your co-founder are very talented and will create something great even if the market for clutch.io isn't that large (I don't know what the market is, I'm just saying "if" it isn't that large). So if you pitched me and said you wanted funding you would be exactly the type of person that I'd want to "tie up". Nothing wrong with that.
But it does look like a great idea. My question as an investor would be "how large of a market is there" but the fact that you have talent means any investment will pay off in the long run.
On the other hand, I think this is a wild goose chase in a different way. It is a talented team that is solving a genuine problem. Today for me to share large files I need to use dropbox. The problem with dropbox is that it needs a sync based solution, that counts towards your quota. Agreed, you can share and then delete once received. But something lightweight like kicksend is a breath of fresh air to use.
Anyway, the wild goose chase here might be that there might never be a business model here, but if the team can solve certain problems then they align themselves to be bought over by a 'big one'. Some of the problems that the team could be genuinely solving:
- Ease the sharing process
- Optimal data compression and bandwidht reduction on the server side
- Privacy
etc...
I would not for once think that the team is doing this 'cos someone else wants them to.
(Not knocking the product, or saying they're doing it wrong; just agreeing it's difficult to immediately see the business model)
I think you guys need to drop that password requirement...
1. This is also broken: https://img.skitch.com/20120517-fq5cdhtchw39nrfti2a3qcw8t9.j...
I was trying to type in 123456@myemail.com and the problems are:
1. I can't see 123 anymore
2. I can't move cursor at all, cursor keys seem to be ignored.
3. the last letter is partially obscured.
Using latest Chrome on Lion here.2. Next, the upload dialog does not have a cancel button and no completion estimate. The upload is slow; my files are large and the uplink is slow, so it's my fault, but there could be better handling of this problem I think.
3. Further, there is no way to send feedback. When I click "feedback" I am presented with a search box for FAQ. I don't think it's time yet to be afraid of too many people sending in suggestions and feedback. It's safe to let people send you email.
4. Finally upload is complete and I received my sharing email, and it has a separate link for each file. This is a show-stopper for me - I am not sitting there and clicking links one by one. How about a simple "get all the stuff as one zip file" link?
I'd really like to see this take off, get integrated into various apps, etc.
(Annoyingly, I've been stuck dealing with >2TB and often >4TB files, too)
It sets the expectations that this kind of service should be free the same way the iPhone AppStore has created the perception that $2 is expensive for an app :(
Hmm, not really. My sister who is not the most technical person has been uploading pictures to PicasaWeb and sharing them with specific people and groups. With the extra storage (whose price sadly increased with Google Drive), I also always upload my files at full resolution and sharing is easy.
The odd thing to me is that if you position yourself against Facebook (who is the implicit target of the first paragraphs), and you go completely free, you have to wonder what the catch is. I pay Google some money for the storage at least.
Although many good ideas start this way obviously you have to take into account how many others are in the same situation.
By "original quality" I'm assuming they mean the full, say, 3 to 8mb file not some 60k jpg. While there are certainly people in the printing and graphic design industry (and others) who might need this even keeping in mind that the service is free I don't see a large user base developing. And the relatively small user base won't even be paying for the service.
But at least this is a step in the right direction.
Now, what if she sends an encrypted file consisting of copyrighted materials? RIAA, MPAA, are you reading along?
What are we going to do to prevent that?
Obviously if you release somethng like this you run the risk of triggering the usual "illegal file sharing" issues.
But you absolutely do not need cloud storage to move large files. There are other ways to do it.
This is the key thing. The desktop app I'm imaging is user friendly, and probably at least somewhat pretty. I think the main technical issue is probably the fact that most people are NATed by their routers, so peer to peer is tricky, but I think with uPnP, you could get around that.
I was originally thinking of this as an open source app, but I suppose one could go the paid app route.
It's really not much of an issue as long as at least one peer has a reachable IP. I sometimes wonder how many people are under the impression that NAT's are a showstopper. This is simply not true. The showstopper is probably the RIAA and MPAA.
Skype slipped under the radar because they branded themselves as VOIP not file sharing. But it's really no different. It's peer to peer data exchange.
Only if both peers are behind the same NAT does the NAT pose a problem, in which case an external "supernode" is needed. But that's easy to set up. And it does not need access to packet payloads.
You could do a paid app. But the code to accomplish the job is very simple and has been made public in various forms multiple times.
File sharing copyright concerns, monitoring communications to catch bad guys and all that stuff is what's holding this back, not lack of a solution for connecting through NAT's.
Why? It's software transferring files between two parties, just like you can do with email and things like Skype and even AIM, and hell, even the service we're talking about. Is there precedent for the people who write such software having legal problems? I'm aware of cases like rapidshare and torrent sites, but for example, are the authors of bittorrent clients also targeted?
> I sometimes wonder how many people are under the impression that NAT's are a showstopper. This is simply not true.
Hmm, I'll admit I don't fully understand this, but back in my torrenting days, you always had to forward a port to be reachable. How do you get around that?
Do you know what a LAN is? It is an evil invention to share copyrighted works. It must be stopped.
If you want a better understanding, read everything you can find on UDP, Ethernet, firewalls, NAT and encapsulation, in that order. I would suggest not to waste time trying to figure out "pre-packaged" peer to peer software solutions (i.e. all the different approaches people have taken, e.g., aeroFS, Kicksend or whatever). They often include far more complexity than you need to accomplish peer to peer. As such, they won't help you much to understand the basics: how connections are made.
They're offering photo & video sharing by email ! Seriously ? Is it that hard for someone to login to Flickr or YouTube and click the email icon.
I feel like any 1/2 way decent engineer could make a clone of this company in 8 hrs
letter-spacing: -0.05em;
:)Hell, I just got my lab group to start using Dropbox for group sharing...
That sounds pretty solved to me.
And free flickr accounts work well enough for people who don't need to print the photos out (which is really the only case you need full res, right?)
I think you're drastically overestimating the sophistication levels of a lot of people when it comes to sharing photos and files. Plus, I doubt my dad has heard of Flickr, let alone know how to spell it.
And regarding Flickr... You're advocating that you would have your dad use Kicksend, which presumably he won't have heard of either.
This one now seems ready to face the exact same problems.