Dropbox Acquires Snapjoy (YC S11) And Puts Photos Into Its Focus
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
I know they haven't given any details about the future of the product, but I imagine they will move the team to DropBox products. As someone who was hoping for a long term improving product, that's a little depressing.
I guess the lesson is that even startups that you pay for aren't immune to being sold. What services are safe to invest time and money in using?
Great question. I think in this situation, a company like Dropbox is probably safer, as they're a lot bigger in certain measurements (amount of funding, amount of revenue, etc).
I think the companies that have the most to lose are the safest to invest time and money in using. A small startup that just started 3 weeks ago is more likely to be sold than a company like Dropbox, in my opinion.
I agree with the rest of your post but what you said above doesn't make sense to me. A 3 week startup is probably more likely to die than be bought whereas Dropbox would likely be a fantastic purchase (for anyone who could afford them). The aim of such Startups (at least if they have VC investors) is to sell the company at some point, whether that be to the public (IPO) or another company (acquisition).
Exactly. My point is that a 3 week old startup is more likely to disappear quickly (fail, get bought, etc.) than a company like Dropbox. Dropbox is a good acquisition target, but I think a company like that would take longer to do so.
As you said, a company like Dropbox could also go for an IPO, in which case, theoretically, they still provide the product that you're paying them for.
I think there will always be early adopters to help startups get their initial traction.
This is actually one of the ironic casualties of the cloud. In the old days you bought your packaged software and it was pretty much guaranteed to work as long as you didn't change your setup (OS, hardware, etc). With cloud services the change is out of your control, so there's nothing you can do to freeze your setup.
This is probably a reason why there may be a growing market for personal clouds.
http://theopenphotoproject.org or https://openphoto.me or https://github.com/photo
Disclaimer, I'm the lead dev
Without diving into the source, my primary complaint was that the whole thing felt unpolished. There were display errors that just needed some TLC, documentation that sorely needed the eyes of a proficient English proofreader, and issues that made me wonder if there were going to be underlying security concerns. (For example, sometimes the path in the URL would be encoded, sometimes not... just makes you wonder what's lurking under there.)
And this led to a lot of other problems, for example, you couldn't keep up with new technological innovations because you needed older systems for some programs.
It's an interesting question, which practice is better.
A boss at a job I worked at a few years ago still keeps his contacts in an ancient version of Lotus organizer without VCard export support. As a result he's pretty much locked into it unless he ponies up $100 for the latest version of the software (released in 2003) which has VCard export. He's too cheap to do that so he'll have to stick with it as long as he is still on a version of Windows that supports 16bit software.
[Sparrow](http://www.sparrowmailapp.com/) is a great example. They were acquired soon after the release of their iPhone app. That kinda soured me and many others.
EDIT: The same could be done for other cases, obviously. Take usage rights on social photo services as a completely hypothetical example. :)
EDIT2: In fact, it could be something YC requires their funded companies to do. That must be pretty popular considering all the Instagram/Flickr debacle.
When was it that Y Combinator decided to ban companies supporting SOPA/PIPA or something to that effect?
Imagine running a cloud service, where you make $10/month/user, and having to read through a separate contract for each person. Does that make sense?
The reality is, you have limited control over a product that you've paid $5, $50, or even $500 for. At most you can get a refund if you're unhappy with the service you received. You cannot force the team of developers to continue work on something, unless you're paying the millions of dollars that that costs.
And it's not difficult to see how adopting it can have benefits: http://blog.flickr.net/en/2011/05/13/at-flickr-your-photos-a....
A lot of people are abandoning Instagram not because of the ToS per se, but because they were reminded that it is now owned by Facebook. And Facebook's reputation is horrible.
Look at what Tumblr are doing by posting their policies on GitHub, which lets everyone see the diffs: https://github.com/tumblr/policy.
Goodwill doesn't have to be legally tethered. But it can be.
Your own.
Even in that case, you will still find that no company keeps their products or services static over decades. In most cases you probably wouldn't want them to. Imagine how it would feel to be stuck on Windows 95.
Supposing that they don't butcher the migration, what Snapjoy service do you love, which wouldn't benefit from a close integration with Dropbox?
My only beef with Dropbox is that the gap between free users and paid customers is too wide, price wise. I understand that customers have to subsidize the hordes of freeloaders, but $120 a year for 100GB doesn't feel right. Maybe they shouldn't try to be profitable yet.
Other than that, they've successfully sneaked a usable file system in iOS, they support all my devices including Linux, they "just work" unless you try to share writing rights, and they're going to get us rid of the dreadful iTunes, iPhoto and no doubt one day iBook/Kindle. That's super impressive.
* either lower the entry price and limit the features of the free version if they need to be profitable now, getting more paying customers with a lower ARPU;
* or lower the entry price a lot, lose money and increase both free and paying market-share, if market-share is their current priority.
But the current gap from free to paying is too damn high IMO.
I use Dropbox as a serious tool for synching and sharing files between my own computers, and with quite a number of other people and companies to do the same. My Dropbox work files are over 50gb. I'm willing to pay for this, and of course do so.
My photos these days do come from multiple sources. However with 11 years of digital pictures, 20+ mb per picture from the latest camera (and thousands of shots) and with a new Go Pro Hero HD in the house, the amount of data storge required dwarfs the capability of Dropbox and my capped Internet connection. The 500gb plan, meanwhile, is $500 per year. That's a lot of money but also insufficient space for photos. I also don't really want to share that many of them, and if I do, then they go straight to the sharing site de jour.
So I see Dropbox as a professional tool for work files, but an overpriced amateur tool for pictures. The app and website seem to keep pushing me to turn on photos, and I wish they would stop.
But yes, Snapjoy does look nice, and if priced correctly could be a tool of choice. Just play nice with iPhoto, Lightroom and Aperture.
Not to mention that cloud storage is becoming core feature of many operating systems. If Dropbox doesn't reinvent itself, it could easily face the fate of Netscape.
So what I'm thinking is that Dropbox will keep building/buying these specific-purpose services which will all work on top of your dropbox account (similar how Facebook built photo-sharing and other features on top of their social network). This is basically the only way for them to stay relevant since pure cloud storage is at this point commoditized and there is zero lock-in.
disclosure: I am the CTO.
I only ask to slake my mild curiosity at how these sorts of deals typically transpire when the two companies have shared investors.
How long is it going to be before iOS or Android (points to the winner!) partners with CVS or Walgreens to offer printing services for photos as an integrated part of the OS?
Having cameras in everybody's pocket all the time (decent ones, too!) is a revolution. The next step is making it easy to put those photos on the fridge.
I really love the reality of physical places having APIs. Think of Walgreens like a peripheral and use it.
I would spend huge amounts of money of photos if this was a simple thing. (And part of the OS. I don't want to open walgreens' undoubtedly god awful app to do this.)
(I just tried it with someone else's public album, so it at least works at the moment. A Google+ user number will also work in picasaweb.google.com urls. Set up the url, click through the redirect and there you go.)
I say they have serious _competition_. But serious business -- not so much.
Google gives away their storage but it is nowhere near the level of ease as Dropbox for non-technical people IMHO.
It's based around events, but you can use its galleries for anything. As an added bonus, it can also aggregate photos from twitter if you give it a hashtag.
Disclaimer: I did the app's design.
I remember chatting with him back when we were both in junior high and he was talking about applying to incubators and doing startups - it's great to see what he's doing now!