Coming from a similar background product-wise: the struggle is real, and while file syncing and sharing is great and achievable it only allows you N user retent

Coming from a similar background product-wise: the struggle is real, and while file syncing and sharing is great and achievable it only allows you N user retention/acquisition, and thus M profit potential. If you (or your investors) demand M*1000 of that, you start looking for a way to usurp not only the user's file syncing needs, but also document editing, calendars, email, contacts, backup... anything that is within reach. This is exacerbated by the fact that more and more vendors (such as Adobe and Figma) drive away from "files", which effectively forces you to use _their_ cloud storage solution. When you are Dropbox this is not a very sweet spot to be in, because Adobe has _both_ the apps for creating projects _and_ the storage/sync, but you only have storage/sync. As long as cloud storage needs to grow exponentially at any cost, feature bloat of the kind Nikita is describing will continue. Most likely Syncthing is so good exactly because they do not have these extrinsic pressures. Add to that the fact that in a bigger product org, the way you get promoted is by shipping "your" feature. Quite often it would be a feature no user would ever want, but it is much more the problem of selling "your" feature to management internally versus selling it directly to the user. A great example of a solution which is local-first, allows you BYO cloud storage (of multiple kinds) and simply offers its own cloud storage at a small markup is Arq, and we are blessed that it does not have the pressures I have described above.