4 ms·

I like the change, and also consider the Public folder to be redundant. I hated having to move files to the Public folder every time I wanted to send a link to

by barik 14y ago

I like the change, and also consider the Public folder to be redundant. I hated having to move files to the Public folder every time I wanted to send a link to someone. I am satisfied with https://www.dropbox.com/links https://www.dropbox.com/links as a way to see which links are shared with the world. Some cynics say it's a marketing tactic, but I actually like the preview as well. I don't have any esoteric use cases like using Dropbox to host web pages. I use Dropbox to sync files across machines and to occasionally share large files with my colleagues. Consequently, I find this change to make things more usable, not less. Just another data point, since the comments here seem to be predominantly negative. Part of what attracted with to Dropbox in the first place is its simplicity. If anything, I'm curious about their business model since I've earned so much space through their competitions and such that I no longer need a paid account.

antihero 14y ago
Ok so say you're bashing out a HTML site with some other frontend people, so you throw it up on your Public folder, and they can access it at /u/8798798/whatever/index.html, and their browsers can access associated content (html, css). This is used a LOT in the web design industry, and taking this out is going to piss a lot of people off.
- barik 14y ago
  From my perspective, it seems like these customers are not the target market for Dropbox. As such, I hope that Dropbox continues to cater to people like myself, who use Dropbox for synchronization across machines instead of as a substitute for hosting services as other people are trying to do. It's nice that they were able to do so, but I'm not sure it was ever advertised as such. To me, Dropbox sharing is a substitute for e-mail attachments, not for use as a CDN. The latest Thunderbird e-mail update seems to reinforce this belief [1]. I think that even the "Photo Gallery" feature that they currently offer is overkill. I like Dropbox because they (for the large part) specialize in doing one thing and doing it well. I hope that they remain that way. Services that tend to provide everything to everyone end up satisfying no one. [1] http://www.ghacks.net/2012/04/27/using-thunderbirds-new-filelink-feature-for-large-file-attachments/ http://www.ghacks.net/2012/04/27/using-thunderbirds-new-file...
  - sixbrx 14y ago
    I don't think allowing direct access to your files, within the limits of your data plan, is trying to offer everything to everyone. That is specializing in doing one thing well, allowing access to files. Trying to second guess what the purpose of the access is, and allowing some accesses and not others, on the other hand is invasive and trying to put the smarts in the middle instead of at the edges where it belongs.
- smarx 14y ago
  Sorry to veer a little off-topic, but where's a good place to reach out to those in the web design industry who are using Dropbox public folders this way? My startup, site44.com, does exactly this, on top of Dropbox (with custom domains and passwords if you want). I think designers would love it, but I'm not really part of that community and don't know the best way to introduce it to them. Any suggestions?
  - antihero 14y ago
    Personally I'd look at going to networking events and checking out mailing lists for co-working spaces. I'll give a spin and a mention to the people I know. Edit: Just gave it a spin. I can't seem to find a way to share the folder that Site44 has created. This is pretty much the key to it all as it allows people to collaborate on things.
    - smarx 14y ago
      Thanks for the tips, and thanks for helping to spread the word. Yes, it makes us very sad that you can't share app folders. Dropbox tells us it's an implementation limitation that's not likely to change soon. :-( An alternative for us would be to skip the Apps folder and go for full access to your Dropbox, but in terms of privacy, we don't really want that access. We like being sandboxed in the Apps folder, but it does mean folders can't be shared.
- Zarel 14y ago
  I'd speculate that this is, in fact, why they're phasing it out: Too many people were using it as a free web host. I doubt it's profitable to be GeoCities Without Ads - GeoCities couldn't even stay up _with_ ads.

by barik 14y ago

antihero 14y ago

Ok so say you're bashing out a HTML site with some other frontend people, so you throw it up on your Public folder, and they can access it at /u/8798798/whatever/index.html, and their browsers can access associated content (html, css). This is used a LOT in the web design industry, and taking this out is going to piss a lot of people off.

barik 14y ago
From my perspective, it seems like these customers are not the target market for Dropbox. As such, I hope that Dropbox continues to cater to people like myself, who use Dropbox for synchronization across machines instead of as a substitute for hosting services as other people are trying to do. It's nice that they were able to do so, but I'm not sure it was ever advertised as such. To me, Dropbox sharing is a substitute for e-mail attachments, not for use as a CDN. The latest Thunderbird e-mail update seems to reinforce this belief [1]. I think that even the "Photo Gallery" feature that they currently offer is overkill. I like Dropbox because they (for the large part) specialize in doing one thing and doing it well. I hope that they remain that way. Services that tend to provide everything to everyone end up satisfying no one. [1] http://www.ghacks.net/2012/04/27/using-thunderbirds-new-filelink-feature-for-large-file-attachments/ http://www.ghacks.net/2012/04/27/using-thunderbirds-new-file...
- sixbrx 14y ago
  I don't think allowing direct access to your files, within the limits of your data plan, is trying to offer everything to everyone. That is specializing in doing one thing well, allowing access to files. Trying to second guess what the purpose of the access is, and allowing some accesses and not others, on the other hand is invasive and trying to put the smarts in the middle instead of at the edges where it belongs.
smarx 14y ago
Sorry to veer a little off-topic, but where's a good place to reach out to those in the web design industry who are using Dropbox public folders this way? My startup, site44.com, does exactly this, on top of Dropbox (with custom domains and passwords if you want). I think designers would love it, but I'm not really part of that community and don't know the best way to introduce it to them. Any suggestions?
- antihero 14y ago
  Personally I'd look at going to networking events and checking out mailing lists for co-working spaces. I'll give a spin and a mention to the people I know. Edit: Just gave it a spin. I can't seem to find a way to share the folder that Site44 has created. This is pretty much the key to it all as it allows people to collaborate on things.
  - smarx 14y ago
    Thanks for the tips, and thanks for helping to spread the word. Yes, it makes us very sad that you can't share app folders. Dropbox tells us it's an implementation limitation that's not likely to change soon. :-( An alternative for us would be to skip the Apps folder and go for full access to your Dropbox, but in terms of privacy, we don't really want that access. We like being sandboxed in the Apps folder, but it does mean folders can't be shared.
Zarel 14y ago
I'd speculate that this is, in fact, why they're phasing it out: Too many people were using it as a free web host. I doubt it's profitable to be GeoCities Without Ads - GeoCities couldn't even stay up _with_ ads.