[Nathan2055]

The infamous Dropbox comment[0] actually didn't even cite rsync; it recommended getting a remote FTP account, using curlftpfs to mount it locally, and then using SVN or CVS to get versioning support.

The double irony of that comment is that pretty much all of those technologies listed are obsolete now while Dropbox is still going strong: FTP has been mostly replaced with SFTP and rsync due to its lack of encryption and difficult to manage network architecture, direct mounting of remote hosts still happens but it's more typical in my experience to have local copies of everything that are then synced up with the remote host to provide redundancy, and CVS and SVN have been pretty much completely replaced with Git outside of some specialist and legacy use cases.

The "evaluating new products" xkcd[1] is extremely relevant, as is the continued ultra-success of Apple: developing new technologies, and then turning around and marketing those technologies to people who aren't already in this field working on them are effectively two completely different business models.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224 [1]: https://xkcd.com/1497/

[OskarS]

It's also not the same thing as Dropbox was offering: that's a description of a network drive, but the key thing about Dropbox is that it's a syncing engine. It's a much harder thing to do, but with very big benefits: much faster (since it's just reading off disk) and offline access.