Long time Dropbox user here. I would disagree. In my opinion they still have the best file sync platform of the big providers, easily beating onedrive and Google drive for reliability, especially with hundreds of thousands of files.
- some stuff about Teams that's mostly only relevant if you're using your work email for a personal account
- minimium age 13 -> 18; add "Dropbox may use and rely on information from third parties, including age signals from app stores, for the purpose of enforcing this restriction."
- free accounts may be terminated after 6 months of no use (previously 12 months)
- removed "If you reside in the EU, the European Commission provides for an online dispute resolution platform, which you can access here: https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr." from the dispute resolution process.
1. You must be 18 to use Dropbox. Previously, you had to be 13 if in the United States, or 16 if higher. Dropbox may use information "Dropbox may use and rely on information from third parties, including age signals from app stores, for the purpose of enforcing this restriction."
2. Your account may be terminated if you don't have a Paid account and haven't accessed for 6 months. Previously, it was 12 months.
3. If you have multiple accounts tied to the same email address, and one is banned, the others may also be banned.
4. "Refunds are only issued if required by law." -> "Refunds are only issued in limited circumstances or if required by law."
5. You automatically agree to the new terms if you continue to have an account. Previously, it was only if you continued to use the service.
It would also potentially invalidate clauses like the one in GPL license too: "this version or any later version" — how can anyone consent to yet-unknown terms?
In this particular case and going after the summary from big85, there's one case of legal compliance (like age restrictions — it applies in appropriate jurisdictions even if the ToS is not updated) or maybe two (banning per-account vs per-owner), some widening of the terms to the benefit of the customer (like refunds being permitted in "special circumstances" on top of "required by law, with only "reductionist" change being about lowering service window for unused free accounts (in some jurisdictions, even this could be about respecting data privacy laws — companies are obligated to remove any data which is not used after a certain time, though I think this is 12 months even under GDPR).
As such, I believe this would not be a good case where you can bring enough light how this type of clause is harming one side to the contract.
For "this or any later version", I have always read this line as you get to choose which version you want to follow, not the one granting you the licence.
Yeah, but I think the main point is that the GPL 'at your option any later version' clause is a burden on the developer, not the user. Suppose that the software is under the GPLv2 (with the later version clause) and the FSF has a hostile takeover. If:
- The FSF makes a GPLv4 to remove all commercial use, it's not a problem for the user since they could stick with the GPLv2. It's not a problem for the developer either, since the extra requirement that they may not agree with is only optional (since the GPLv2 can still be used).
- The FSF makes a license that says: screw copyleft, GPLv4 is now the MIT license. Again, it's not a problem for the user, they can either continue to use the GPLv2 or make use of the additional liberties of the MIT license (e.g. using the code in close source work). But it is a problem for the developer. They chose to use a copyleft license and now everybody can grab their code and use it in closed source software, etc.
This is vastly different from the Dropbox changes, since every update of the terms affects the user.
Though even the "user" might be harmed, because you might get a device shipped to you with what-was-previously-copyleft software, and now you can't ask the vendor (also the "user") for copy of the source code since they can claim "we are using it under the terms of v4, sorry".
Yes, brave name choice. I went to have a look and the home page is nice, well laid out, and has links to documents. Small free tier to put your feet in the shallow end, and a couple of monthly plans, one aimed at individuals and the other at orgs. Perhaps a family plan would have benefits?
Alas no linux support, not even an api to allow the use of some terminal command to get round GUI fragmentation. Searching for 'sync online storage with linux' leads to a recent redit thread and a Mint Linux forum thread.
I heard you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem
I guess teenagers don't have any need to sync files, eh? Hate to see this gradual erosion of internet access for young people - I'd bet half the notable members of this very site started their career trajectory by learning how to break/fix computers in middle school or before
This has nothing to do with that. They probably realized that teenagers are a small enough portion of their userbase that the loss of revenue (and probably lack thereof to be fair) is far outweighed by the opportunity to ask users for their ID.
It will simply teach them how to go around those "protections". And put them at risk of using shaddy services to do so. Exactly like what happened with the war on drugs...
Hmmmmm today is a very different world compared to when we used the Internet to learn how to code. Now with Ai doing all the coding is learning how to code even happenning?
Also, just talked two friends who work for mid-size companies and last week both of their CEOs told them to just point Ai to their Jira tickets to finish all their tasks. Anyone else hearing their CEOs instruct the same thing?
Amazing Dropbox went from a brilliantly simple service to this stagnating corporate swamp of ooze. Yet another fascinating example of how headcount correlates with quality decline.
The pricing got very complicated, that part is true. On the other hand, service quality didn’t go down. They added many small features which makes things easier, on the other hand.
I use a bunch of additional services they offer. They work well, make me spend less money and save my time (e.g.: send, transcription, advanced sharing controls).
We loved Dropbox and had a family subscription. One of the main reasons we stopped using them (besides it being a US company and Trump threatening declare war to a fellow European NATO ally) was that even though we were paying users, they continuously badgered us with upsells. Using Maestral as a client made things better (at the loss of block-level sync + now unmaintained), but every time I had to log into the web interface I got stupid upsell ads.
I once contacted their customer support about this and their answer was "Oh really? Can you send some examples?" So I sent them screenshots of all the upselling banners, popups, etc. that they showed and I never heard back from them.
It also didn't make sense at all. Why, if I'm using Dropbox for family use, would I upgrade to a business plan?
Why hasn't anyone created a windows and mac client that git pushes changes to remote after file activities of local computer, and polls remote repo every 1 minute for changes to pull? I'd gladly pay for that. :-)
Dropbox will be one of the next Bending Spoons acquisitions. Low growth, none of the upsell or product extension things they've done have really worked out, and no-one's idea of what the future looks like.
Funny that this is the only Dropbox post I've seen on HN besides infamous references to their launch post. You'd think there would be plenty of interesting improvements to make.
Having been a paid user for the last decade my current experience is just getting error messages on my phone every week that something failed to sync, and that I have to re-enter the app every ~month to disable/enable syncing for my offline files, otherwise it doesn't work. I can't remember any time I've been pleasantly surprised by any change to the service.
This leaves a lot of questions. Why are they raising the age limit? What legislation demands this? Will other services follow? And what if parents give consent? Are users on a family plan now forced to kick off their kids from the joined plan?
TL;DR?
I did a comparison with an LLM of my choice and there was no meaningful difference (or nothing I would consider HN-worthy).
Given the HN-worthy differences posted by others, here’s another example of why it’s not a good idea to delegate your thinking to LLMs.
I… guess? I'm not sure why this was posted. None of these changes seem important.
I saw a comment and didn’t prompt an LLM and see the whole difference: https://www.diffchecker.com/QD8AKShC/
- You must be 18+
- You must access Dropbox every 6 months (from 12) if you have a free to ensure they don't delete your account
Diff or it didn't happen
Well, diff it then?
(I'm a former user of dropbox.)
Good services make change explicit.
Dropbox seems to have degraded into incompetence. Unable to provide good services.
Long time Dropbox user here. I would disagree. In my opinion they still have the best file sync platform of the big providers, easily beating onedrive and Google drive for reliability, especially with hundreds of thousands of files.
100%
It's 2026 and they're handling IT like pariahs of the stone age.
Even they grey beards of the 70s would have worked that out easily.
Oh it's probably intentional. I've seen efforts to simplify terms of service get rejected because "more people might read it if it's shorter".
Diffchecker for the save
https://www.diffchecker.com/QD8AKShC/
Super useful. Any open source tools like this?
https://diffviewer.vercel.app/v2/diff?id=diff-94626646216089...
https://github.com/technikhil314/offline-diff-viewer
Looks like the major changes are:
- some stuff about Teams that's mostly only relevant if you're using your work email for a personal account
- minimium age 13 -> 18; add "Dropbox may use and rely on information from third parties, including age signals from app stores, for the purpose of enforcing this restriction."
- free accounts may be terminated after 6 months of no use (previously 12 months)
- removed "If you reside in the EU, the European Commission provides for an online dispute resolution platform, which you can access here: https://ec.europa.eu/consumers/odr." from the dispute resolution process.
That last point is funny... so arbitration agreements are designed to make the process intentionally more difficult. Can't provide too many hints!
I don't think that's the reason. From the linked site:
Major changes:
1. You must be 18 to use Dropbox. Previously, you had to be 13 if in the United States, or 16 if higher. Dropbox may use information "Dropbox may use and rely on information from third parties, including age signals from app stores, for the purpose of enforcing this restriction."
2. Your account may be terminated if you don't have a Paid account and haven't accessed for 6 months. Previously, it was 12 months.
3. If you have multiple accounts tied to the same email address, and one is banned, the others may also be banned.
4. "Refunds are only issued if required by law." -> "Refunds are only issued in limited circumstances or if required by law."
5. You automatically agree to the new terms if you continue to have an account. Previously, it was only if you continued to use the service.
6. Some terms covering Teams accounts.
I would really love to see courts throw this BS out.
I agree with you in principle.
It would also potentially invalidate clauses like the one in GPL license too: "this version or any later version" — how can anyone consent to yet-unknown terms?
In this particular case and going after the summary from big85, there's one case of legal compliance (like age restrictions — it applies in appropriate jurisdictions even if the ToS is not updated) or maybe two (banning per-account vs per-owner), some widening of the terms to the benefit of the customer (like refunds being permitted in "special circumstances" on top of "required by law, with only "reductionist" change being about lowering service window for unused free accounts (in some jurisdictions, even this could be about respecting data privacy laws — companies are obligated to remove any data which is not used after a certain time, though I think this is 12 months even under GDPR).
As such, I believe this would not be a good case where you can bring enough light how this type of clause is harming one side to the contract.
For "this or any later version", I have always read this line as you get to choose which version you want to follow, not the one granting you the licence.
Certainly, but would that even be enforceable from a perspective of the grantee?
"Hey, I trusted FSF to do the right thing with the next version and they did not"
They blindly accepted to honor the terms which have not yet been defined.
Yeah, but I think the main point is that the GPL 'at your option any later version' clause is a burden on the developer, not the user. Suppose that the software is under the GPLv2 (with the later version clause) and the FSF has a hostile takeover. If:
- The FSF makes a GPLv4 to remove all commercial use, it's not a problem for the user since they could stick with the GPLv2. It's not a problem for the developer either, since the extra requirement that they may not agree with is only optional (since the GPLv2 can still be used).
- The FSF makes a license that says: screw copyleft, GPLv4 is now the MIT license. Again, it's not a problem for the user, they can either continue to use the GPLv2 or make use of the additional liberties of the MIT license (e.g. using the code in close source work). But it is a problem for the developer. They chose to use a copyleft license and now everybody can grab their code and use it in closed source software, etc.
This is vastly different from the Dropbox changes, since every update of the terms affects the user.
Yes, the developer is the grantee in my comment.
Though even the "user" might be harmed, because you might get a device shipped to you with what-was-previously-copyleft software, and now you can't ask the vendor (also the "user") for copy of the source code since they can claim "we are using it under the terms of v4, sorry".
I hope file sync is treated as "access", otherwise this would make me anxious.
I switched to Sync last year. Much cheaper, better quality.
I didn't know about Sync. TIL someone had the guts to start a company named "Sync" in 2011.
Let that sync in
Yes, brave name choice. I went to have a look and the home page is nice, well laid out, and has links to documents. Small free tier to put your feet in the shallow end, and a couple of monthly plans, one aimed at individuals and the other at orgs. Perhaps a family plan would have benefits?
Alas no linux support, not even an api to allow the use of some terminal command to get round GUI fragmentation. Searching for 'sync online storage with linux' leads to a recent redit thread and a Mint Linux forum thread.
not sure if this helps: https://help.sync.com/hc/en-us/articles/55076263500051-How-t...
forgot to link: https://help.sync.com/hc/en-us
What’s a good Dropbox alternative? Especially for Macs. Feels like they spent twenty years just making the Mac client worse.
Self-hosted Seafile + Tailscale works great for me.
If you only have ios and mac clients why not icloud?
iCloud Drive is the obvious choice.
Last I've tried iCloud Drive is not preserving file attributes especially if you want to use it cross OS between Mac and Windows. Dropbox does.
I heard you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem
Brilliant :). Since this is currently going to woosh for younger visitors: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9224
Use maestral.app on Linux and macOS.
Also bypasses the free Dropbox account's limitations on 3 devices.
Filen
I guess teenagers don't have any need to sync files, eh? Hate to see this gradual erosion of internet access for young people - I'd bet half the notable members of this very site started their career trajectory by learning how to break/fix computers in middle school or before
This has nothing to do with that. They probably realized that teenagers are a small enough portion of their userbase that the loss of revenue (and probably lack thereof to be fair) is far outweighed by the opportunity to ask users for their ID.
It will simply teach them how to go around those "protections". And put them at risk of using shaddy services to do so. Exactly like what happened with the war on drugs...
Hmmmmm today is a very different world compared to when we used the Internet to learn how to code. Now with Ai doing all the coding is learning how to code even happenning?
Also, just talked two friends who work for mid-size companies and last week both of their CEOs told them to just point Ai to their Jira tickets to finish all their tasks. Anyone else hearing their CEOs instruct the same thing?
It is not about age. It is just a way to tie accounts to a real life identity.
It won't be surprising if the requirement comes from some alphabet agency.
Dont they already have the payment information?
Not universally. I've had a free dropbox account for nearly 2 decades, and never attached a payment method
Don't most countries give people their first IDs before 18? Mine does it at 14.
It’s erosion of closed saas, not the internet. That already broke the hacker environments of yesteryear.
Amazing Dropbox went from a brilliantly simple service to this stagnating corporate swamp of ooze. Yet another fascinating example of how headcount correlates with quality decline.
The pricing got very complicated, that part is true. On the other hand, service quality didn’t go down. They added many small features which makes things easier, on the other hand.
I use a bunch of additional services they offer. They work well, make me spend less money and save my time (e.g.: send, transcription, advanced sharing controls).
We loved Dropbox and had a family subscription. One of the main reasons we stopped using them (besides it being a US company and Trump threatening declare war to a fellow European NATO ally) was that even though we were paying users, they continuously badgered us with upsells. Using Maestral as a client made things better (at the loss of block-level sync + now unmaintained), but every time I had to log into the web interface I got stupid upsell ads.
I once contacted their customer support about this and their answer was "Oh really? Can you send some examples?" So I sent them screenshots of all the upselling banners, popups, etc. that they showed and I never heard back from them.
It also didn't make sense at all. Why, if I'm using Dropbox for family use, would I upgrade to a business plan?
Why hasn't anyone created a windows and mac client that git pushes changes to remote after file activities of local computer, and polls remote repo every 1 minute for changes to pull? I'd gladly pay for that. :-)
i think that's kind of what rclone is https://github.com/rclone/rclone
haven't used it yet. i either back up my data with restic or sync it to other devices with syncthing, but those are tiny files (keepassxc dbs)
Dropbox will be one of the next Bending Spoons acquisitions. Low growth, none of the upsell or product extension things they've done have really worked out, and no-one's idea of what the future looks like.
I've been a happy customer of Tresorit for several years now. Give them a try if you're fed up with Dropbox.
At first I was selective in what folders I synced but after a few months I decided to just sync my entire workspace folder with everything in it.
Incredibly convenient, everything is automatically synced between my desktop and laptop.
If you go this route look into filters, it's not a very advertised feature but works great for excluding build output, venvs and other stuff.
i'm so happy with syncthing project.
If the enshittification continues, it might be time to go back to rsync [0].
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863
Funny that this is the only Dropbox post I've seen on HN besides infamous references to their launch post. You'd think there would be plenty of interesting improvements to make.
Having been a paid user for the last decade my current experience is just getting error messages on my phone every week that something failed to sync, and that I have to re-enter the app every ~month to disable/enable syncing for my offline files, otherwise it doesn't work. I can't remember any time I've been pleasantly surprised by any change to the service.
This leaves a lot of questions. Why are they raising the age limit? What legislation demands this? Will other services follow? And what if parents give consent? Are users on a family plan now forced to kick off their kids from the joined plan?
Does this mean that young adults that work for companies that use Dropbox, cannot collaborate with others using Dropbox?
Not the first time Dropbox bros kicked kids off a platform.
Mission SF Soccer remembers.