
End of the Road for Xmarks - willwagner
http://blog.xmarks.com/?p=1886
======
ajg1977
Man, I'm gutted. I use Xmarks every day to sync from my work & windows
machines (Firefox) to my MacBook (Safari) and thus to my iPhone / iPad. I'd
have happily paid $5 a month or so to use Xmarks and I imagine I'm not alone.

It's really unfortunate that they won't even try the freemium, or (shock!)
even the outright pay to play approach. I'm sure with two million users there
would have been enough paying customers to create a profitable business.

~~~
japherwocky
I cannot comprehend how they aren't even going to TRY to charge for ANYTHING.

How the fuck do they think this whole cash flow thing works?

2 million users, and they don't even put out a god damn paypal donation
widget? Show ads? Freemium anything? Charge something outrageous, lose 90% of
your 2 million users, and you'll still have a significant monthly income.

This is just the stupidest news I've heard in a while. Zero respect for these
guys, they clearly don't have even a shred of business sense.

~~~
raganwald
Zero respect for the people behind the service, really? I have zero respect
for your comment but I stop well short of saying I have zero respect for you.

Things are probably not that simple. They have investors. It may not be a case
of "Hey, we can make a business that pays for three guys to eat." Perhaps
their investors need to see a certain minimum return or else the investors
would rather close up shop.

Maybe they have a better buysiness idea and it's better to close this one and
put 100% of their energy into the new idea. Have you heard of justin.tv? IIRC,
a large number of people on reddit were criticizing Justin and his partners
for selling their previous startup on eBay. They got some money and started
again with a blank piece of paper.

I am not saying that you're wrong about what to do given the information you
have. I am saying that (1) It is difficult to be absolutely certain that they
are making the worst possible business decision in this case given how little
we know, and (2) Even if they are making the worst possible business decision,
how does this extend to having zero respect for the complete human beings who
laugh, love, play, and built something many people value?

p.s. The company is for sale. If you have an opinion of how it ought to be
run, there's no better way to make your case than to buy it for a fire sale
price and run it. In all honesty, I would be absolutely delighted if you were
to make a go of it. That would be a very inspiring story.

~~~
raganwald
p.p.s. I was exaggerating when I said "zero respect for your comment." I was
just trying to make a point about the difference between criticizing someone's
point and criticizing them personally. But now that I think about it, I was a
little rude. I apologize.

~~~
japherwocky
I'm a big boy on the internet, I don't mind a flame at all, especially in
response to a provocative post.

If you spend years, and millions of dollars, and don't make _any_ attempt to
bring _any_ money in the door, I think you are making a mockery of the entire
startup culture.

It's a business. What part of that do they not get?

Maybe maybe maybe, maybe they could try being a business and not seriously
expect that some magical revenue stream is going to come knocking at their
door with sacks full of cash.

Who funded these people? How can you seem to be so technically competent and
marketing savvy, and not have a shred of business sense?

Are they going to go "focus on the next thing"?

Do they really deserve to be given funding for anything?

I think if you take someone else's money under the pretense of creating a
business, you have some responsibility to the entire system to actually _try_
to create a business. And they haven't!

~~~
raganwald
I wasn't flaming you.sifting through your follow-up, I find a few interesting
items. First, indeed who did fund them? Have you asked the investors if they
are unhappy? Ifnthe investors are unhappy, what went wrong with the
governance? Why are we even assuming management is to blame? How do we know
what happened? Maybe the finders wanted to generate cash flow but were nixed
by the investors who wanted growth at the expense of revenues in the hope of
being bought by Google?

Another thing. What is this responsibility you speak of? A funded startup
exists to find an equilibrium between the needs of the investors and the needs
of the founders. Nobody else gets a say in what happens. They have zero
obligation to do what you want them to do if you aren't sitting on their
board.

It sounds to me like you have strong opinions about what is and isn't the
right way to do a startup. You might be right, but still there's something
disquieting about taking a culture based on disruption and revolution and
writing rules for what is and isn't the right way to revolt against the
existing business structure.

~~~
japherwocky
Fair enough, maybe the investors told them not to generate cash flow. In which
case, the investors are twits and deserve to lose their investment. My point
is, whoever made that decision has been hitting the silicon valley kool-aid
way too hard.

(Do you really think I'm saying they are responsible to my opinions? You seem
like a smarter guy than that.)

I do have strong opinions about the right way to borrow money from other
people:

When someone like Xmarks.com flops, it makes startups look bad to the 2
million users who are going to think twice about storing their data on
someone's servers. It makes startups look bad to people who would like to make
a return on their investment.

You can disrupt and revolt and rethink and metaprogram all you'd like,
especially if you're sitting on VC funding. You can call cashflow an "existing
business structure", but at some point, eventually, I think you need to charge
something for something.

------
jsankey
_with the emergence of competent sync features built in to Mozilla Firefox and
Google Chrome, it’s hard to see users paying for a service that they can now
get for free_

After taking so many knocks, it's easy to be disheartened. But why not at
least give this a go? It doesn't involve a large engineering investment - just
charge for what you already offer! When the alternative is shutting down,
where existing users need to move on anyway, you might as well. Those users
might appreciate the value of what they have now that it is about to
disappear...

~~~
scg
Maybe it's because it creates an obligation for them to continue the service
for a reasonable amount of time.

~~~
jsankey
Fair point, but how about this: they've committed to 3 months anyway, so why
not try charging for 3 months? Just don't touch the money coming in during
that period. If they reach the end of that time, and it's not working, issue
refunds and shut down. There is some cost to this (transaction fees etc), but
seemingly minimal compared to other running costs they've already committed to
(because if it fails, the number of transactions will necessarily be low).

They might struggle to get people to sign up when there is doubt about the
service surviving. But that cat is already out of the bag, and as I alluded to
earlier they could also play this to their advantage (charging now is not a
money-grab, it's simply a matter of keeping a valuable service viable).

~~~
Goosey
I agree 100%. This whole thing reminds me of reddit's recent budget issues and
how their appeal resulted in a huge boost for them. Just looking at the
comments on this blog post make me think that simply including a 'paypal
donation' link at the bottom of this blog post ALONE would have generated
enough funds to keep them running for for some time.

This is a bit of a harsh thing to say... but is it possible they were not able
to find a business model due to lack of trying?

------
mbyrne
They are failing because they can't even _ask_ people to pay for their
service. They skipped that and went directly to we are shutting down our
servers in 90 days.

DHH needs to give them some scream therapy about business models. The one he
does about asking your customers to pay for your service.

~~~
frossie
I am now going to repeat what you said, but with more feeling:

 _We also considered refocusing Xmarks as a freemium sync business, but the
prospects there are grim too: with the emergence of competent sync features
built in to Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome, it’s hard to see users paying
for a service that they can now get for free._

Ask me! Ask me! Why don't you ask me ?!!!

Native firefox syncing isn't going to help me sync my Firefox bookmarks to my
iPhone, is it? Maybe that is worth something to me, ya know?

Isn't it completely ironic, that on top of HN right now is PG's Y-combinator
screed, with how important it is to launch as soon as possible with as little
functionality as you can in order to let users guide you to what they really
want? So users are okay for telling you what features they want but they are
not okay for telling you whether they want to pay ??

I mean okay, maybe I am a complete aberration in being willing to pay a few
bucks for xmarks. But _they didn't even ask_. Maybe there would have been
enough other aberrations out there to keep it going as a low-key low-turnover
service.

This is the thing that bothers me with the start-up world - it seems so bi-
modal: make it big or go bust. What about a quiet, modest little service that
can pay for itself and maybe a bit extra?

Bah. I'm sad.

~~~
whopa
FWIW, Mozilla has an app for syncing your bookmarks to your iPhone:

<https://www.mozilla.com/en-US/mobile/home/>

~~~
frossie
Yeah - thanks for pointing that out. It's not a true bidirectional sync
though, like xmarks, right?

~~~
whopa
No, it doesn't do bidirectional sync, at least not yet.

------
joshu
2m users * 1% conversion rate * $10/yr = $100k = probably not enough for a VC-
backed startup.

My suspicion is that because users just used the browser's internal bookmarks
they couldn't easily add affordances that would draw attention, leaving no
surface on which to advertise. I guess this is one advantage that delicious
had, although breaking the bookmarking paradigm to do so was very painful in
other ways.

I no longer believe startups who claim their value proposition is "the data
will be really valuable someday."

~~~
robk
Yep "probably not enough for a VC-backed startup" is the key here. This would
have been a nice bootstrapped business. For them taking VC put them on a road
that unfortunately wasn't the right one for them and forced them to swing for
a bigger outcome than was possible. Sad.

~~~
dillydally
$100k is an ok number for a one-person outfit, but it would be hard to support
even one employee on that number.

In face, their current model of altering the Google SERPs almost certainly
generates more revenue.

------
sjs
Chrome killed my use of Xmarks. With a consistent, cross-platform browser that
has syncing out-of-the-box I no longer need Xmarks. I mainly use other
browsers for testing now.

~~~
mitjak
Ditto here but I can't think of a way to bring those bookmarks over to Safari
to sync with the iPhone, aside from using Xmarks. Any ideas?

~~~
sjs
Instapaper. I know that's kind of a cop-out but incidentally it (and Google)
have killed my use of bookmarks apart from a relatively svelte bookmarks bar.
Instapaper is my reading queue, Google is my long-term memory. Bookmarks are
more like shortcuts for me now.

The nice thing is that I can "bookmark" any link from any browser that I use,
as well as twitter and RSS. And I have them instantly on my iPad, phone,
notebook, or any machine with a browser without installing any software or
extensions.

~~~
mitjak
What do you mean by Google? Google Bookmarks, the Chrome sync? Google
Notebook? :)

~~~
sjs
Oh, just Google's search. If I want to find something I previously read I
Google it now instead of sifting through crufty, old, poorly organized and
needlessly hierarchical bookmarks. Tagged bookmarks would help there I guess
(like Delicious) but then you have to tag everything...

------
ianferrel
My experience with Xmarks was not a great one. I used it when it was first
called Foxmarks and enjoyed it. Some time after the name change, I noticed
that one of the updates had turned on by default some extra overlays on the
google search results page touting their rankings.

The blog post suggests that this was a bonus feature, or a value-add, but
that's not how I saw it. A previously well-behaved bookmarks sync plugin all
of a sudden decided to impose on my preferred search engine. That's a spammy
low-class intrusion into my browsing experience.

I turned off the feature, but every time I updated the plugin thereafter it
was turned back on by default. I jumped ship as soon as Chrome presented a
viable alternative.

------
aresant
"For four years we have offered the synchronization service for no charge,
predicated on the hypothesis that a business model would emerge to support the
free service."

Not a bad hypothesis, one I see regularly but 90 days to close sure
illustrates the downside and value of searching for that monetization model
earlier rather than later.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
I think it's a fairly shocking hypothesis.

My feeling was that the lesson from this is don't go into a business if you
don't have at least a vague idea how you're going to make money out of it.

I love XMarks and I'll absolutely miss it (and would have considered paying
for it) but this would seem to be niaivity in the extreme.

~~~
dillydally
It was founded by Mitch Kapor. I think he knows a thing or two about starting
companies...

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
I don't care who founded them, they've just announced that they're closing
citing a lack of a viable business model.

That would seem to suggest that they might have thought about revenue a little
earlier in the process and I have a feeling that with hindsight Mitch Kapor
might agree.

~~~
dillydally
Funny. Do you have any actual information about how early they tried to find a
business model? I suspect you don't.

So, the situation is this: we have a product lots of people want. The naive
business model (freemium) won't work -- a simple back-of-the-envelope
calculation shows that.

What do you do? Go forward building a very popular product and look for a
business model, or quit because you can't think of how to make money from day
1?

------
ww520
I really hate to see Xmarks shutdown. Been a happy user.

For not going the charging user route, could it be that they took some rounds
of funding and expanded their company structure and infrastructure greatly to
the point that it couldn't be sustained without a huge success? They expanded
into the search and other stuff besides bookmark sync'ing. Those are the ones
that don't pan out and dragging down the whole company.

Instead of shutting down everything, it would be better to keep the bookmark
sync part and dump the rest, and start charging users. Not sure whether the
investors would go for the low return route.

------
fauigerzigerk
It's always sad when someone's dreams are shattered. But what I don't get is
why a bookmark syncing service needs venture capital, employees, a CEO and
whatnot. There may not be a business model that supports all that, but there
may be a business model that pays for the labor actually required to provide a
syncing service.

In a way this is like shutting down all the cafes that failed to become
Starbucks.

~~~
bstrong
My guess is that this has a lot to do with when they started. In 2006, the
cloud platforms we take for granted today didn't exist. Running a service
meant buying servers, hiring an ops team, etc. Starting today, you could
probably bring a sync service up on App Engine in a few weeks and operate it
for a couple hundred bucks a month.

I started my last company in 2005, and I've often thought that if we had
started a couple of years later when the cloud platforms were available, we
could have been a lot more successful. Instead we built a product and an
organization around an obsolete technology stack with a high cost structure,
and there was no going back.

------
nod
Are there any other sync services that work across both Firefox and Chrome?

~~~
benmccann
This is my main use case. I would gladly pay for one.

------
desigooner
I, for one, am extremely disappointed to hear this news. I use Xmarks
extensively on chrome and firefox across 3 computers. It is so easy to setup
and use. I've never managed to get the Chrome sync working as it always hangs
up and never finishes setting up.

I think I'd have paid for Xmarks as a service.

~~~
chime
> I've never managed to get the Chrome sync working as it always hangs up and
> never finishes setting up.

Same here. I tried really hard to make Chrome sync work reliably across the
multiple devices I use. Kept duplicating my bookmarks, deleting new bookmarks,
and just randomly making extra folders. XMarks is just so much nicer and works
across all the browsers I use.

------
wyclif
_Wow, xmarks is dead because they couldn't "find a scalable business model"
with two million users._

<http://twitter.com/PinboardIN/status/25734453850>

~~~
markbao
xmarks: _@PinboardIN hey if you've got some good ideas, we're all ears!_

and, of course, pinboardIN: _@xmarks the model that has worked well for us is
'charge people money for a useful product or service'_

~~~
user24
exactly. The hardest part is having the balls to charge for lemonade in the
first place.

edit: source, patio11: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1668553>

------
terpua
From "build something people want" to "built something people want" to "can't
monetize 2 million users."

Any other examples of this?

~~~
sirn
Reddit? But at least they tried charging their users, and it worked.

------
holychiz
sucks to have this ending after all your efforts. Xmarks was a great product.
Hats off to you and your team and good luck in your next adventure.

------
larrywright
Does anyone else find it odd that two million active users is "not enough
users". Most startups would kill for that.

~~~
ericabiz
Reminds me of the old dot-com screed: We lose money on every customer, but we
make it up in volume!

------
wolfrom
I find it strange that there are no buyers interested in your user base. I'd
love to hear more about the monetization efforts that you attempted, as I
would have imagined there should be numerous ways to leverage those users.
But, of course, if I was an expert, I'd probably have the capital to make an
offer.

------
martinp
Sorry to see them go. I've been using their extension in Firefox since the
beginning and it has always performed exceptionally well while synchronizing
thousands of bookmarks.

------
kylec
Huh. I was actually looking for a Chrome bookmark sync for my iPhone two or
three weeks ago and I came across Xmarks. I didn't choose it because I was
really hoping for a standalone app that would interface with Chrome's built-in
bookmark sync. While it's sad to see any popular software company shutter its
doors, since it is going away (in a comparatively short 90 days, no less) I'm
personally glad I didn't start using it.

------
bherms
Sad to see them go, but this might be a good lesson for several people out
there who go into startups with the "make product now, worry about revenue
model later" mentality. While that can be successful in many cases, there is a
downside as well where many businesses don't survive.

Either way, I'll miss xmarks since I use it on all my computers and my phone
:( Thanks for the great product for the last several years.

------
zacharypinter
They might've been doing this already with their Google search enhancements,
but why don't they make their free version of the extension hijack (in a very
open way to the user) Google queries and insert their own affiliate id so that
they get the credit? Seems like an unobtrusive enough way to finance a free
product, though it might step on Mozilla's toes.

------
Ogre
I use the Xmarks firefox plugin, but with my own server. It's always supported
that. I expect that'll keep working for a while until a newer Firefox breaks
the plugin, so I'm still in the same boat of needing to find another sync
method. But I might have longer than people who use the service. Or shorter,
no way to tell, really.

~~~
FlemishBeeCycle
I'm in the same boat. The article didn't explicitly mention the situation
where users are syncing to their own servers. I'm wondering if that would
really be impacted seeing as you're not really using any of their server
resources?

~~~
Ogre
Hopefully they'll open source the plugin so we can keep it updated for changes
to Firefox. Though I'll probably just switch to another solution, especially
if there's another that uses my own server. Or maybe just Dropbox.

I only switched to Xmarks after Google Browser Sync went away, I guess I
should just get used to this.

~~~
Yopie
While maintaining cross browser capability, I couldn't agree if xmark could
work with dropbox or my own server.

------
bond
I can't believe a team with so many users hasn't began charging them and when
things get rough they want to shut down instead of charging because they think
users will not pay?

Two million users? Sorry but they know nothing about business and it's worse
for the ones who backed them... How on earth they're going to let this go this
way?

------
jawee
I used Foxmarks for a long while when I was using Firefox, until Google
Browser Sync came along, which has also passed. It was a great idea at the
time. In its modern iteration, however, I felt like the best part about it was
the inter-browser interoperability. I used it more recently for a time when I
was still mostly using Chrome and then Firefox on some machines (such as BSD
boxes).

All of the newer browser sync options that I am aware of are in a convenient
location--built into the browser. Opera, Chrome, Firefox, et all are all
getting bookmark sync options. However, I would much like to see a way to sync
easily between the different browsers again. This is what made XMarks useful
once it evolved past being only for Firefox. For now, I'm using all Opera,
partially so I can keep everything together including my mobile devices.

------
naner
Oops. I just switched to Xmarks after Chrome's sync ate a chunk of my
bookmarks because of a version mismatch.

~~~
wccrawford
It's okay. I've had so many problems with xmarks and chrome that you'll be
glad you didn't get to switch.

------
EvanMiller
Lessons learned:

1\. Adding a feature to someone else's product is a risky business model. If
it's popular, the product-maker will implement your feature, at which point
your goose is cooked.

2\. Adding a free feature to someone else's free product isn't even risky. It
is among the surest methods of losing money.

3\. Know when to sell. The missed opportunity here was search. With their data
and methods, Xmarks was able to improve query results for a predictable
fraction of searches. At this point (2008), they should have sold to one of
the up-and-coming search engines -- Windows Live or Ask.

~~~
random42
I do not necessarily agree. There are a _lot_ of good _businesses_, which
basically _fill the gap_ in other product.

xMarks is not like an cut-n-paste iPhone app
(<http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/06/10c.html>), which becomes
_useless_ after the vendor decides to implement the feature, rather a decent
service (Chrome/Mozilla sync does not solve the syncing problem across
browsers/iPhone/iPads etc.) which could not its business model.

------
bcrawl
"Looking for the list of all auto manufacturers? Or presidential libraries? Or
art supply sites? A casual comparison of our results with those of the major
search engines would convince you that we were on to something. We recruited a
group of non-technical subjects to do a usability test, and it flopped. Sit
people in front of a search box and ask them to test it, and their first query
is their own name. #FAIL."

Why did they assume their primary market was going to be non-technical people?
Why not build some thing like stumbleupon of 100 Million bookmarks.

------
kalvin
Nobody's mentioned this yet, so: this is particularly notable because it's
"Mitch Kapor's startup" (famous for Lotus 1-2-3). Used to be called Foxmarks.

------
est
I hope they could open source their code or their sync protocol, or at least
release a guide how to setup thirdparty sync servers.

------
binomial
On an opportunistic note, I do wish they'd everyone access to their "1 billion
bookmark corpus", in anonymized form of course.

------
Tichy
Aren't there several YC companies who do searches of browsing history?

At the moment I rely on Firefox awesome bar, but I have a nagging feeling that
it is not reliable (keep not finding sites I was sure I had bookmarked). So a
better way to search and organize bookmarks is still being called for.

I can't imagine that there isn't a market for better bookmarking...

------
LiveTheDream
Todd, will you open-source any code?

~~~
Caligula
Opensourcing the corpus would be more interesting but I suppose with their
privacy policy this is a no go.

~~~
LiveTheDream
100% agree. I had that question included in my first draft of my original
comment, but figured anonymizing the bookmark data is a very tricky/impossible
task so I removed it. See AOL search data[1]. Maybe Xmarks could sent an opt-
in request to users and release the data of people who are comfortable with
it. I would be fine with it, personally; all my bookmarks are on delicious
anyway.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal>

------
kumark23
Our newly launched service Zukmo is a good alternative for Xmarks.

I just posted a request for it to be reviewed (under Ask HN):
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1735218>

------
cowmixtoo
I'm afraid to go back to Google for bookmark syncing because the last time
Google offered the service they shut it down. That's how I got to X/FoxMarks
in the first place.

------
amackera
I would pay for Xmarks.

------
photon_off
xMarks has an amazing set of data. A set of tagged bookmarks on a large enough
scale is essentially like running mechanical turk (with 2,000,000 users) on
the entire internet (better yet, only bookmark-worthy parts of the internet),
and asking it to "describe this page in 10 words or less". The results, I
think, are the most accurate description of URLs you could get on such a large
scale. Essentially every site that has over a certain amount of bookmarks is
_guaranteed_ to be of high quality and very relevant to what it's been tagged
as. (The only problem is when sites change, domains expire, etc).

When I was making MoreOf.It, I scouted the competition in depth. The only one
that stood out was xMarks, and similarity search wasn't even their main gig.
They understand the richness of bookmarking data. They've separated URLs into
categories, and have the highest ranking sites in those categories. They also
nailed similarity pretty well. I might even say their results are better than
mine, because they have a much larger index of sites.

Two and a half years ago, when I first built a prototype of similarity search,
there were hardly _any_ meta-websites. Besides Quantcast and their ilk, and
bookmarking websites, and maybe a couple of bullshit "site worth calculators"
(which just multiply site traffic by an estimated CPM), there was hardly
anything happening in the meta-site space. Now, there are tons more services
that cater to people Gooling an actual url or site name. To name a few,
CrunchBase, AboutUs.org, BackType, UberVU, SimilarSites, SitesLike, and sites
that aggregate results from these (QuarkBase). "Meta" is blossoming, and it
seems like xMarks could take advantage of this with their rich dataset.

For example, as someone told me I should do, they could sell analytics
information to websites about their competitors. If you're ZipCar.com, for
example, you would pay to know the following: How have people described
zipcar.com in the last (x amount of time), and what are the trends of those
tags? How is my popularity vs. an automatically generated list of my
competitors [ala: similar sites]. Which competitors are trending, and with
which tags? Any new competitors that are breaking through the ranks? Some
information could give cues to alter your business: What types of tags are
related to my business are trending right now (i.e.: perhaps "bike share" is
becoming more and more popular. I think that's valuable information. And, like
an arms dealer, you can deal to both sides of competition. With 2,000,000
users organizing this set of data (for their own benefit of course), it's
pretty confident sample size and it's win-win for everyone.

Frankly, I don't understand what benefits "synchronizing" offers. Why not just
store your bookmarks on any number of bookmarking websites (Delicious, Google,
etc), and then log-in to that website from whatever browser/computer/device
you want? I do, however, see value in the analytics of what people bookmark,
and how they bookmark it.

~~~
jasonkester
Unfortunately, that dataset would only stay amazing until they tried to use it
to power a search engine.

History has shown that any time user-generated content is shown to users,
spammers will quickly set themselves up as the ones generating 99% of the
content.

~~~
photon_off
It's only worth spammers time if their search is a successful product that
spammers want to be a part of. Even still, with 2m users, I'd imagine that
bots wouldn't have a substantial effect on the data, not at least without
easily beind detected.

Search is beside the point, though. They said they tried it and it was amazing
but only for some things. It's true, just search delicious to get an idea of
the type of search possible. It's very good for most things, but worthless for
finding any content that people wouldn't tag, like 98% of the content of any
URL.

My hypothesis was that their data could be used for other reasons.

------
twodayslate
Excellent service. I have been using xmarks for a while.

------
redstripe
I never used them because there are plenty of _intranet_ related bookmarks
that I wouldn't want appearing on a search engine. This service could have
lead to some nasty data breaches. It's probably better for the internet in
general if they fade away.

Having said that, it sucks that they ran a popular service that they couldn't
monetize.

------
baddox
That sucks. How do I synchronize my passwords with Chrome now?

~~~
jonursenbach
Check out <https://lastpass.com/>

~~~
ecaradec
I didn't know about it, it's really great. It's sort of a synchronized keepass
with better browser integration. Thanks.

------
lotusleaf1987
In my fantasy world, Marco Arment would buy Xmarks and combine it with
Instapaper. I'm sad to see Xmarks disappear without any viable alternative.
I'd gladly pay $15-20 per year if that's what it took, but I imagine it could
be even cheaper since cloud storage is so cheap:
[http://www.nasuni.com/news/nasuni-blog/whats-the-cost-of-
a-g...](http://www.nasuni.com/news/nasuni-blog/whats-the-cost-of-a-gb-in-the-
cloud/)

