
Dropbox' Public/ folders will be phased out soon - czottmann
http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=62381&replies=13
======
jellicle
This is a major downgrade in the Dropbox user experience. It makes it more
confusing to know what is shared WITH THE ENTIRE WORLD and what is not, which
is a tremendously important thing to know. Simultaneously, it makes it more
difficult to share files. Dropbox "gains" by adding their splash screen into
the file download process, but every user of the product loses. This is a
decision made by the marketing department.

A major step backwards for Dropbox.

~~~
_delirium
I do like the Public folder, but you can still easily get a list of exactly
what's shared; the "Links" sidebar (<https://www.dropbox.com/links>) lists all
links you've created, and lets you deactivate any that you don't want to be
available anymore.

~~~
nl
Dropbox has a website?

(Yes _I_ knew Dropbox had a website. I'm speaking for all those users who
downloaded it once and now use it to synchronize their computers, never
realizing there is a website too. And yes, these people do use the public
folders: they right click & send the link to someone, but don't connect that
to the idea they can see their own files on the web)

~~~
antidoh
I have helped a computerphobe (hates computers and Internet, clueless, but
must use them) with Dropbox. She gets that her folders on various computers
around town are synchronized.

I had a _very_ difficult time explaining to her that her same folders and
files are available via the web interface.

Those people are out there.

~~~
tammer
_Most_ people (as in the majority of the population with access to digital
media) have a very difficult time understanding that the filesystem is a
hierarchy.

I'm always espousing the necessity of backups to my friends/family, which
means I've usually got the role of setting up a Dropbox account for someone
without a technical background.

When I say that their "My Documents" folder is a level _above_ their Dropbox
folder, I get a blank stare. While many users can create folders and somewhat
organize their data, to most non-experienced users I've encountered, the
mental image of a hierarchy of data segmented into directories is not
represented clearly enough by the GUI's of modern operating systems.

When people hear the word "folder" and see the folder icon, they don't think
of it (the way we do) as a metaphysical representation of the overall
directory tree. They simply think of a folder on a desk. A folder on a desk is
not usually _inside_ another folder. It's usually just sitting there. So a
user without knowledge of the tree/hierarchy model just sees various sets of
folders, not a set of folders _within_ other folders. Therefore getting things
_in_ to their Dropbox is an exercise of mental visualization that takes time
and explanation.

Further, once I've somewhat explained this concept, I usually leave it there
and tell them that "the green checkmark means you're backed up." The web
interface is a whole new exercise in visualization that is quite a bit more
difficult to pick up. Even after I tell people that "your data is synced to
the web interface," they don't initially understand what that entails, and
believe the web interface is separate from the files they've "backed up" on
"their Dropbox" (the local Dropbox folder.)

My girlfriend (A/B test subject #1) is used to using the "upload" button on
the Dropbox web interface because for a good while she didn't realize things
on her local folder would sync to the web interface. She's also not entirely
comfortable with the hierarchy model, and the "upload" model is in fact easier
for her to understand.

Reminds me of the SJ quote from an AllthingsD conference where he says every
usability test hits a wall when the user encounters the filesystem. I've seen
this evidenced again and again.

~~~
barik
"When I say that their "My Documents" folder is a level above their Dropbox
folder, I get a blank stare."

You might get a blank stare, because Windows itself has been trying (somewhat
unsuccessfully) to move away from this hierarchical model, blurring this
metaphor. Consider the Libraries feature, which can essentially collect many
folders (My Documents, Dropbox\Documents) and can represent them as a single
virtual library.

Similarly, "Favorites" further serve to flatten this hierarchical model
(Desktop, Downloads). And finally, consider things that look like folders but
aren't physical folders at all (Recent Places).

I actually didn't understand your "level above" analogy either. On Windows 7,
the My Documents is:

C:\Users\barik\Documents ( _appears_ as My Documents but the folder is
actually called Documents, hah!)

and

C:\Users\barik\Dropbox

which is at the same level?

~~~
nightpool
The dropbox folder can be chosen at installation time, so apparently he chose
to put it inside the Documents folder.

~~~
UnFleshedOne
I think some earlier versions of dropbox client had the folder be in Documents
by default and then they changed it.

------
bane
This is a move absolutely in the wrong direction. I'm sure the idea is to push
more eyeballs across the DB logo and grow the userbase. But to those users, DB
will look like yet another fileshare a la megaupload/filefront/whatever and
not something particularly special.

Here's some better ideas:

\- harden up the way users _want_ to use the public folder and make it more
like a CDN

\- Add another price tier if they must to ensure it works!

\- Let users host web sites out of their public folder! Hand craft HTML still
has a place among basic users who just want to put up a web page about their
dog!

\- put media specific folders in the public folder (maybe at different price
tiers) and turn it into a flickr/soundcloud/youtube competitor!

~~~
glesica
A staffer (?) mentions further down that almost no one was using their Public
folder, so I really doubt that the average Dropbox user wants any of the
things you listed.

Dropbox is a file storage and sharing service, not a CDN or web host. Just
because it could be hacked to make it a CDN or web host doesn't mean those
things are highly desirable to customers or good for their actual business.

~~~
AgentConundrum
> _almost no one was using their Public folder_

I almost exclusively use my public folder. I mean, I keep things in other
folders as well, but my main use case is typically "I want to send this file
to $friend, so I'll just save it in my public folder and send them the link."

~~~
anxrn
They made it easier to do this. You can send a public link to any file
anywhere in Dropbox now.

~~~
Centigonal
No, now it's saddled with weird arbitrary restrictions and a URL tree that
makes no sense.

Sorry for the tone -- I'm a little frustrated.

------
runn1ng
A hint to everyone:

If you got the link, made by "Get link", and you don't like the innecessary
preview in browser, just add "?dl=1" to the end of the link

example:
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1axoy96uwa80wko/matfyzak%20%281%29...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/1axoy96uwa80wko/matfyzak%20%281%29.pdf)
\- ugly preview page
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/1axoy96uwa80wko/matfyzak%20%281%29...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/1axoy96uwa80wko/matfyzak%20%281%29.pdf?dl=1)
\- sane PDF link

~~~
deefour
Dropbox support offered up the ?dl=1 querystring as the solution to permanent,
public URLs when I emailed them, but I have the same issue with the fact that
the files are forced to download. If they're going to stick with Dropbox
branded preview for public URLs, I'd like to at least see a similar ?view=1
querystring to keep images/pdfs/etc.. displaying directly in the browser.

~~~
Gormo
Delete the '?dl=1' parameter, and change the URL from 'www.dropbox.com' to
'dl.dropbox.com'.

This yields a proper direct link to the file, but the directory tree is still
inaccessible.

~~~
runn1ng
That's perfect, thanks!

------
atarian
They are NOT removing the ability to link to files in your Dropbox. Just the
Public folder itself, which is no longer needed since any file can now be
shared with a public link.

EDIT: And for those of you concerned by any impact on using Dropbox as a CDN,
there shouldn't be any issues. The links that Dropbox generates from your
files have a bit of chrome (a preview of the contents of the file and a couple
of buttons), but you can still get a direct link from the "Download" button.

~~~
Cancel
In that case they should implement instant shared link creation, not via
opening a web browser.

~~~
atarian
You can get still get a link via right-click menu (at least on Mac OSX) for
any file in your Dropbox folder (including the ones outside of the Dropbox >
Public folder).

~~~
mparlane
<https://dl.dropbox.com/u/9910153/20111022_131203.jpg>

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3wlvb7h36o5uvb/20111022_131203.jp...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3wlvb7h36o5uvb/20111022_131203.jpg)

There are your two links. One is a public folder the other is not.

One takes you to a web browser before you can even get the link. One does not.

Guess which one I would rather have. And now guess which one they are removing
:(

~~~
runn1ng
Add "?dl=1" to the second one it is a simple link again

[https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3wlvb7h36o5uvb/20111022_131203.jp...](https://www.dropbox.com/s/s3wlvb7h36o5uvb/20111022_131203.jpg?dl=1)

Magic!

~~~
FreeFull
Except now Firefox actually wants to download it instead of just displaying
it.

~~~
derefr
On the other hand, it seems that if you stick that ?dl=1 link into an <img>
src, it still downloads and displays.

~~~
BHSPitMonkey
But that isn't good enough. I show people screenshots by tossing the public
URL into an IM or IRC chat _all the time_. It's good for that because it
requires no effort from me to upload the file, and viewing the image is
seamless for the recipient (click the link, see the picture). Under the new
system, clicking the link would (at best) initiate a file download, which is
far more annoying.

------
euroclydon
What I find disappointing is their focus on photo uploads. I think users
really just want to pick a best of breed provider for major features like this
in their lives, and Facebook has photos sharing locked up.

Dropbox has brought simple file synchronization between machines that are not
necessarily on the same network, to the masses, but they need to do it in away
that doesn't make you want to drop Dropbox when it goes wrong. I had a machine
with Dropbox installed turned off for a year, and when I turned it on, it's
clock was wrong, so when I updated the clock, Dropbox deleted all files in my
Dropbox that were newer than the last time I had that machine running. What
did it delete? Hard to tell. And Dropbox doesn't support restoration for
folders, or points in time, just single files.

~~~
snsr
> I updated the clock, Dropbox deleted all files in my Dropbox that were newer
> than the last time I had that machine running.

While off-topic, this is a concerning scenario that I hadn't considered.

~~~
euroclydon
Prior to that, Dropbox _just worked_ for me, but now I see it for the
dangerous black box that it is. It can't be trusted as a backup solution for
important files. It's only a convenient toy.

------
StephenFalken
The Public/ folder is probably the most useful feature of Dropbox. It is
totally user friendly and integrated into the desktop. You just have to drop a
file in the folder and get the public url from the drop-down menu. It couldn't
get much easier than that. And now it will be phased out. Really sad news. I
guess it's about time to try Google Drive.

~~~
CrazedGeek
If I may refer you to a previous comment:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4115879>

~~~
StephenFalken
Well, now the "get link" drop-down menu item sends you to a webpage, where you
can finally click "Download". It's a total waste of time. The fast workflow of
the Public/ folder will be gone.

------
barik
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> 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
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.

~~~
smarx
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
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
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.

------
reneherse
Houston, we have a problem.

Just about the only thing I use Dropbox for is the public folder. I've gotten
many of my friends and collaborators to sign up for the service, based on the
recommendation of this very feature. It's been a real boon for rapidly
iterating front end mock ups.

Dropping support for what Dropbox evidently regards as "edge use cases" is not
how you "build the next Apple or Google". The Public folder may not be used by
the majority, but it is the domain of the geekiest, most hacker-spirited
segment of users. Why trample that most creative segment?

The removal of my team's files from Dropbox and searching for a better sharing
method begins _now_.

~~~
soupboy
I think you are overreacting. Are you serious about using the public folder
for "rapidly iterating front end mock ups"? Why would you want to put
sensitive and confidential data for everyone in the world to see?

~~~
BHSPitMonkey
I often use the feature the same way. It's only "up for everyone in the world
to see" if everyone has the URL, and nothing I ever share is so sensitive that
the risk of someone bruteforcing all of the possible file/folder names in my
Public folder poses a threat. (I imagine Dropbox would catch on to such
attempts at the network level, anyway.)

------
mkup
People started to use Dropbox as a free CDN, didn't they? Why do we need AWS
CloudFront if we have Dropbox? :)

~~~
driverdan
Because S3 makes a terrible CDN. The latency is bad and can vary
significantly.

Using it as a CDN for very large files is fine but for standard static web
assets it's terrible.

~~~
ceejayoz
Where was S3 mentioned? The post said CloudFront.

~~~
treyp
Dropbox uses S3

~~~
ceejayoz
Yes, but not directly. They've built or are using a CDN in front of S3, just
like CloudFront.

------
losvedir
Wow, how are people using their "Public" folders? I'm honestly surprised at
all this outrage.

I was unaware you could share any folder/file before so I just played around
with it. From your file manager, right click _any_ dropbox file or folder and
select 'Get Link'. The browser will open and send you to a page displaying all
those files and folders. You can copy/paste that link to anyone.

Is the only difference that in the case of linking to a single file, rather
than a full directory, the link clicker now sees a preview of the file (with a
big Download button) instead of downloading it directly.

Isn't that actually an improvement, so the linker isn't just blindly trusting
and downloading a file from some random link? That seems ripe for abuse, if
users got used to that mindset.

~~~
czottmann
It's a nice and simple way to serve a webpage or two. Here's an example:

I have a folder with an `index.html` and a `image.jpg` in it. The HTML file
can reference that JPG by requesting `./image.jpg`, the browser will try to
fetch it from the same directory — and it will find it. Also, the links to an
users `Public` folder will not expire.

With the new'ish "share link" functionality, I can't do that, since every file
is served from is own path, from its own preview page. To get that link, I
need to query the API; to get the direct/media link, I need to query the API
again, the resulting link will be different, and it will expire after four
hours.

So no more dropping a mockup for a client in a folder, sending her the link to
the `index.html` and be done with it. That's a step backwards. Yes, I could
store the files on my own server, but that's besides the point.

------
derefr
Here's a question (that probably only Dropbox themselves can answer, until
this change comes down the pipe)--the email said this:

> After July 31, we will no longer create Public folders in any new Dropbox
> accounts.

Now, I've deleted my Public folder before, and it seems that recreating a
folder named Public in the Dropbox root and restarting the sync daemon was all
that was needed to convert it back into "the" Public folder.

So, for those new users, will this change mean that "the folder named Public
will no longer have special-cased semantics, _unless_ a flag is set on your
account saying you're grandfathered into the old behavior", or does this
change mean "we'll leave in the code that makes the Public folder work the way
it does--but just not generate one for new users when setting up their
dropbox, so they must explicitly create it themselves?" It seems to me that
the latter is the most simple/elegant option, technically, and the one I'd go
for if I was a Dropbox engineer and hadn't specifically been told to make it
impossible for people to use Public folders from now on.

~~~
protospork
From what's been said in the forums and implied in that email they sent to API
users, they're leaving the functionality in and just no longer creating the
folder on install.

My question is: How long is that functionality going to stick around for
legacy users after it's been hidden by default?

EDIT: Indefinitely. I wonder if that's according to the modern usage or the
dictionary one...
[http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=62424&replies=8#p...](http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?id=62424&replies=8#post-443337)

And to answer your original question, I was wrong and new users won't get
access at all:
[http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?page=2&id=62381&...](http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?page=2&id=62381&replies=53#post-443340)

~~~
TillE
Nope.

> Unfortunately, new users will not be able to get the functionality just by
> creating a new Public folder.

[http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?page=2&id=62381&...](http://forums.dropbox.com/topic.php?page=2&id=62381&replies=44#post-443340)

For whatever reason, they seem intent on killing the feature. Extremely
disappointing.

------
phwd
Dropbox public folders for _new_ accounts will be phased out. As mentioned in
the link, all current users can continue to use it.

~~~
jncraton
It seems like most people here seem to be missing this fact.

From the Dropbox staff response:

"All current users retain their Dropbox Public folder, and it's function
continues."

This news was intended for developers who rely on Public for app
functionality. The public folder is not going away for existing users.

~~~
Jimmie
Worry is still warranted. Removing a feature for new accounts is a very clear
step in the direction of completely removing the feature.

Yes, current accounts keep the feature the whole point of grandfathering
features is to eventually phase them out entirely.

------
zapt02
This is an outrage.

The sharing functionality is not the same at all since it gives every file an
obfuscated name, making it impossible to link directly in an effective
fashion.

This feature is the only thing that has kept me from switching to a competing
provider (Sugarsync, GDrive).

------
mkhattab
Well, this sucks. Are they removing this feature to cut down on bandwidth? Or
perhaps piracy?

~~~
_delirium
From a comment further down, it sounds like it's due to considering it now
redundant, and not wanting to support two ways of sharing files. The original
way to share Dropbox files over the web was to drop them in your Public
folder, but now you can right-click on any file, in any folder, and generate a
shareable link to it. So they're going with that as the new sharing mechanism,
and phasing out the "drop it in your public folder" approach.

~~~
mkhattab
Yes, however, the new way seems counter intuitive. It would be difficult to
keep track of what is publicly shared, at least in an organized manner.

~~~
parfe
You could organize all the files you want to share into a single folder. Maybe
name it something like Share/ or Public/

~~~
bane
If only Dropbox had a folder, perhaps already called Public, that you could
organize your shared crap into...

~~~
parfe
Right Click Any Folder, Dropbox -> Get a Link

------
gavreh
Terrible idea. Having the public directory there to just drop files into and
knowing that it is all "Public" is one of the features that differentiated
Dropbox from its many competitors.

------
picklefish
My Honor's thesis has been in my Public folder for several years now and is
even referenced in a paper. While I realize this probably isn't the most ideal
location, it's served me well. If I understand this correctly I'm
grandfathered in and won't lose this functionality, correct?

I also use the public folder daily for sharing screenshots and other files. It
really has solved the filesharing problem for me and I'm disappointed they are
adding to the complexity to such an easy and great filesharing method.

EDIT: Also the only reason I'm still with dropbox is the public folder, I
moved all my other data to Google Drive when it was released...

------
coolnow
Does anyone else think this can be easily fixed with a Powershell (or batch)
script? Preconfigure it with your public folder url "id" and make it so it
copies the generic url to the clipboard (complete with filename) and just
appends a "?dl=1" at the end. Make a shortcut to the script and send it to the
context menu.

Don't say Dropbox creates a unique token for every link made, which means in
that case, we'd have to create a link through Dropbox first. Anyone see any
huge flaws in this? (first post)

~~~
Jimmie
The browser will treat the link as a download instead of content. You click on
an image link, it downloads the image instead of displaying the image.

Seriously breaks using the folder as a simple content server.

~~~
coolnow
_sigh_ , i just realised HTML files would just download and not open this way.
Why Dropbox, why?

------
LeafStorm
While they are cleaning up _one_ singleton folder, I hope they will clean up
another set of singleton folders. Namely, app folders. I realize that giving
every app access to your entire Dropbox is a bad idea, but apps only being
able to access "Apps/The App Name/" is like only being able to share files in
"People/theiremail@example.com/". For one, it completely kills the ability to
have multiple apps use the _same files_.

What would work better is an "Add to App" model. If I want to use a folder as,
say, my Calepin blog, I would go to the Dropbox Web interface (maybe even the
GUI client) and click "Add to Calepin." Then if I _also_ wanted to use it as
my Epistle Notes folder, there are absolutely zero issues.

------
kuroir
Any Dropbox alternatives? I use Dropbox with an automatic script to upload
screenshots / files / you name it, on Mac.

I'll stop using Dropbox when they release this.

~~~
rane
\- The feature is not going away for existing users.

\- I love Cloudapp for sharing files on Mac. Take a screenshot using Skitch,
and drag it to the cloud icon -> URL goes to clipboard, very simple.

------
kenrikm
Bad, Bad, Bad idea.. I pay for Dropbox every month however if they are going
to start cutting useful features I might as well just go with iCloud.

------
hippich
Recently I sent DMCA notice to Dropbox to remove my work from one of their
user's public folder. Which was basically used to host images. They responded
quickly to my request.

I am wondering if this is a true reason, and not showing dropbox splash
screen. It is so easy to share files with their public folder right now which
might cause copyright problems in future.

------
URSpider94
My bet is that it's a financial decision. It's easy to see how hotlinked image
files (or even entire web sites run out of /Public) could account for a major
portion of Dropbox's outgoing bandwidth charges.

However, if that were it, you'd think they would consider keeping the feature
for paid subscribers.

------
Karunamon
My decision to abandon Dropbox in favor of Google Drive seems to have been the
correct one, if they're going to go the route of removing functionality and
keeping their prices static.

(Note: I'm aware that Google Drive doesn't have this function. I don't use it
for that anyways.)

~~~
rlu
Out of curiosity, what was your rationale for choosing Google Drive over
SkyDrive?

SkyDrive:

* gives you 7GB vs Google's 5. (and 25gb if you ever used it before the client got released)

* has a sick feature where, from skydrive.com, you can browse your entire computer and download files. So if you forget to put a file in the skydrive folder you can still access it remotely

* supports more platforms than Google Drive

* doesn't destroy Office documents

Yes, I am affiliated with Microsoft but I _am_ genuinely interested in why you
chose to migrate to Google Drive over SkyDrive. Did you not know about the
things I listed or does Google offer something you care about more?

~~~
Karunamon
The big one was the file upload limit. The fact that I have X amount of
storage and can't split that up any way I want always struck me as a bit
silly.

Another one was that I'm already heavily invested into Google's ecosystem
(apps, android, the whole nine yards), so splitting that up with another
company didn't make much sense.

------
aimatt
I really hope they don't remove this. This is the only reason I pay them
instead of Google Drive.

------
czottmann
Someone has added an idea to the official Dropbox idea board. Vote it up if
you feel like it, maybe it'll help.

<https://www.dropbox.com/votebox/9527/save-the-public-folder->

------
arihant
I don't mind the splash page, but I do mind the obfuscated links. Previously,
I could just tell the name of file to the friend who new my public folder
address.

The 'get link' feature adds garbage in the link that nobody can hope to
remember.

~~~
BHSPitMonkey
I mind the splash page (and content disposition headers).

1\. For quickly showing ideas/images/screenshots to friends/colleagues, it
becomes an ordeal. (Okay, click through a marketing page, then the file starts
to download, then they need to open the file in an image viewer, then they
need to find and delete the file. All this instead of click, see, close tab.)

2\. It breaks the process of embedding media into web pages / forum posts /
etc.

3\. It breaks the process of being able to say, throw together some HTML, CSS,
Javascript files, and images into a folder under /Public and have the public
URL function in a browser.

~~~
czottmann
Well, you can go to any link page, copy the "Download" URL and remove the
"?dl=1" suffix. You should have a dl.dropbox.com URL now, which will show the
file in the browser, and not force the browser to download the file.

That being said: it's an undocumented feature, thus can't be taken as granted
(and might be removed at any point in time without warning), and the path is
still cryptic.

Man, I am _not_ happy at the moment.

------
BrainInAJar
"Dropbox' utility will be phased out soon"

------
chris_wot
Time for OwnCloud?

------
obilgic
I always hated that folder.

~~~
nodrama
:) The first thing I did when I installed Dropbox, was to delete that folder.
After that, when I wanted to test how Dropbox works, I recreated it. I loved
that all the public stuff was in... Public.

After using Dropbox for some time I realized that using Public was simple but
limiting: I have a file that I want to keep in a specific Dropbox subfolder
together with other files (organize things) and, at the same time, I want to
share only that one file. So I have to copy it in Public folder too, which
mean I have it in two places.

What they need to do it what they did: share anything but... add all the
public stuff in one, easy to see place. Maybe softlinks in the Public folder
with the same subfolder structure as the Dropbox folder. And when you delete a
softlink or an entire folder, all the linked files will not be public anymore.

------
Spittie
This suck. But it was kinda oblivious that they were going to remove it. It
was never advertised as a feature, and it was made more complicate that the
"normal" sharing. Probably they want to stop people from using it as a
cdn/server, something that it was never made for.

------
knes
//Shameless plug

My friends and I have been working on a way to easily send files. It's called
Dropdock. You can check it out at <http://getdropdock.com> . If you want to
signup, use the invite code DROPDOCKBETAP1.

Feedbacks more than welcome :)

~~~
hack_edu
I'm shocked that this isn't a parody; considering your service, choice of
color, and even your URL are already a blatant ripoff of Dropbox.

Shameless indeed...

------
ry0ohki
Wish the topic of this thread was renamed to not cause hysteria. You can still
share publicly, it just doesn't need to be a in a magic folder first. Although
the magic folder was a great way of remembering what you had shared, I'm sure
the Dropbox folks will come up with some other way of reminding me about my
publicly shared files.

~~~
dereg
The hysteria, if any, would be about the fact that all shared links would
direct you to a splash page on the web on which you'd have to click on another
link to download the shared object, as opposed to the current public folder
serving up direct links (w/o the added step).

~~~
rane
Also, you can't easily get the link on the clipboard.

You're forced to open a browser and then copy the link from the page. ?dl=1
seems to solve the preview issue, though.

