Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by corin_ on Friday February 04, 2011 @01:06AM
(#2178567)
The files are hosted on AWS S3 (despite the fact that their domain is "cdn.lts.cr", they're not using CloudFront), so assuming a cost of $0.14/GB (too lazy to calculate it including S3's various pricing ranges that come into play when more data is being stored), and completely ignoring facts such as cost of hosting the site, and the time factor of creating and managing the site...
Also assuming that all free users use all of their 200mb, and all pro users use all of their 10gb...
They need a free-to-pro conversation rate of 0.37% to break even on the S3 costs, i.e. one pro account for every 271 free accounts.
Alternatively assuming that all users will use 50% of their 200mb or 10gb, then that's a conversation rate of 0.17%, or one pro account for every 593 free accounts.
My guess is that, if we ignore people who try it out and then decide not to use the service, chances are that, of the people who stick around (i.e. the people who will actually store more than one test file), quite a decent number will move to the pro account. So yeah, I can see how they are making a profit, seems like it could turn into a nice (and really easy maintenance) little cash cow.
On a seperate topic, would be amazing if someone created an open source version of this as a front-end for S3 - though I'm far too lazy to do it myself.
edit: I see the creators are reading this thread, so here's a direct query. Any chance you'd create an account for maybe a few dollars a month (less than pro) that you provide no storage for, and that gets hooked up to an S3 (or S3+CloudFront) account of the user's chosing?
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by iamgoat on Friday February 04, 2011 @12:57AM
(#2178550)
Oh, and Crate is already profitable. No worries about losing your stuff because the business tanks.
That's helpful, but not a guarantee.
The site seems a little too bare to trust with my credit card, though the free version sounds really great. It seems like it's missing something. Like a weekend project that still has some details to flesh out.
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by corin_ on Friday February 04, 2011 @01:24AM
(#2178604)
A few personal thoughts:
- Allow a custom CNAME for files hosted so that they can be shared on a pro user's own domain (you're already CNAMEing to S3, is it possible for you to add additional CNAMEs onto that for users? I'm not sure.)
- Publicly viewable directory listing for a crate? When I saw the name that's how I assumed it would work straight away, that after creating a crate I can link someone to it and they can see and view all the files in it. Realised this is actually possible before I submitted this comment, but have kept it in here to make the point that it could perhaps be a bit clear. Waiting for a user to mouseover the crate name to discover this feature helps keep the site looking clean, but perhaps isn't the best usability feature (at least for new users).
- No ability to change username (nice but not necessary) or email (necessary) in the settings page
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by iamgoat on Friday February 04, 2011 @09:36AM
(#2179515)
More links in the footer, mainly. A page to contact you either by form, email, or phone number. This goes a long way knowing that I have a way to contact you if I have problems. A Team or Company page would be good to learn a bit more about the personal side of the business and to know that it's not a 1-person shop.
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by moeffju on Friday February 04, 2011 @03:03AM
(#2178763)
This brought back fond memories of drop.io. There was "ridiculously easy * sharing". Crate does look a nice replacement, Although they offer far less storage and features, it seems like a viable answer to many people's problems. However, the same feature set is covered by Dropbox' Public Folder, or am I missing something?
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by erikabele on Friday February 04, 2011 @11:38PM
(#2182464)
I guess it's geared towards some different use case, just compare the workflow with something like Dropbox:
- with Dropbox I've a public folder which is linked from my Finder sidebar so I can simply drop an existing file into it and copy the public URL by right-clicking on it
- with Crate I've to open a tab with the website, navigate to the file, drag back to browser (not Finder, where I am when navigating to the file), then copy the URL, then decide what to do with the original file on my harddisk
Maybe that's easier for some tasks or for some users, I don't know. Maybe the last bit is crucial: do I want to keep the file locally (Dropbox) or just put it out there?
For me, the initial download & setup of something like Dropbox is worth the benefits it provides.
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by _delirium on Friday February 04, 2011 @03:45AM
(#2178835)
You don't have to, though it's geared towards that. You can use it entirely through the web interface if you want, manually uploading and downloading files.
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by handzhiev on Friday February 04, 2011 @04:26AM
(#2178903)
And how is drag n drop easier than having an upload button? I don't want to open explorer, find my file there, resize the window and drag with the mouse. Clicking on "upload" button and locating my file is much easier.
Re:Crate. Web-based file sharing done incredibly easy.
by ams6110 on Friday February 04, 2011 @09:47AM
(#2179558)
scp at the command line is easier still, especially if you define an alias in your .ssh/config file. Do any of the "cloud" file storage services support scp/sftp access?
Also assuming that all free users use all of their 200mb, and all pro users use all of their 10gb...
They need a free-to-pro conversation rate of 0.37% to break even on the S3 costs, i.e. one pro account for every 271 free accounts.
Alternatively assuming that all users will use 50% of their 200mb or 10gb, then that's a conversation rate of 0.17%, or one pro account for every 593 free accounts.
My guess is that, if we ignore people who try it out and then decide not to use the service, chances are that, of the people who stick around (i.e. the people who will actually store more than one test file), quite a decent number will move to the pro account. So yeah, I can see how they are making a profit, seems like it could turn into a nice (and really easy maintenance) little cash cow.
On a seperate topic, would be amazing if someone created an open source version of this as a front-end for S3 - though I'm far too lazy to do it myself.
edit: I see the creators are reading this thread, so here's a direct query. Any chance you'd create an account for maybe a few dollars a month (less than pro) that you provide no storage for, and that gets hooked up to an S3 (or S3+CloudFront) account of the user's chosing?
Especially since it's Simple.
Now if only somebody would come out with a service to shorten all these links I have laying around I'll be set.
The site seems a little too bare to trust with my credit card, though the free version sounds really great. It seems like it's missing something. Like a weekend project that still has some details to flesh out.
- Allow a custom CNAME for files hosted so that they can be shared on a pro user's own domain (you're already CNAMEing to S3, is it possible for you to add additional CNAMEs onto that for users? I'm not sure.)
- Publicly viewable directory listing for a crate? When I saw the name that's how I assumed it would work straight away, that after creating a crate I can link someone to it and they can see and view all the files in it. Realised this is actually possible before I submitted this comment, but have kept it in here to make the point that it could perhaps be a bit clear. Waiting for a user to mouseover the crate name to discover this feature helps keep the site looking clean, but perhaps isn't the best usability feature (at least for new users).
- No ability to change username (nice but not necessary) or email (necessary) in the settings page
- https://
edit: p.s. I realised that in neither of my comments did I remember to mention - nice work, a really nice minimalistic product!
- with Dropbox I've a public folder which is linked from my Finder sidebar so I can simply drop an existing file into it and copy the public URL by right-clicking on it
- with Crate I've to open a tab with the website, navigate to the file, drag back to browser (not Finder, where I am when navigating to the file), then copy the URL, then decide what to do with the original file on my harddisk
Maybe that's easier for some tasks or for some users, I don't know. Maybe the last bit is crucial: do I want to keep the file locally (Dropbox) or just put it out there?
For me, the initial download & setup of something like Dropbox is worth the benefits it provides.
http://developer.apple.com/library/safari/#documentation/app...
Have a look for yourself :)