Well, the original comment made 3 distinct arguments which can basically be summed up as:
1) Its feature-set is easily duplicated (from a technical perspective)
2) It doesn't solve one particular use-case (that it wasn't designed to solve)
3) It's hard to imagine it catching on, let alone making money
Point #1 was widely mocked after Dropbox caught on, but turned out to be kind of correct - it just wasn't end-users that mimicked its feature-set, it was other companies.
Point #2 is irrelevant.
Point #3 was hilariously wrong. It went viral as hell, and the founders could've rode off into the sunset with a boatload of cash if they sold the company to Apple when they were approached. In the alternate universe where that happened, Apple devices just have a Dropbox feature instead of iCloud, a la Siri and Shazam.
Regarding #1, being easily replicated by end-users was the whole point of Point #1 in the original comment. It rested entirely on how easy it is to just slap such a thing together, and how people will just do it and skip using Dropbox which would mean the product would fail.
Whether it could be duplicated by other companies (with billions in the bank and thousands of engineers and OS/device access for integration) is irrelevant to the original comment's point.
1) Its feature-set is easily duplicated (from a technical perspective)
2) It doesn't solve one particular use-case (that it wasn't designed to solve)
3) It's hard to imagine it catching on, let alone making money
Point #1 was widely mocked after Dropbox caught on, but turned out to be kind of correct - it just wasn't end-users that mimicked its feature-set, it was other companies.
Point #2 is irrelevant.
Point #3 was hilariously wrong. It went viral as hell, and the founders could've rode off into the sunset with a boatload of cash if they sold the company to Apple when they were approached. In the alternate universe where that happened, Apple devices just have a Dropbox feature instead of iCloud, a la Siri and Shazam.