| Snapjoy seems pretty cool, and the team seems like a bunch of awesome+smart people who I'd love to meet (e.g. http://www.slideshare.net/michaeldwan) but this article is terrible. Going by Snapjoy's blog (http://blog.snapjoy.com/2012/copy/) this new copy feature seems to be "include friend albums on my timeline" which doesn't seem revolutionary or anything. If you were to pick a recent feature I think the fact they added SSL 10 days ago is just as noteworthy, and the ability to "liberate your data" and control your photos a week before that is even more interesting. So given this there is something really odd about TechCrunch raving so unabashedly about Snapjoy. For instance, the article raves about the Copy feature, the Shuffle feature (browse your photos in random order), and then makes the claim that Snapjoy "nailed the timeline concept way before other big companies" (despite the fact they were still in private beta when Facebook launched Timeline). The article even turns the lack of pricing plans, which seems like a point that invites legitimate criticism for a photo storage company, into a reassuring endorsement: "the future pricing plans aren’t available yet. Once they are, I think that you’ll be very impressed.". And this all from the author (Drew Olanoff) who 2 days ago tore the new MySpace demo concepts to shreds (http://techcrunch.com/2012/09/24/the-mere-existence-of-a-new...) because "pretty things don't win" (despite lauding Snapjoy as being a "work of art") and then threw an ad hominem at Harrison Weber from The Next Web (Drew's former employer) in for good measure. From what I can tell Drew doesn't have any conflicting interests (he just really likes Snapjoy and sings its praises through many articles and tweets) but this really doesn't feel like professional media. |