I've taken the shutting down of Everpix a lot harder than I probably should. I was not only invested in the product, but also the vision of the company. I had been using it since earlier this year and put it right up there with Evernote on services I planned on using for years to come. There has been a lot of discussion on Twitter about the business model of Everpix. As John Siracusa said, everything about Everpix was perfect except for the business model. I believe that services like Everpix Premium need to either be unlimited or include so much storage (Flickr) that you are likely never to get close. This is what makes the products easy to understand. You should not have to spend time counting file sizes for cloud access. This has led me to wonder if Everpix was a product or a feature (a reference to when Steve Jobs called Dropbox a feature and not a product). Everpix had double the conversion to paid accounts when you compare them to Evernote (12.4% vs 6%), so it was obviously doing something right. Did Everpix simply not have enough time to scale or was it simply not ever going to be profitable? Can cloud photo management be a standalone product from a financial perspective? Will you get enough people to sign up (and convert to paid) without an alternative business model? Yahoo is an advertising company. It is in their best interest to keep you on the site. If Apple offered an Everpix-like service (which they should), it would be an add-on to buying a Mac or iOS device. For all our advances in cloud technology, this is one thing that no one had right until Everpix and it is a shame that they didn't make it.
Update: Profitability information from one of the co-founders of Everpix.