Conclusion

We have looked at the history of the arXiv, identifying a number of possible reasons that determined its success as the most popular online preprint repository. We argue that the arXiv flourished because it catered to technically savvy researchers with a long standing tradition of sharing and collaboration (physics, for example, is one of the most highly collaborative fields of research).  The simplicity of the site and its LaTeX-centric submission process, secured rapid growth within communities that were already used to taking full control of the typesetting process, and were comfortable with sharing their documents with colleagues.
We argued that while the arXiv was quick to adopt technology early on, it has changed very little since its launch. This unwillingness or inability to foster new technology and practices are an impediment to better research communication practices currently available.
We suggest that the arXiv of the future will be web-native and web-first, multi-format and format-neutral so as to include the whole research community. In order to foster transparency and reproducibility, it will be built for open data and open research, also allowing for commenting and open peer review. The arXiv of the future will be a database of preprints identified by a Digital Object Identifier, with a well-defined semantic structure that will make them fully machine-readable and easily discoverable. It will be transparent and publish all the information about alternative metrics that may determine the true impact of the research it hosts.  
We believe that should the arXiv continue to remain stagnant, it will be eclipsed by other services, just like the arXiv itself did to its predecessors. We encourage researchers to demand more out of the platform and believe that in the era of the web, sharing research via PDF must inevitably come to an end. Let us embrace new technologies and practices, just like the arXiv did nearly 30 years ago so that we might create a better way to share research.