5 ms·

Dropbox is still OK for easily sharing files with other, especially movies and stuff that its sharing web UI supports. But in 2019 it is basically an inferior

by veidr 7y ago

Dropbox is still OK for easily sharing files with other, especially movies and stuff that its sharing web UI supports. But in 2019 it is basically an inferior and antiquated tool for syncing your own files. I moved to the open-source SyncThing[1] some years ago, which gave me: 1.) the ability to sync any arbitrary set of folders I want, which of course completely obviates the need to care about things like this issue (i.e., no need to use symlinks to sync other folders, because you can just sync those folders themselves) 2.) the ability to actually sync folders that contain symlinks, as many types of software projects do (Dropbox and many other purported sync tools can't do that, which means there are many common types of folder that they can't sync without corrupting them by replacing the symlink with the contents of the symlink destination) EDIT: Or, have they fixed that now, and is that why they are making this announcement? I am not sure. Back when I used Dropbox for syncing, it couldn't sync a folder containing a symlink, but this may no longer be true. (?) 3.) better sync reliability 4.) better sync performance 5.) completely superior security story; end-to-end encryption means you are in control of who can access your files (no access for employees, governments, etc) The tradeoffs are: a.) a little bit more work to set up (but it's really just a little bit... I walked my dad through it over the phone... basically the same amount of work as getting your credit card billing setup on Dropbox) b.) weaker story on mobile, no iOS app c.) no "cloud" so you have to do your own (e.g., leave an iMac running 24/7 back at your house or something) All in all, after 2+ years I am extremely happy with Syncthing, and I don't think products like Dropbox have a very strong case to exist anymore, at least not for the original purpose of syncing folders full of computer files. That problem has now been solved better, way more securely, and for free. (Which is probably why Dropbox seems to be trying to pivot to become some kind of enterprise team commmunication hub.) [1] https://syncthing.net https://syncthing.net (if on a Mac just install the Mac app and it will install the other components for you)

kranner 7y ago
> c.) no "cloud" so you have to do your own (e.g., leave an iMac running 24/7 back at your house or something) > That problem has now been solved better, way more securely, and for free. You haven't accounted for the cost and maintenance of the 24/7 iMac (or VPS) if one doesn't already have that, and not everyone does. I'm also a happy SyncThing user but I wouldn't say it's as easy to use as Dropbox for the general user.
- veidr 7y ago
  Yeah, you are right. But if you do have one computer you can leave on all the time, then I think it is.
- johnpowell 7y ago
  I run Syncthing on a Raspberry Pi without issue.
- thekyle 7y ago
  My 24/7 server is my Android phone. It doesn't cost me anything more than before it had Syncthing on it and maintenance consists of running Android updates which I did anyway. I suspect that most people with smartphones also leave them on 24/7.
  - kranner 7y ago
    That might work except for people who use iOS, for which Syncthing doesn’t have a client yet if I’m not mistaken.
    - thekyle 7y ago
      That's true. I don't really know why Syncthing isn't on iOS. It could be missing APIs or licensing issues with GPL. Hopefully something gets worked out eventually.
      - veidr 7y ago
        It's not that, it's actually because of the best and most reasonable of reasons: the maintainers and core committers don't use / aren't interested in iOS. They aren't opposed to it, and they give advice and helpful comments to those who want to try it. But, this is just one of the many places where Apple's authoritarian platform model shows its disadvantages. Syncthing is written in Go, but Apple didn't provide a good story for doing Go development for iOS, and because of their lockdown rules, nobody other than Apple can. Therefore, to get Syncthing running on iOS, you'd need to do a complete from-scratch implementation in one of the languages Apple allows you to use. So it is a relatively huge effort. A few people have tried, but nobody's completed anything very compelling. [1]: https://forum.syncthing.net/t/on-syncthing-ios-port-again/8964/11 https://forum.syncthing.net/t/on-syncthing-ios-port-again/89...
esoterica 7y ago
> c) no "cloud" so you have to do your own (e.g., leave an iMac running 24/7 back at your house or something) You really buried the lede right at the bottom didn't you? The entire point of a Dropbox type service is off-site cloud backups. If I have to buy and maintain a second server and leave it running 24/7 in my house (i.e. I'm not insulated against losing my data if my house burns down or a burglar breaks in) then clearly this product is providing an entirely different and far more limited service than Dropbox and is not an effective replacement for it.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > The entire point of a Dropbox type service is off-site cloud backups. No, it isn't. The entire point of Dropbox is having a shared folder on multiple devices that keeps itself in sync. "Cloud backup" aspect is a side effect, but it's too easy to break that "backup" accidentally. WRT. SyncThing, it's not for regular people not willing to expend any effort at all to set it up and keep it running, but in our adtech-driven startup economy in technology, these regular people are doomed to be ripped off and abused. Such are the aggregate ethics of this market.
  - veidr 7y ago
    There's some famous HN quote when Dropbox launched about how it would could be implemented "quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs and blah blah blah..." Actually back then Dropbox was pretty neat an there was no way my dad could implement that himself, and even for us nerds, it would be a major hassle to set up and keep running... so Dropbox had real and obvious value. My point replying here was that now, under some circumstances anyway (see below), it now really is quite trivial for regular people not willing to expend any^W much effort at all to set it up and keep it running. (It is less than one minute of one-step installing and then configuring Syncthing.) However the thing I missed, as pointed out in some of these comments, is that not everybody has a machine at home that is on all the time. I do, and I set up an iMac for my dad and sister etc and told them to just leave it on all the time and just let the screen sleep after an hour. I think a lot of people do that, and I think it is a good idea in general, but if you don't want to do that, then yeah in that scenario Dropbox still does have some value.
Schoolmeister 7y ago
> 2.) Back when I used Dropbox for syncing, it couldn't sync a folder containing a symlink, but this may no longer be true. From the first paragraph: "As of mid-2019, Dropbox no longer follows items outside of your Dropbox account that are linked to by a symlink." In the next paragraph is explained how symlinks linking to files within your Dropbox folder still work.
- veidr 7y ago
  Right, that's what made me think that my (now years old) understanding of how Dropbox handles symlinks may not be true anymore. But I don't have two machines with Dropbox at the moment to test for sure. Does it now just sync the symlinks as-is, so if you have a folder full of symlinks, you just get the same folder full of the same symlinks (as if you had zipped the folder, and then unzipped it on some other machine)? If so, that is a big improvement from the old days IMO, though it would unavoidable cause the issue being discussed here.
rdslw 7y ago
> But in 2019 it is basically an inferior and antiquated tool for syncing your own files. IPO dates of most (once) cool tech startups signal time to search for replacement and time of approach change by them.

by veidr 7y ago

kranner 7y ago

> c.) no "cloud" so you have to do your own (e.g., leave an iMac running 24/7 back at your house or something) > That problem has now been solved better, way more securely, and for free. You haven't accounted for the cost and maintenance of the 24/7 iMac (or VPS) if one doesn't already have that, and not everyone does. I'm also a happy SyncThing user but I wouldn't say it's as easy to use as Dropbox for the general user.

veidr 7y ago
Yeah, you are right. But if you do have one computer you can leave on all the time, then I think it is.
johnpowell 7y ago
I run Syncthing on a Raspberry Pi without issue.
thekyle 7y ago
My 24/7 server is my Android phone. It doesn't cost me anything more than before it had Syncthing on it and maintenance consists of running Android updates which I did anyway. I suspect that most people with smartphones also leave them on 24/7.
- kranner 7y ago
  That might work except for people who use iOS, for which Syncthing doesn’t have a client yet if I’m not mistaken.
  - thekyle 7y ago
    That's true. I don't really know why Syncthing isn't on iOS. It could be missing APIs or licensing issues with GPL. Hopefully something gets worked out eventually.
    - veidr 7y ago
      It's not that, it's actually because of the best and most reasonable of reasons: the maintainers and core committers don't use / aren't interested in iOS. They aren't opposed to it, and they give advice and helpful comments to those who want to try it. But, this is just one of the many places where Apple's authoritarian platform model shows its disadvantages. Syncthing is written in Go, but Apple didn't provide a good story for doing Go development for iOS, and because of their lockdown rules, nobody other than Apple can. Therefore, to get Syncthing running on iOS, you'd need to do a complete from-scratch implementation in one of the languages Apple allows you to use. So it is a relatively huge effort. A few people have tried, but nobody's completed anything very compelling. [1]: https://forum.syncthing.net/t/on-syncthing-ios-port-again/8964/11 https://forum.syncthing.net/t/on-syncthing-ios-port-again/89...

esoterica 7y ago

> c) no "cloud" so you have to do your own (e.g., leave an iMac running 24/7 back at your house or something) You really buried the lede right at the bottom didn't you? The entire point of a Dropbox type service is off-site cloud backups. If I have to buy and maintain a second server and leave it running 24/7 in my house (i.e. I'm not insulated against losing my data if my house burns down or a burglar breaks in) then clearly this product is providing an entirely different and far more limited service than Dropbox and is not an effective replacement for it.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
> The entire point of a Dropbox type service is off-site cloud backups. No, it isn't. The entire point of Dropbox is having a shared folder on multiple devices that keeps itself in sync. "Cloud backup" aspect is a side effect, but it's too easy to break that "backup" accidentally. WRT. SyncThing, it's not for regular people not willing to expend any effort at all to set it up and keep it running, but in our adtech-driven startup economy in technology, these regular people are doomed to be ripped off and abused. Such are the aggregate ethics of this market.
- veidr 7y ago
  There's some famous HN quote when Dropbox launched about how it would could be implemented "quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs and blah blah blah..." Actually back then Dropbox was pretty neat an there was no way my dad could implement that himself, and even for us nerds, it would be a major hassle to set up and keep running... so Dropbox had real and obvious value. My point replying here was that now, under some circumstances anyway (see below), it now really is quite trivial for regular people not willing to expend any^W much effort at all to set it up and keep it running. (It is less than one minute of one-step installing and then configuring Syncthing.) However the thing I missed, as pointed out in some of these comments, is that not everybody has a machine at home that is on all the time. I do, and I set up an iMac for my dad and sister etc and told them to just leave it on all the time and just let the screen sleep after an hour. I think a lot of people do that, and I think it is a good idea in general, but if you don't want to do that, then yeah in that scenario Dropbox still does have some value.

Schoolmeister 7y ago

> 2.) Back when I used Dropbox for syncing, it couldn't sync a folder containing a symlink, but this may no longer be true. From the first paragraph: "As of mid-2019, Dropbox no longer follows items outside of your Dropbox account that are linked to by a symlink." In the next paragraph is explained how symlinks linking to files within your Dropbox folder still work.

veidr 7y ago
Right, that's what made me think that my (now years old) understanding of how Dropbox handles symlinks may not be true anymore. But I don't have two machines with Dropbox at the moment to test for sure. Does it now just sync the symlinks as-is, so if you have a folder full of symlinks, you just get the same folder full of the same symlinks (as if you had zipped the folder, and then unzipped it on some other machine)? If so, that is a big improvement from the old days IMO, though it would unavoidable cause the issue being discussed here.

rdslw 7y ago

> But in 2019 it is basically an inferior and antiquated tool for syncing your own files. IPO dates of most (once) cool tech startups signal time to search for replacement and time of approach change by them.