7 ms·

For $10 you can get Dropbox (2 TB) data, so I dunno if saving that $5 is worth it in this case. You get the Linux client, and far more reliability in every aspe

For $10 you can get Dropbox (2 TB) data, so I dunno if saving that $5 is worth it in this case. You get the Linux client, and far more reliability in every aspect. I think, if I really would want to go setting up my own thing to save money, setting/writing some service backed by object storage (AWS S3) would be cheaper and reliable enough.

CameronNemo 6y ago
Does Dropbox Linux client still support filesystems other than ext4? https://itsfoss.com/dropbox-linux-ext4-only/ https://itsfoss.com/dropbox-linux-ext4-only/
- timmytokyo 6y ago
  The last-straw motivating reason I switched to nextcloud was because dropbox decided they wouldn't let me sync my files to an ecryptfs file system. (I believe they recanted on this policy a few months later.) I didn't like being held hostage to their bad design decisions, so I left and found a solution that worked better for me. Dropbox has also had some serious security vulnerabilities [1], which left me feeling less than confident in their ability to manage my personal data. [1] https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/06/21/dropbox-lets-anyone-log-in-as-anyone/ https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/06/21/dropbox-lets-any...
  - pdmccormick 6y ago
    Thanks for the heads up, I see this confirmed at https://help.dropbox.com/installs-integrations/desktop/system-requirements#linux https://help.dropbox.com/installs-integrations/desktop/syste... under the list of supported file systems on Linux (which is currently ext4, zfs and xfs on 64 bit systems, eCryptFS backed by ext4, and btrfs).
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- saghm 6y ago
  Yes; I've been using Dropbox with btrfs on Arch Linux for a month or two now. According to the Arch wiki[1], Dropbox added support back for ZFS, ecryptfs, XFS, and btrfs a little over a year ago (around seven months after they initially dropped support for everything other than ext4 on Linux). That being said, I had been using Nextcloud on a DigitalOcean droplet for a couple years before that, and I never had any issues with it. The only reason I switched back to Dropbox was that Google announced earlier this year they were getting rid of Google Play Music, and I had a bunch of music uploaded from CDs on there that I wanted to back up, and I would have ended up needing to pay more per month for the storage on a DigitalOcean instance to fit all the music than the $10/month that Dropbox charges for 2 TB. [1]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dropbox#Using_Dropbox_with_non-ext4_filesystems https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dropbox#Using_Dropbox_w...
iphone_elegance 6y ago
Or just OneDrive with office365 $7 a month for 1TB with all the other stuff
- truncate 6y ago
  or iCloud or Google Drive which are even cheaper IIRC with more plans. But people commenting here for this post, probably care about services that support Linux.
INTPenis 6y ago
Nextcloud supports S3 as external storage. So it, and its app, are essentially S3 frontends. I use nextcloud but I already have a k8s cluster where I host my stuff like calendars, notes, decks, S3. One 10Gi volume is 1USD/month where I host mine. Yes, more expensive, but I don't need 2TB and also how come Dropbox can offer storage that cheap? What's their incentive? Also I still use my Google account and if I add it into Fedora my Google drive appears in the Gnome file manager. So I'm confused about the lack of Gdrive client, I assume they mean from Google. But all Google has to do is expose APIs and docs and someone else will write one.
- dwild 6y ago
  Blackblaze is at $0.005/GB/Month (so 10$ for 2TB) and they still make a profit out of it. I have no doubt Dropbox can make a profit out of users barely filling their 2TB limit then.
josu 6y ago
>For $10 you can get Dropbox (2 TB) data, so I dunno if saving that $5 is worth it in this case. You get the Linux client, and far more reliability in every aspect. For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem.
- in9 6y ago
  I'm a linux user but unfamiliar with how to set up and arrange those technologies in reliable (for my taste) fashion.
  - Anthony-G 6y ago
    The comment your responding to is actually a toungue-in-cheek reference to the original Dropbox announcement on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 It's not to be taken seriously.
- truncate 6y ago
  Yes I know that. The issue around just using one VM is that it is single point of failure IMO. Yes, is unlikely that VM will die, and yes, the VM image itself is likely backed by reliable storage (they are supposed to be disposable IIRC, you'd ideally want to attach some kind of volume which is extra $$$ -- correct me if I'm wrong here). That said, my point was with little extra money -- features such as easy sharing, security, versioning, nice mobile apps, and time saved moving around things manually (like photos), offline access (and if you use rsync cron, not worrying about conflicts) etc makes it worth that extra few $$$.

CameronNemo 6y ago

Does Dropbox Linux client still support filesystems other than ext4? https://itsfoss.com/dropbox-linux-ext4-only/ https://itsfoss.com/dropbox-linux-ext4-only/

timmytokyo 6y ago
The last-straw motivating reason I switched to nextcloud was because dropbox decided they wouldn't let me sync my files to an ecryptfs file system. (I believe they recanted on this policy a few months later.) I didn't like being held hostage to their bad design decisions, so I left and found a solution that worked better for me. Dropbox has also had some serious security vulnerabilities [1], which left me feeling less than confident in their ability to manage my personal data. [1] https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/06/21/dropbox-lets-anyone-log-in-as-anyone/ https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2011/06/21/dropbox-lets-any...
- pdmccormick 6y ago
  Thanks for the heads up, I see this confirmed at https://help.dropbox.com/installs-integrations/desktop/system-requirements#linux https://help.dropbox.com/installs-integrations/desktop/syste... under the list of supported file systems on Linux (which is currently ext4, zfs and xfs on 64 bit systems, eCryptFS backed by ext4, and btrfs).
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
saghm 6y ago
Yes; I've been using Dropbox with btrfs on Arch Linux for a month or two now. According to the Arch wiki[1], Dropbox added support back for ZFS, ecryptfs, XFS, and btrfs a little over a year ago (around seven months after they initially dropped support for everything other than ext4 on Linux). That being said, I had been using Nextcloud on a DigitalOcean droplet for a couple years before that, and I never had any issues with it. The only reason I switched back to Dropbox was that Google announced earlier this year they were getting rid of Google Play Music, and I had a bunch of music uploaded from CDs on there that I wanted to back up, and I would have ended up needing to pay more per month for the storage on a DigitalOcean instance to fit all the music than the $10/month that Dropbox charges for 2 TB. [1]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dropbox#Using_Dropbox_with_non-ext4_filesystems https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dropbox#Using_Dropbox_w...

iphone_elegance 6y ago

Or just OneDrive with office365 $7 a month for 1TB with all the other stuff

truncate 6y ago
or iCloud or Google Drive which are even cheaper IIRC with more plans. But people commenting here for this post, probably care about services that support Linux.

INTPenis 6y ago

Nextcloud supports S3 as external storage. So it, and its app, are essentially S3 frontends. I use nextcloud but I already have a k8s cluster where I host my stuff like calendars, notes, decks, S3. One 10Gi volume is 1USD/month where I host mine. Yes, more expensive, but I don't need 2TB and also how come Dropbox can offer storage that cheap? What's their incentive? Also I still use my Google account and if I add it into Fedora my Google drive appears in the Gnome file manager. So I'm confused about the lack of Gdrive client, I assume they mean from Google. But all Google has to do is expose APIs and docs and someone else will write one.

dwild 6y ago
Blackblaze is at $0.005/GB/Month (so 10$ for 2TB) and they still make a profit out of it. I have no doubt Dropbox can make a profit out of users barely filling their 2TB limit then.

josu 6y ago

>For $10 you can get Dropbox (2 TB) data, so I dunno if saving that $5 is worth it in this case. You get the Linux client, and far more reliability in every aspect. For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem.

in9 6y ago
I'm a linux user but unfamiliar with how to set up and arrange those technologies in reliable (for my taste) fashion.
- Anthony-G 6y ago
  The comment your responding to is actually a toungue-in-cheek reference to the original Dropbox announcement on Hacker News: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 It's not to be taken seriously.
truncate 6y ago
Yes I know that. The issue around just using one VM is that it is single point of failure IMO. Yes, is unlikely that VM will die, and yes, the VM image itself is likely backed by reliable storage (they are supposed to be disposable IIRC, you'd ideally want to attach some kind of volume which is extra $$$ -- correct me if I'm wrong here). That said, my point was with little extra money -- features such as easy sharing, security, versioning, nice mobile apps, and time saved moving around things manually (like photos), offline access (and if you use rsync cron, not worrying about conflicts) etc makes it worth that extra few $$$.