3 ms·

All good and well, but isn't comparing Syncthing and Dropbox kind of apples to oranges? Dropbox has a completely different scope that goes beyond what Syncthin

by qayxc 5y ago

All good and well, but isn't comparing Syncthing and Dropbox kind of apples to oranges? Dropbox has a completely different scope that goes beyond what Syncthing is offering. If you don't require the features Dropbox offers, it's the wrong tool in the first place.

cestith 5y ago
Is it apples and oranges or is it a nice pair of paper scissors compared to a multitool with the little fold-out scissors? Often we carry the multitool because it mostly meets lots of different needs. Sometimes we just want a single focused tool that does its one job really well. There are lots of ways to sync or backup files and folders, each with their own quirks, advantages, and disadvantages. There's git, mercurial, OneDrive, Sharepoint, Dropbox, Google Drive/Google One, rsync, scp, NFS, Owncloud, Nextcloud, Crashplan, unison, snapback, Amanda, bacula, IDrive, Carbonite, Barracuda Backup, Veam, duplicity, DAR, bup, Acronis TrueImage, Veritas Backup Exec, HP Data Protector, Borg backup, Commodo Backup, and Windows/SAMBA shares over CIFS to name a minority of options. If every attempt met every need, there'd be far fewer tools for this.
newaccount74 5y ago
Both are solutions to sync a folder across multiple devices. The fact that dropbox added a bunch of extra features over the years is irrelevant to most users.
- qayxc 5y ago
  That's like arguing Photoshop is too complicated compared to MS Paint, because both can resize and crop images. If all you want to do is syncing folders across devices, use a tool that does just that. Just to emphasize how this is relevant, here's what Dropbox says about what it is [0]. > What is Dropbox? > Dropbox is a place where all your team’s content comes together. There's nothing in that very first sentence of their own description of the product that suggests syncing folders across devices as a use case. Just because you can do that, too, doesn't mean it's the primary use case. Dropbox sees their product as a solution for collaborating across teams. But that's only one side, so let's look at the "Personal Use"-section [1]: > Back up your big ideas, your best memories and your family traditions. And again, syncing folders across devices isn't mentioned - they see Dropbox as a centralised backup solution. > Centralise your storage, declutter your life So they tell the user exactly how they see their product and the laborious installation process is a consequence of that. So while you see a product for syncing across devices, the product is advertised as a collaboration solution or a centralised storage for backup and device-independent global access. That's not me claiming this either, this is straight from the horse's mouth and what users are told. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/features https://www.dropbox.com/features [1] https://www.dropbox.com/plus https://www.dropbox.com/plus
  - Macha 5y ago
    Dropbox wants users to see Dropbox as all these things because syncing is a table stakes feature for all their competitors now. So they add all these in search of a USP. From my experience though, their users (and not just the tech bubble) don't care. Someone who even opens the Web interface to access a file without a client/app installed counts as a power user. In fact as more people use aaS that hide the concept of files, a lot of those users are dropping off as they have all their docs in Google docs or photos in iCloud or whatever
  - scbrg 5y ago
    Huh. Perhaps. Last time I checked, Dropbox very much did claim that syncing data between devices was their primary use case. Perhaps they changed while I wasn't looking (I haven't been looking since they forced me to Syncthing by deciding that my filesystems weren't supported). Perhaps the author is coming from a similar place. History matters. If someone sells you a product, and then completely changes the scope of said product, it's a bit odd for people to complain when you start looking for alternatives that fit the scope of the product you initially bought, no?

by qayxc 5y ago

cestith 5y ago

Is it apples and oranges or is it a nice pair of paper scissors compared to a multitool with the little fold-out scissors? Often we carry the multitool because it mostly meets lots of different needs. Sometimes we just want a single focused tool that does its one job really well. There are lots of ways to sync or backup files and folders, each with their own quirks, advantages, and disadvantages. There's git, mercurial, OneDrive, Sharepoint, Dropbox, Google Drive/Google One, rsync, scp, NFS, Owncloud, Nextcloud, Crashplan, unison, snapback, Amanda, bacula, IDrive, Carbonite, Barracuda Backup, Veam, duplicity, DAR, bup, Acronis TrueImage, Veritas Backup Exec, HP Data Protector, Borg backup, Commodo Backup, and Windows/SAMBA shares over CIFS to name a minority of options. If every attempt met every need, there'd be far fewer tools for this.

newaccount74 5y ago

Both are solutions to sync a folder across multiple devices. The fact that dropbox added a bunch of extra features over the years is irrelevant to most users.

qayxc 5y ago
That's like arguing Photoshop is too complicated compared to MS Paint, because both can resize and crop images. If all you want to do is syncing folders across devices, use a tool that does just that. Just to emphasize how this is relevant, here's what Dropbox says about what it is [0]. > What is Dropbox? > Dropbox is a place where all your team’s content comes together. There's nothing in that very first sentence of their own description of the product that suggests syncing folders across devices as a use case. Just because you can do that, too, doesn't mean it's the primary use case. Dropbox sees their product as a solution for collaborating across teams. But that's only one side, so let's look at the "Personal Use"-section [1]: > Back up your big ideas, your best memories and your family traditions. And again, syncing folders across devices isn't mentioned - they see Dropbox as a centralised backup solution. > Centralise your storage, declutter your life So they tell the user exactly how they see their product and the laborious installation process is a consequence of that. So while you see a product for syncing across devices, the product is advertised as a collaboration solution or a centralised storage for backup and device-independent global access. That's not me claiming this either, this is straight from the horse's mouth and what users are told. [0] https://www.dropbox.com/features https://www.dropbox.com/features [1] https://www.dropbox.com/plus https://www.dropbox.com/plus
- Macha 5y ago
  Dropbox wants users to see Dropbox as all these things because syncing is a table stakes feature for all their competitors now. So they add all these in search of a USP. From my experience though, their users (and not just the tech bubble) don't care. Someone who even opens the Web interface to access a file without a client/app installed counts as a power user. In fact as more people use aaS that hide the concept of files, a lot of those users are dropping off as they have all their docs in Google docs or photos in iCloud or whatever
- scbrg 5y ago
  Huh. Perhaps. Last time I checked, Dropbox very much did claim that syncing data between devices was their primary use case. Perhaps they changed while I wasn't looking (I haven't been looking since they forced me to Syncthing by deciding that my filesystems weren't supported). Perhaps the author is coming from a similar place. History matters. If someone sells you a product, and then completely changes the scope of said product, it's a bit odd for people to complain when you start looking for alternatives that fit the scope of the product you initially bought, no?