3 ms·

It is a cliche, but the plural of anecdote is not data. I never had any problems with Dropbox, but had Office on OneDrive corrupt files. OneNote has also render

It is a cliche, but the plural of anecdote is not data. I never had any problems with Dropbox, but had Office on OneDrive corrupt files. OneNote has also rendered some notes unreadable. The bottom line is that errors happen. You should prepare for that and make backups. Also, Dropbox are still among the very best when it comes to syncing. Many useful synchronization features are implemented by Dropbox, but not the competition. E.g., features that most competitors do not have: - Modifying a large file on Dropbox will only resync modified chunks. - DropBox avoids re-uploads, both when uploading identical files and moving files around: http://macography.net/2013/05/speed-test-dropbox-google-drive-box-skydrive-amazon-cloud-drive/ http://macography.net/2013/05/speed-test-dropbox-google-driv... - Dropbox does LAN sync. If a machine has to download a large file and another machine on the network has the same file, chunks are provided peer to peer. This makes using large files on multiple machines or in a team much faster. - Dropbox does streaming sync. A machine can already download chunks when another machine is still uploading: https://blog.dropbox.com/2014/07/introducing-streaming-sync-supercharged-sync-for-large-files/ https://blog.dropbox.com/2014/07/introducing-streaming-sync-... Sure, OneDrive and Google Drive do have many useful functions that Dropbox does not have, such as including complete office suites. But for the original task, file syncing, Dropbox is still pretty much unbeaten.

calinet6 12y ago
I think you're attributing too much of Dropbox's success to simple technical reliability. It really isn't that difficult a problem, and many services and projects do it right. I have an rsync script that has been syncing my files reliably to an offsite location for 6 years. It's certain that Dropbox has a high quality syncing service, but there are other factors. Think, for example, how this case was handled: a fault in their core product, a breach of user trust in their service, and they understood that it needed more than a technical solution. None of this was part of their core sync reliability: it was part of a more broad quality, which is closer to their true reason for success.
- danieldk 12y ago
  I think you're attributing too much of Dropbox's success to simple technical reliability. I did not say anything about their reasons for success. Only what the technical advantages are compared to some of the other file sync services. It really isn't that difficult a problem, Difficult enough that some of its useful features are not matched by other services yet. I have an rsync script that has been syncing my files reliably to an offsite location for 6 years. That's great. But that is one-way sync and not something my parents could use. Dropbox is successful because they made sync technology that is relatively flawless to the average user. Also, there is a network effect. In the longer term, it will be interesting to see if they survive, since Microsoft and Google have been undercutting prices heavily, and as far as I know there is no online Office suite on the horizon (only Microsoft Office integration for business users).
arthurfm 12y ago
> Dropbox does LAN sync. If a machine has to download a large file and another machine on the network has the same file, chunks are provided peer to peer. This makes using large files on multiple machines or in a team much faster. Doesn't the file have to exist on Dropbox's servers before it can be synced to another computer on the same LAN? The last time I looked into it, this was the case.

calinet6 12y ago

I think you're attributing too much of Dropbox's success to simple technical reliability. It really isn't that difficult a problem, and many services and projects do it right. I have an rsync script that has been syncing my files reliably to an offsite location for 6 years. It's certain that Dropbox has a high quality syncing service, but there are other factors. Think, for example, how this case was handled: a fault in their core product, a breach of user trust in their service, and they understood that it needed more than a technical solution. None of this was part of their core sync reliability: it was part of a more broad quality, which is closer to their true reason for success.

danieldk 12y ago
I think you're attributing too much of Dropbox's success to simple technical reliability. I did not say anything about their reasons for success. Only what the technical advantages are compared to some of the other file sync services. It really isn't that difficult a problem, Difficult enough that some of its useful features are not matched by other services yet. I have an rsync script that has been syncing my files reliably to an offsite location for 6 years. That's great. But that is one-way sync and not something my parents could use. Dropbox is successful because they made sync technology that is relatively flawless to the average user. Also, there is a network effect. In the longer term, it will be interesting to see if they survive, since Microsoft and Google have been undercutting prices heavily, and as far as I know there is no online Office suite on the horizon (only Microsoft Office integration for business users).

arthurfm 12y ago

> Dropbox does LAN sync. If a machine has to download a large file and another machine on the network has the same file, chunks are provided peer to peer. This makes using large files on multiple machines or in a team much faster. Doesn't the file have to exist on Dropbox's servers before it can be synced to another computer on the same LAN? The last time I looked into it, this was the case.