Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite • Hacker News Board

Re: Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite

#91

Post by brian_cloutier » Wed, May 25, 2016, 11:02 AM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #62

ja30278 wrote: post #12

So..the cost of an extra kernel/userspace switch was too much for a file request that is going to be serviced by a server on the other side of the internet?..really?

Exactly what I noticed about it. Also worth noting that the context switch here may matter for the practically tiny amount of people living in the right places in the US. It's pretty much a definition of a first world problem. Meanwhile, I'll be here with my 200ms ping to S3 wondering why would they waste all that time/complexity just to avoid a context switch. Reminds me of the performance arguments for kdbus.

The OS pre-extension doesn't know which files are stored locally and which are placeholders for remote files. You can't just selectively use FUSE for the remote ones. Using FUSE makes every file operation slower.

Re: Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite

#92

Post by GordonS » Wed, May 25, 2016, 12:30 PM UTC

bravura wrote: post #61

aw3c2 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also checkout Seafile if you want something more Dropboxy.

But that seems to only use Seafile's servers, not S3.

you can also install seafile on your own VM and use your own storage

Re: Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite

#93

Post by oarsinsync » Wed, May 25, 2016, 4:19 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #36

radicaldreamer wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I killed my Dropbox Pro account and upgraded iCloud storage because the integration with the Photos app in iOS is way superior and the lack of something like Project Infinite, which results in a lot of manual folder management for my long tail of old docs. Dropbox's core sync technology is still unmatched, but the Pro offering leaves a lot to be desired over some of the better integrated experiences of Google and App…

Going for iCloud, that's an odd decision, frankly. I would have understood Google Drive, but not iCloud. When it comes to my personal photos archive, I care about 2 things: (1) occasional sharing and (2) keeping my huge archive safe. Dropbox does both, iCloud does neither. iCloud sharing only works with people using iDevices and I don't have many acquaintances or family members with a preference for Apple. Dropbox al…

> When it comes to my personal photos archive, I care about 2 things: (1) occasional sharing and (2) keeping my huge archive safe. Dropbox does both, iCloud does neither.

iCloud definitely does occasional sharing. Keeping your archive safe is definitely questionable though.

> iCloud sharing only works with people using iDevices and I don't have many acquaintances or family members with a preference for Apple. Dropbox allows for publishing to a web link, with or without a password, with or without an expiration date. And that's cool, because I can send that link to anybody. Cross-platform and all that.

I can do that with iCloud Photos. I select a bunch of photos I want to share, I select an existing (or create a new) iCloud shared photo library, and then I enable a web link for them and share that. Works on fruits, robots, glass panes and penguins.

Re: Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite

#94

Post by hemancuso » Wed, May 25, 2016, 4:52 PM UTC

sz4kerto wrote: post #74

hemancuso wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually in beta now. :)

I've tried to sign up for the beta many times, I don't think I ever got an answer :/ great product on Windows though.

it gets sucked into a database ;)

Re: Dropbox: Going Deeper with Project Infinite

#95

Post by superobserver » Wed, May 25, 2016, 8:07 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #82

superobserver wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you suppose it matters when someone unapologetically extends their unbidden shill-like opinion favoring a more current employer? Running closed source code clearly involves a level of trust that permits abiding ignorance. Nothing more to say then.

I'm not sure what this means, but if by "unbidden shill-like opinion" you mean to insinuate astroturfing by another commenter, that's not allowed on HN without evidence. An opposing opinion is not evidence.

For one, this was in regards to the parent being a response to its parent, which was unrelated to other parents. Second, I was attempting to make a generalized assessment that no one should particularly care about a prior/current/whatever employee's opinion, precisely because it is sorely lacking in technical details that matter. (In other words, it was an argument from authority - a fallacy.) Perhaps I triggered the wrong idea with "shill-like" but I'll take the down vote for that with pride. Cheers (and keep up the great mod work)!