Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

aerofs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 123 posts

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#32

Post by sliverstorm »

jb55 wrote: post #14

I was using this for awhile but the sync algorithm is retarded. It spent all of its time syncing gigs of meta data and saturating my upload rate. Also be prepared to make room for the 100mb+ process as it does not seem to care about memory efficiency. I guess I'm still stuck with rsync and cronjobs until they work out the issues.

Indeed. Prepare to wait hours for newly added files to be synced, prepare for immense memory footprints, prepare for the worst conflict resolution you've ever seen.

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#34

Post by augustl »

scrrr wrote: post #33

Is there a command-line client? I'd like to install that on a server via ssh and use it as a middle-man storage so I don't have to always have at least 2 computers running to sync.

I sure hope so. My home server has neither Xorg installed or a monitor attached. Very hard to tell what the actual product is, but I'd be surprised if they don't have a Linux daemon of some sort.

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#35

Post by kahawe »

I think I missed something... basically it uses P2P instead of a central server that copies my data but doesn't that mean I am sending possibly private data all around the internet to other aero users, though encrypted?

Then isn't that the same situation we had in the DEFCON hacks: what keeps people from recording all your traffic and one fine day when the encryption is not secure anymore, they can simply decrypt it?

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#36

Post by aquark »

icebraining wrote: post #19
aquark wrote: post #7

I've been using the beta for several months now and it has worked great across a variety of Windows and Mac machines. For things like music and photos where I have 40+GB of accumulated bits it feels a better option than a straight cloud based system like DropBox or JungleDisk (which I also use, but for a smaller amount of stuff). I have a number of machines with many GB of spare disk space, so rather than paying mont…

>Since machines on the local network sync at LAN speeds it is also very fast in the usual case. On a LAN, I don't really see the advantages over something like FreeFileSync, which is GPL'd. Over the 'net, locating the machine and performing NAT traversal can be useful, though, especially for people behind ISP NAT.

I've never looked at (or heard of) FreeFileSync ... but AeroFS offers a very simple install and clean minimal UI for setting up the syncing.

I don't have to worry about which machine has which copy of which file, or even what the machine names are. I just login and can choose which 'Libraries' to sync with the local machine -- it handles finding the correct source, retrying when I close the laptop lid in the middle of something, etc, etc.

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#37

Post by nasmorn »

kahawe wrote: post #35

I think I missed something... basically it uses P2P instead of a central server that copies my data but doesn't that mean I am sending possibly private data all around the internet to other aero users, though encrypted? Then isn't that the same situation we had in the DEFCON hacks: what keeps people from recording all your traffic and one fine day when the encryption is not secure anymore, they can simply decrypt it?

If you want to share your data over the internet you kinda need to send it out at one time or another. This traffic can always be intercepted and stored for later use.

What is your point exactly?

Re: AeroFS - File Sync Without Servers

#39

Post by joeyespo »

mgw wrote: post #3

Beautiful homepage but there is an extra word in the paragraph "Unlimited Storage": "AeroFS lets you can sync all the data" Also I don't fully understand the product from just the first page. Who is your target audience?

Yeah that's an interesting choice of wording. I think unrestricted storage would have been more accurate. Unlimited does grab your attention though.
Post reply on HN