upvote
Same. Specifically I was considering Backblaze for our company’s backups (both products, computers and their bucket for server backups. That is no longer the case as of the news.
reply
Bidirectional auto file sync is a fundamentally broken pattern and I'm tired of pretending it's not. It's just complete chaos with wrong files constantly getting overridden on both ends.

I have no clue why people still use it and I'd cut my losses if I were you, either backup to the cloud or pull from it, not both at the same time like an absolute tictac.

reply
> I have no clue why people still use it

This is an instance of someone familiar with complex file access patterns not understanding the normal use case for these services.

The people using these bidirectional sync services want last writer wins behavior. The mild and moderately technical people I work with all get it and work with it. They know how to use the UI to look for old versions if someone accidentally overwrites their file.

Your characterization as complete chaos with constant problems does not mesh with the reality of the countless low-tech teams I've seen use Dropbox type services since they were launched.

reply
This would be half OK if it worked, but you can't trust it to. OneDrive, for instance, has an open bug for years now where it will randomly revert some of your files to a revision from several months earlier. You can detect and recover this from the history, but only if you know that it happened and where, which you usually won't because it happens silently. I only noticed because it happened to an append-only text file I use daily.
reply
Even crazier is one drive has a limit on the total length of a file path, how is this even a thing that exists.
reply
Unlimited strings are a problem. People will use it as storage.

No, I'm not joking. We used to allow arbitrary paths in a cloud API I owned. Within about a month someone had figured out that the cost to store a single byte file was effectively zero, and they could encode arbitrary files into the paths of those things. It wasn't too long before there was a library to do it on Github. We had to put limits on it because otherwise people would store their data in the path, not the file.

reply
I remember someone telling me that S3 used to be similarly abused - people were creating empty files and using S3 like a key-value store somehow, so AWS just jacked up the price of S3 head-object API call to push people back to DynamoDB or whatever.
reply
Just include filename size in file size for billing purposes?
reply
In the fine print, only to be used against bad actors (w/guarantee that filenames under x chars would never be charged), or that too problematic? building good faith into policy + "hiding" info...

Reason - to not overcomplicate or give appearance of nickel-and-diming

reply
No, just charge for the amount of storage they use on your server. Not the amount of data you think you’re storing. In non-special cases these will be the same number.
reply
What do you expect to happen when your cloud storage file path is 5000 characters long and your local filesystem only supports a maximum of 4096?
reply
Everything needs limits otherwise someone will figure out how to or accidentally break it.
reply
I also have no clue why people use it.

You can 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. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software.

reply
This reference is 19 years old this month, in case anyone who recognized it was still feeling young.
reply
noooooooooooo!!!!!!!!
reply
Wait a moment, you just gave me an idea for a product
reply
This cannot be a serious proposal. You should probably talk to people who don't use technology because they love it, but because they need it.
reply
1 out of a thousand people might do that, the others will buy the product. That's why people use it, most people don't want to build everything themselves.
reply
reply
But as usual it forgets the "For a Linux user" part.

If we remove the whole linux section and just ask "why not map a folder in Explorer" it's a reasonable question, probably even more reasonable in 2026 than in 2007. The network got faster and more reliable, and the dropbox access got slower.

reply
Obvious. Explorer even has support built in for transparent ‘native’ gui support. I’m not even sure why you felt the need to explain it in detail. Next you’ll be explaining how to walk. (/s, I loved it)
reply
Slow as fuck compared to 2 synced dirs
reply
It works perfectly fine if you're user that know how it works. I use it with Syncthing and it works coz I know to not edit same file at the same time on 2 devices (my third and fourth device is always on internet so chances propagate reasonably fast even if the 2 devices aren't on on the same time)

But the moment that hits normal users, yeah, mess

reply
I think this is a case of people using bidirectional file sync wrong. The point is to make the most up to date version of a file available across multiple devices, not to act as a backup or for collaboration between multiple users.

It works perfectly fine as long as you keep how it works in mind, and probably most importantly don't have multiple users working directly on the same file at once.

I've been using these systems for over a decade at this point and never had a problem. And if I ever do have one, my real backup solution has me covered.

reply
+1. It works perfectly if your mental model is:

“Every file is only ever written to from a single client, and will be asynchronously made available to all other clients, and after some period of time has elapsed you can safely switch to always writing to the file from a different client”.

reply
Bidirectional file sync is also in hot demand from people who don't know the words, "file", "client", "write", "async", "available", or "time"

:P

reply
The fact that lay people can and will use a tool incorrectly does not mean said tool is not useful
reply
> And if I ever do have one, my real backup solution has me covered.

What do you use and how do you test / reconcile to make sure it’s not missing files? I find OneDrive extremely hard to deal with because the backup systems don’t seem to be 100% reliable.

I think there are a lot of solutions these days that error on the side of claiming success.

reply
I agree. I use syncthing for syncing phones and laptops. For data like photos, which aren't really updated. It works very nice. And for documents updated by one user, moving between devices is totally seamless.

That being said i understand how it works at a high level.

reply
Throw some clock skew into the mix and it’s even more hilarious!
reply
Why is this downvoted?
reply
The insult to tictacs.
reply
[dead]
reply