In the coming months and years, we will see a large number of companies and users turning away from Microsoft – every week, I train dozens of people on Linux Zorin and Mint, and this development is unstoppable.
So, we need the Linux Proton Drive version 1 soon – it SELLS Proton :-)
And while we're at it, I have an additional and difficult request for version 2: why not make it as technically sophisticated as Dropbox?
1. Core Difference Between Dropbox and Most Other Drives
Dropbox stands out primarily because of the depth and maturity of its synchronization engine.
Compared to systems such as Nextcloud, Proton Drive, Google Drive, or Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox is heavily optimized for:
• Efficient block-level delta transfers
• Very low-latency filesystem event handling
• Transaction-safe updates
• Defensive and reliable conflict resolution
• Prioritized syncing of actively modified files
The difference is not primarily about collaboration features, but about synchronization robustness under active desktop workloads.
⸻
2. What Would Be Required to Reach That Level
To match Dropbox’s sync reliability, a vendor would need to:
• Implement true block-level delta synchronization
• Integrate deeply with OS-level filesystem change tracking
• Introduce atomic, transaction-like handling of file updates
• Strengthen conflict detection and resolution logic
• Implement intelligent sync prioritization for active working sets
This is mainly a client-engine architecture challenge rather than a server-side feature addition.
⸻
3. Broader Benefits
A more advanced sync architecture would improve:
• Reliability for large and complex project directories
• Stability under rapid, continuous edits
• Data integrity in multi-device workflows
• Reduction of corruption risks
• Overall predictability in professional desktop environments
The primary gain is not new functionality, but higher determinism, resilience, and trust in distributed file synchronization.
Clemens
In the coming months and years, we will see a large number of companies and users turning away from Microsoft – every week, I train dozens of people on Linux Zorin and Mint, and this development is unstoppable.
So, we need the Linux Proton Drive version 1 soon – it SELLS Proton :-)
And while we're at it, I have an additional and difficult request for version 2: why not make it as technically sophisticated as Dropbox?
1. Core Difference Between Dropbox and Most Other Drives
Dropbox stands out primarily because of the depth and maturity of its synchronization engine.
Compared to systems such as Nextcloud, Proton Drive, Google Drive, or Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox is heavily optimized for:
• Efficient block-level delta transfers
• Very low-latency filesystem event handling
• Transaction-safe updates
• Defensive and reliable conflict resolution
• Prioritized syncing of actively modified files
The difference is not primarily about collaboration features, but about synchronization robustness under active desktop workloads.
⸻
2. What Would Be Required to Reach That Level
To match Dropbox’s sync reliability, a vendor would need to:
• Implement true block-level delta synchronization
• Integrate deeply with OS-level filesystem change tracking
• Introduce atomic, transaction-like handling of file updates
• Strengthen conflict detection and resolution logic
• Implement intelligent sync prioritization for active working sets
This is mainly a client-engine architecture challenge rather than a server-side feature addition.
⸻
3. Broader Benefits
A more advanced sync architecture would improve:
• Reliability for large and complex project directories
• Stability under rapid, continuous edits
• Data integrity in multi-device workflows
• Reduction of corruption risks
• Overall predictability in professional desktop environments
The primary gain is not new functionality, but higher determinism, resilience, and trust in distributed file synchronization.