I'm using this for about 6 months now. It works exactly like Dropbox, but it doesn't store any data on a central server, so I can use it even for my more sensitive files like my ssh private key.

I have a server at home on which AeroFS is running, so my data generally is available. And if my internet at home is down, usually there's another machine where it's running.

As it's syncing and keeping the local copy, the most current data will be on the machine I'm working on anyways.

The installation feels a bit "heavier" than dropbox which does a better job at staying out of my way, but the advantages of next to unlimited storage and no third-party server are huge for me.

AeroFS isn't as refined as Dropbox, but the flexibility of cross-computer sync makes it pretty ideal for large media storage. I have almost 200GB of photos, and dropbox really wasn't an option for that. They release updates to the product every few weeks, so it's getting better.

Gripes: 1- It's a lot chattier than dropbox. This could be a tradeoff for being a distributed protocol, but it's something that dropbox seemed to improve in over time as well. 2- Iffy compatibility with Lion: I often get "AeroFS is already running" messages. 3- They recently added the needed ability to change the location of the AeroFS Library, but I'd love to modify the location of each Share in the Library. 4- This is likely beyond the project's scope, but I'd love to be able to access my files without syncing in a pinch. 5- Better activity view: Dropbox's menu icon changes to indicate activity. I find this useful, so I can shut it off if my connection is slow. AeroFS's icon doesn't change, and to view activity, you need to open Preferences.

Positives: 1- Unrestricted size, great for large media libraries 2- Seems very fast, especially over LAN 3- I love how you can set up multiple shares - one for a workgroup, one for personal projects, and one for photos, and you can sync those among any computers you want. 4- It makes offsite backup effortless 5- Auto-updates are great

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 monthly storage fees for back up, I can just use this to replicate rarely changing content. Since machines on the local network sync at LAN speeds it is also very fast in the usual case.

Good morning everyone, I'm one of the co-founders of AeroFS. I'll be here the rest of the day answering questions as they come up, if anyone has them. Otherwise, feel free to either chat with me on the website, and/or through support@aerofs.com :-)

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.

One day, I will love AeroFS. But that day is not yet today: AeroFS does not preserve file modification times across clients, which kills it for me.

On the bright side, I finally got around to setting up Unison + cron to keep files in sync between my MacBook Air and my MacBook Pro, and it's working quite well. I'd highly recommend it to anyone facing a similar challenge.

This sounds very similar to Microsoft's LiveMesh. Besides that fact that it's not Microsoft, what are the big differences in functionality or usability (or is it totally different)?

This looks very interesting, but the it's a bit difficult to figure out what it actually is from the website. My impression is that it's like a more featureful take on Unison ("two-way rsync" iirc) with a central server to facilitate NAT traversal.

I suppose they probably haven't figured out their eventual pricing model, but I'd certainly pay a few bucks a month just for coordinating NAT traversal, papering over dynamic IPs and a web interface to set sync policy. For the most part, when my computers are sync'd peer-to-peer, I really don't need or want a copy of my data in the cloud -- my boxes _are_ the cloud. That means that their typical incremental cost per user would be practically zero.

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?

I see it more suitable for techies than normals. For instance I can't imagine explaining to my wife or sister that their files won't sync and they can lose something if the other machine went offline but when it came back they have already switched off the first one :(

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 guess I'm just old school, but my solution to this problem has been a 250 GB external drive + CVS for all my files. I've been doing it for years and it works great. Every time I leave a machine, it's just 'cvs commit -m "Leaving home/work/library/Starbucks"'. Once you get past the perverse feeling of checking your music library into CVS, it works fine.

AeroFS looks like an interesting service, I remember reading the earlier entry about them and their blog (i think it was on posterous at the time).

It reminded me of two projects --

Wuala which allowed seemless syncing between machines, as well as donating storage to gain the benefit of "cloud storage" for your files. They eventually went the route of offering storage space and got bought by Lacie.

The second is much older (mid/earlyish 90s) that had the same p2p based donate space on your drive and fragments of your files will be stored on other connected machines.

The sharing and other similar features will be interesting to see how those are implemented.

Our whole company has been using AeroFS exclusively for our network drives, and it's worked extremely well! It's great because we can share files of any size, and it seamlessly updates between all machines.

Anyone know if it supports lazy syncing? i.e. if I have a big beefy server with a couple hundred gigs of media, and I would like to be able to access individual files occasionally from my small laptop, am I forced to sync everything over because the folder is shared?

I am using it as well ... really fast & light weight :) - If you are in work environment, updates happen almost real time across your team.

Only if they had option to have different path for each libraries.

I see they have a Linux version. Is it Open Source?

Echoing joelthelion, I wonder: is this just a service selling you access to Tahoe-LAFS? If so, wouldn't it make more sense to just install Tahoe yourself instead of paying them and worrying about whether their version of the code is less secure than the publicly audited version?

(Actually, even if not. Why would you pay someone to have access to your own files on your own computer?)

love it, love it, love it. Please don't go out of business :) Related to going out of business - I'd like to start paying something monthly to support, please add that option

git annex might be of interest to some:

http://git-annex.branchable.com/

http://julien.danjou.info/blog/2011.html#Handling_my_music_c...

There's a nice big "Download Now" button that leads to a "Sign Up for an Invite" page that says "as soon as we can". That button causes the expectation that I would download something immediately so it's disappointing and discourteous when that's not the case.

I can't figure out if at allows seeding backups.

E.g. - backing up your first massive backup locally using an external drive, then moving it physically offsite and beginning the sync online.

That seems like a fantastic feature to me. That way, instead of having - say - a photo library on each of my laptops - I can have a single photo library at a remote location on an external hard drive that's constantly synched with new photos, without the need to upload hundreds of GB in an initial seed.

Plus - of course - being able to access any of my photos from anywhere.

Crashplan offers something similar - but it's purely a backup solution - and doesn't make your files "cloud-like" accessible.

Theory is great, BUT if it isn't storing anything, then at least one device/computer with an up-to-date version of the folder must be online at all times. Is that correct? If not how does it sync without storing the data remotely?

I signed up for this ages ago. I tried it for a while, and then ditched it. IIRC it didn't have support for one of my operating systems at the time. My requirements have changed now, and it's been a while, so I just went to the website to download the app again, and I can't find it anywhere. The download link just goes to an invite page. I still have my credentials, but I can't log in with them, because there is no login form. Or at least it is hidden...

It definitely looks cool. I assume when the cloud backup option is avaiailable you can choose what to back up? Can you choose which folders are synched on a folder-by-folder basis (since I don't need my 500GB photo library on my mac laptop, but I do want it on y desktops)? Hopefully there is a version that works on Windows Server 2008/2011? This would kick butt on the mac app store. Invite requested...

it looks like they ultimately will charge for cloud backup (just like dropbox). As you note, the incremental cost of user is zero, so they don't incur a cost by distributing lots of client applications (unlike dropbox, who incurs costs for free customers that use the <2GB plan). it will be interesting to see if dropbox responds. I like the model aerofs proposes. I'm a dropbox user but I use it entirely for the file syncing across three machines - I've only once used the web access to my files (i.e. only once used the cloud storage that aerofs would not provide). If AeroFS has the same usability as dropbox, I would switch to get more storage for free.

If you select the learn more link, you can see that they have basically built a P2P distributed files storage system.

I also don't understand from the website if this is a real filesystem (mounts in the namespace of the OS, works with any program etc) or o userspace utility, something like an explorer/finder plugin.

Can anyone shed some light on that? Thanks.