Change Beta to Beta or farewell to Live Mesh
Instead of the preface
A few years ago, having connected a local network to the office, we, as a team of design engineers using Autocad, Inventor, 3dsMax, celebrated the transition to a new level of interaction, when the entire database for work began to be stored in one place.
Yesterday it was an office with a local network, today it is local Wi-fi networks in every home, but years have passed and, like in those days, we again face the same task - to debug the interaction mechanism of the team that is scattered around the world today, Works with large projects with thousands of files, where files sometimes weigh around a gigabyte. And if through mail, chat rooms, forums, Facebook, Google Groups, Google Wave, etc. we somehow learned how to coordinate the general work, then create a fully functioning network for exchanging project information, building shared file libraries, and managing projects — we have not succeeded so far.
In the search for free, reliable and convenient services, we tried a lot of offers, including Box , DropBox , Syncplicity , Skydrive , Live Sync, Live Mesh , etc., and now it seemed that we felt a more or less working version, as we were pleased with the news that Live Mesh is being closed and instead of it, alternative Live Sync service is imposed, which, as it turned out, brings us only disappointments.
')
Next, I will talk about how we found a way to solve our applied problems of building a collaborate system for engineering projects with reference to the advantages and disadvantages of existing online services for synchronizing and storing files in the clouds.
Searching of decisions
The specificity of the team’s work on the engineering project is such that we have thousands of project files that are changed by different team members in different places (Russia, Israel, Mongolia, etc.) and all this has to be synchronized between everyone, duplicated, and allow everyone to work offline.
While searching, we met with various types of such services:
1. File sharing
It is clear that all kinds of file sharing, such as Rapidshare, iFolder categorically and immediately disappeared. These services are good only for storing large amounts of static information online that is not subject to change and is only suitable for downloading. In addition, if they are free, then the storage is temporary and with a lot of restrictions.
2. Online flash drives
Such attractive, at first glance, services like Skydrive with free 25GB (and 125 in the form of 5 combined Hotmail accounts) were also not in the lot. It is tempting, a lot of space, you can upload a bunch of files, but the main drawback of such services is that the files are static, they need to be downloaded and uploaded separately, you need a constant connection to the Internet. Although there are all sorts of services, such as Gladinet or SDExplorer , which allow you to create virtual disks or directories in your computer and exchange with the online storage, but in fact it all works very slowly, with interruptions, require a permanent connection to the Internet. In addition, they will close such a service and forgive the files, unless you specifically make sure that they are still duplicated on the computer.
3. Online synchronizers
Online synchronizers, such as Live Sync, which until recently was a separate Windows Live service, are a big plus in the fact that they practically do not limit us in the amount of disk space for synchronization, since they do not store files in the online storage, but only synchronize folders of different computers, which can be connected a lot to such a network.
But, the main drawback is that computers must be constantly on the network, but if we missed such a synchronization session, many problems arise with the version of the files, which, in practice, cannot be resolved later, because it takes a lot of time and attention.
In addition, Live Sync constantly had a lot of problems with the Firewall, to the extent that everyone had to turn off the Firewall for a short time so that the synchronization was successful.
4. Online storage with synchronization
but. Box, Syncplicity and DropBox
Progressive were such services as Box , Syncplicity and DropBox . When we found out about them, we felt relieved. However, these services also have a lot of application limitations for the work of the team.
For example, Box and Syncplicity allow you to synchronize only 2-3 computers for free. DropBox works most favorably on their background, which allows you to synchronize 10 computers, which is already suitable for the average team. This is a big plus.
But the main problem of all such services is that they are limited in scope for free accounts, or they are expensive when it comes to teamwork.
For example, DropBox limits the amount of exchanges through shared folders. That is, when sharing folders, the receiving party must have enough free space in the online storage. For example, if someone offers me a shared 1 GB file, while my storage is full, I won’t be able to get it.
This is where the problem arises, we can’t buy a paid account in a sly way and share it for everyone. You have to pay the whole team for their accounts. For example, for $ 1,000 a year, you will have the same 50GB of storage for sharing between 10 computers. Is it too?
But we are inventive people and have found a way to ride DropBox. You can not buy an account and share it, but you can buy an account and use it for everyone! We did not share anything, just all set up the agent program for one account. As a result, our 10 computers are synchronized in one 50GB account.
For $ 100 50GB, which is 10 times cheaper than the "frontal approach." Then for $ 200 you can buy 100GB (and this is still the limit), which is 5 times cheaper and the volume is 2 times more than everyone has their own account.
The disadvantage is that this is a shared account and for those who want to have private folders it is not suitable. But the main advantage of such services is their reliability - information is duplicated on many computers and, if the service ceases to exist, the information will remain on computers. Also, the failure of any computer on the network is not fatal.
b. Live Mesh vs. Live sync
A more advanced analogue of DropBox is the Live Mesh service, at least it was until recently, and then we were glad that it would cease to exist and is already included in the updated service Live Sync and Skydrive.
We started using it six months ago and got a lot of advantages. This service gives 5GB of free online storage, allows you to synchronize many devices. Given the drawbacks of DropBox for teamwork, this is a real alternative.
For example, the alternative is that shared folders increase the amount of shared storage. If you create multiple accounts on Hotmail and share them all on team members, then the total amount will be equal to the number of accounts * per 5GB. We made sure that everyone had their own 5GB personal accounts (for personal purposes) and created more than 15 service accounts, which gave us free 75GB of disk space for exchange. So you can create at least how many (did not check?) New accounts and add them to the amount of shared storage. Or in general, you can open a new account for each project.
If you do not take into account the delay in synchronization and its slow speed (we’ll write it on Beta), then this service could be considered an ideal solution for team work.
However, the news of the closure of this service upset us.
Not only is it closed, we were not given the opportunity to flexibly switch to a new Live Sync, which not only was cut to 2GB, but also did not make it possible to transfer already stored files from Live Mesh.
It causes indignation that this is the same Microsoft, but there is no connection between these services. It all starts with a beautiful installation of Windows Live Wave 4, which removes the installed Live Mesh agent program from your computer and installs Live Sync.
When you find that the connection of the file base with the online storage is lost, you get bewildered. When you discover that there is no plug-in for transferring already uploaded gigs from Live Mesh to the updated SkyDrive - you are already beginning to get angry and cover Microsoft in righteous rage.
Then, in despair, you put the Live Mesh agent on top again and both services start to work. And according to rumors, we still have half a year left to collect our manatki and leave Live Mesh for Live Sync + Skydrive. How it will be, wait and see. In the meantime, let's see what Beta on Beta we traded.
At the first review, it became clear that the 2GB that we were given is another Skydrive storage, which is in no way connected to the Skydrive, which is 25GB. Files that are synchronized there cannot be transferred between repositories. Apparently, Microsoft decided to wind up its traffic, artificially cutting off the connection between Skidrive 25, Skydrive 2 and Live Mesh 5. Either they have corporate competitions there and some design teams struggle with others for the championship, leaving users to rake their Beta deficiencies: there is not a slider, how much is left to wait until the synchronization is complete, nor is there a convenient manager for managing permissions and this is only on the surface, I haven’t noticed any increase in speed, the time delays are the same as Live Mesh.
I even noticed that office files uploaded to Skydrive 2 do not always open online for editing in the new Web Office Online, but from Skydrive 25 they open. In general, they have there, in Microsoft, not everything is in order.
I am glad that, as before, the shared folders are summarized in the total volume, but now not 5, but 2 GB each. If you need to have 100 Hotmail accounts, then let's go for it.
Working model
Summing up, you can delineate the working model. Considering all the advantages and disadvantages of the services examined and tested in a hard operating mode, we built the following model for ourselves:
1. For operational work that requires instant exchange between all team members, DropBox is the most suitable service with a clever way to use it, as discussed above - one paid account for all team members attached to it.
2. For long-term work and storage of large amounts of information, Live Mesh fit perfectly with a series of service accounts shared as root folders for all team members.
Apparently, the only alternative to it will be Live Sync + Skydrive 2GB with the same series of accounts (although you don’t have to create new ones!) Shared as root folders for all team members.
After operational work, the project is transferred to storage in Live (Mesh or Sync) and the team continues to work on DropBox, which synchronizes it between all without delay.
Afterword
One can only hope that we have not traded Beta to Beta in the sense that it sounds in the well-known saying and that the internal mess of software monsters will not lead users again to a dreary search, debugging and adaptation of imperfect, greedy and temporary services for a much-needed area like organization collaborate repositories
Wait and see.
A few years ago, having connected a local network to the office, we, as a team of design engineers using Autocad, Inventor, 3dsMax, celebrated the transition to a new level of interaction, when the entire database for work began to be stored in one place.
Yesterday it was an office with a local network, today it is local Wi-fi networks in every home, but years have passed and, like in those days, we again face the same task - to debug the interaction mechanism of the team that is scattered around the world today, Works with large projects with thousands of files, where files sometimes weigh around a gigabyte. And if through mail, chat rooms, forums, Facebook, Google Groups, Google Wave, etc. we somehow learned how to coordinate the general work, then create a fully functioning network for exchanging project information, building shared file libraries, and managing projects — we have not succeeded so far.
In the search for free, reliable and convenient services, we tried a lot of offers, including Box , DropBox , Syncplicity , Skydrive , Live Sync, Live Mesh , etc., and now it seemed that we felt a more or less working version, as we were pleased with the news that Live Mesh is being closed and instead of it, alternative Live Sync service is imposed, which, as it turned out, brings us only disappointments.
')
Next, I will talk about how we found a way to solve our applied problems of building a collaborate system for engineering projects with reference to the advantages and disadvantages of existing online services for synchronizing and storing files in the clouds.
Searching of decisions
The specificity of the team’s work on the engineering project is such that we have thousands of project files that are changed by different team members in different places (Russia, Israel, Mongolia, etc.) and all this has to be synchronized between everyone, duplicated, and allow everyone to work offline.
While searching, we met with various types of such services:
1. File sharing
It is clear that all kinds of file sharing, such as Rapidshare, iFolder categorically and immediately disappeared. These services are good only for storing large amounts of static information online that is not subject to change and is only suitable for downloading. In addition, if they are free, then the storage is temporary and with a lot of restrictions.
2. Online flash drives
Such attractive, at first glance, services like Skydrive with free 25GB (and 125 in the form of 5 combined Hotmail accounts) were also not in the lot. It is tempting, a lot of space, you can upload a bunch of files, but the main drawback of such services is that the files are static, they need to be downloaded and uploaded separately, you need a constant connection to the Internet. Although there are all sorts of services, such as Gladinet or SDExplorer , which allow you to create virtual disks or directories in your computer and exchange with the online storage, but in fact it all works very slowly, with interruptions, require a permanent connection to the Internet. In addition, they will close such a service and forgive the files, unless you specifically make sure that they are still duplicated on the computer.
3. Online synchronizers
Online synchronizers, such as Live Sync, which until recently was a separate Windows Live service, are a big plus in the fact that they practically do not limit us in the amount of disk space for synchronization, since they do not store files in the online storage, but only synchronize folders of different computers, which can be connected a lot to such a network.
But, the main drawback is that computers must be constantly on the network, but if we missed such a synchronization session, many problems arise with the version of the files, which, in practice, cannot be resolved later, because it takes a lot of time and attention.
In addition, Live Sync constantly had a lot of problems with the Firewall, to the extent that everyone had to turn off the Firewall for a short time so that the synchronization was successful.
4. Online storage with synchronization
but. Box, Syncplicity and DropBox
Progressive were such services as Box , Syncplicity and DropBox . When we found out about them, we felt relieved. However, these services also have a lot of application limitations for the work of the team.
For example, Box and Syncplicity allow you to synchronize only 2-3 computers for free. DropBox works most favorably on their background, which allows you to synchronize 10 computers, which is already suitable for the average team. This is a big plus.
But the main problem of all such services is that they are limited in scope for free accounts, or they are expensive when it comes to teamwork.
For example, DropBox limits the amount of exchanges through shared folders. That is, when sharing folders, the receiving party must have enough free space in the online storage. For example, if someone offers me a shared 1 GB file, while my storage is full, I won’t be able to get it.
This is where the problem arises, we can’t buy a paid account in a sly way and share it for everyone. You have to pay the whole team for their accounts. For example, for $ 1,000 a year, you will have the same 50GB of storage for sharing between 10 computers. Is it too?
But we are inventive people and have found a way to ride DropBox. You can not buy an account and share it, but you can buy an account and use it for everyone! We did not share anything, just all set up the agent program for one account. As a result, our 10 computers are synchronized in one 50GB account.
For $ 100 50GB, which is 10 times cheaper than the "frontal approach." Then for $ 200 you can buy 100GB (and this is still the limit), which is 5 times cheaper and the volume is 2 times more than everyone has their own account.
The disadvantage is that this is a shared account and for those who want to have private folders it is not suitable. But the main advantage of such services is their reliability - information is duplicated on many computers and, if the service ceases to exist, the information will remain on computers. Also, the failure of any computer on the network is not fatal.
b. Live Mesh vs. Live sync
A more advanced analogue of DropBox is the Live Mesh service, at least it was until recently, and then we were glad that it would cease to exist and is already included in the updated service Live Sync and Skydrive.
We started using it six months ago and got a lot of advantages. This service gives 5GB of free online storage, allows you to synchronize many devices. Given the drawbacks of DropBox for teamwork, this is a real alternative.
For example, the alternative is that shared folders increase the amount of shared storage. If you create multiple accounts on Hotmail and share them all on team members, then the total amount will be equal to the number of accounts * per 5GB. We made sure that everyone had their own 5GB personal accounts (for personal purposes) and created more than 15 service accounts, which gave us free 75GB of disk space for exchange. So you can create at least how many (did not check?) New accounts and add them to the amount of shared storage. Or in general, you can open a new account for each project.
If you do not take into account the delay in synchronization and its slow speed (we’ll write it on Beta), then this service could be considered an ideal solution for team work.
However, the news of the closure of this service upset us.
Not only is it closed, we were not given the opportunity to flexibly switch to a new Live Sync, which not only was cut to 2GB, but also did not make it possible to transfer already stored files from Live Mesh.
It causes indignation that this is the same Microsoft, but there is no connection between these services. It all starts with a beautiful installation of Windows Live Wave 4, which removes the installed Live Mesh agent program from your computer and installs Live Sync.
When you find that the connection of the file base with the online storage is lost, you get bewildered. When you discover that there is no plug-in for transferring already uploaded gigs from Live Mesh to the updated SkyDrive - you are already beginning to get angry and cover Microsoft in righteous rage.
Then, in despair, you put the Live Mesh agent on top again and both services start to work. And according to rumors, we still have half a year left to collect our manatki and leave Live Mesh for Live Sync + Skydrive. How it will be, wait and see. In the meantime, let's see what Beta on Beta we traded.
At the first review, it became clear that the 2GB that we were given is another Skydrive storage, which is in no way connected to the Skydrive, which is 25GB. Files that are synchronized there cannot be transferred between repositories. Apparently, Microsoft decided to wind up its traffic, artificially cutting off the connection between Skidrive 25, Skydrive 2 and Live Mesh 5. Either they have corporate competitions there and some design teams struggle with others for the championship, leaving users to rake their Beta deficiencies: there is not a slider, how much is left to wait until the synchronization is complete, nor is there a convenient manager for managing permissions and this is only on the surface, I haven’t noticed any increase in speed, the time delays are the same as Live Mesh.
I even noticed that office files uploaded to Skydrive 2 do not always open online for editing in the new Web Office Online, but from Skydrive 25 they open. In general, they have there, in Microsoft, not everything is in order.
I am glad that, as before, the shared folders are summarized in the total volume, but now not 5, but 2 GB each. If you need to have 100 Hotmail accounts, then let's go for it.
Working model
Summing up, you can delineate the working model. Considering all the advantages and disadvantages of the services examined and tested in a hard operating mode, we built the following model for ourselves:
1. For operational work that requires instant exchange between all team members, DropBox is the most suitable service with a clever way to use it, as discussed above - one paid account for all team members attached to it.
2. For long-term work and storage of large amounts of information, Live Mesh fit perfectly with a series of service accounts shared as root folders for all team members.
Apparently, the only alternative to it will be Live Sync + Skydrive 2GB with the same series of accounts (although you don’t have to create new ones!) Shared as root folders for all team members.
After operational work, the project is transferred to storage in Live (Mesh or Sync) and the team continues to work on DropBox, which synchronizes it between all without delay.
Afterword
One can only hope that we have not traded Beta to Beta in the sense that it sounds in the well-known saying and that the internal mess of software monsters will not lead users again to a dreary search, debugging and adaptation of imperfect, greedy and temporary services for a much-needed area like organization collaborate repositories
Wait and see.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/98042/
All Articles