MobileMe vs Dropbox Redux

In my last post I talked about using Apple's MobileMe to mimic the functionality of Dropbox, and discussed it as a possible replacement for the file syncing service should I ever need more space than the free Dropbox offers. In the end, both services came up wanting to some extent. So I've continued to poke and observe.

The Mobile Situation

I had initially found MobileMe problematic, especially compared to Dropbox, and especially when dealing with, of all things, Mac-specific metadata. But it turns out that Dropbox is not without its own problems either. In fact, after looking more closely at my Dropbox data, not only are my custom icons and labels missing on one of my computer's Dropbox folders, but a good many of my image files, for some reason, don't display properly on my iPhone (or, for that matter, on an iPad I've had the good fortune to test out — more on that later) when viewed from the mobile Dropbox app.

The images seem fine on my computer, and when viewed from the web, but when viewed or downloaded to my iPhone they are corrupted, so it would seem to be a problem with how they're downloaded to the mobile app only, not corrupt data per se. Nevertheless, it's a problem.

Moreover, it's problem I don't have with MobileMe. The same images viewed on my iDisk app look fantastic.

Behavior-wise, though, I much prefer the Dropbox app. As I'd mentioned in my last post, it's capable of displaying text files with the .sh extension. But it's also a lot more friendly when it comes to viewing and managing images. Dropbox, for instance, allows you to use the swipe gesture to flip between images that are in the same folder, much like you can do in the native Photos app; iDisk doesn't. It also has a gallery view for image folders that iDisk lacks.

Dropbox allows you to create folders and add photos from your phone to your Dropbox; iDisk doesn't. iDisk, on the other hand, does allow you to share a file right from the mobile app, but this is something I never do, so it's not particularly useful to me. Dropbox's features are useful, and are ones I use all the time.

The Dropbox app is the clear winner in terms of behavior; I much prefer it. But it doesn't do me much good if my images don't display properly. Dropbox fails on a core piece of functionality, and that makes it hard to fully recommend if photos are your game.

Decisions, Decisions

I find myself ping-ponging between MobileMe and Dropbox: Dropbox is simple and easy to use, but MobileMe includes more features; Dropbox lets me read my shell scripts from it's mobile app, but MobileMe lets me view my photos more reliably. Overall, I like Dropbox better, but the image issue is quite possibly a deal killer.

Find My iPhone

Apple recently announced that iOS 4.2 will include the Find My iPhone service for free with the current crop of hardware. Though I'm still using an iPhone 3GS, I will almost certainly purchase the next revision of the phone, and that will probably be right around the time that my MobileMe subscription is set to expire. Since Find My iPhone is one of the few reasons I've continued to hang on to my MobileMe subscription, I'm seriously debating not renewing it when the time comes. My foray into Apple's cloud services has been largely disappointing. If Dropbox can fix this image issue by that time, it will make this decision a no-brainer.

It's a shame, really. Everywhere the iPhone shines, MobileMe falls down. Where my iPhone instantly allowed me to consolidate my Mac and mobile data (remember when your Address Book and phone contacts were completely separate?) MobileMe seems to offer a Mac-specific service that's easily replaced by free and more cross-platform solutions. Mail, contacts and calendar can all be provided better and for free by Google. And there are much better, faster and cheaper ways to get synchronized data storage and backup. What's more, I already give Apple most of the money in my technology budget, so I can't help feeling cheated when I have to fork over additional green for these services.

So, while not perfect in some really key areas, I will likely end up giving my money, this time, to Dropbox. Here's hoping they continue to improve their excellent, if not quite perfect, service.

UPDATE:

One other admittedly very minor beef I have with Dropbox that I just have to get off my chest: if you want gallery functionality, the folder used for images must be called "Photos." As a person who uses this folder almost exculsively for either drawings or computer graphics, I'd prefer something more neutral. iDisk uses the word "Pictures" which I much prefer.

Mobile Me vs. Dropbox

So I've been using Dropbox for quite some time now and I've been extremely pleased with it. It keeps my stuff in sync, and I don't have to even think about it. And that's what you want from a service like Dropbox: seamlessness; ease-of-use; freedom from worry.

I'm using the free version, so I only get 2GB of storage. This has been plenty for me so far, but I often wonder about what I should do if I ever hit that limit.

I've also been using Mobile Me for just over a year. I mainly got it to tinker with, as well as for the off chance that I should someday lose my iPhone. In addition to the various things you can do with MobileMe — none of which I ever actually do, it turns out — you get 10GB of disk space on your WebDav-connected iDisk, and this can be synced to any computer you sign on to much like your Dropbox account is synced. So I've been tempted to replace Dropbox with MobileMe, since I'm paying for it anyway. Before going ahead with a dedicated switch, though, I thought I'd give it a try for a while first. See how it stacks up against Dropbox.

It turns out — and this will probably come as no surprise to current MobileMe subscribers — that the iDisk functionality is problematic for a number of reasons.

First of all, MobileMe occasionally tells me that there is a sync conflict, despite the fact that I've told it to always keep the latest version of a file. This is something you never see with Dropbox. Ever. I'm not sure how the two services differ in terms of their syncing algorithms, but Dropbox definitely has the edge.

But perhaps more disturbing is the fact that MobileMe — an Apple-hosted service, mind you — doesn't seem to be able to retain Mac-specific data on certain files synced to iDisk. Case in point: Remember when I told you about adding icons to your Services to make them clearer and prettier? Well, I wanted to store those Services in the cloud for easy access from any computer. When I copied them to my local iDisk, everything appeared to be just fine.

But as soon as the sync began, the icons and labels all started disappearing.

In the end, MobileMe stripped off all the labels and icons from my files.

I'm not sure why Apple's own file syncing service is incapable of handling Mac-specific data, but this works just fine using Dropbox. And Dropbox wins on seamlessness too. So if I ever do have to spend some money on this, that money will be going to Dropbox. It really is a terrific, versatile service, and it's very Mac-compatible.

UPDATE:

Another advantage that Dropbox has over iDisk is its iPhone app. Both let you read documents directly from the online storage, but Dropbox is actually smarter about file types, particularly when it comes to text files. The iDisk app on iPhone will not allow me to read text files that end with the .sh suffix (or, I'd wager, any text file that doesn't end with .txt), saying that the file type is not supported.

Dropbox for iPhone, on the other hand, will recognize those files as text files and display them as such.

This is a big deal for me because one of the main uses I have for these services is constant access to my scripts in the field. They're essentially my shell scripting field reference. But unless they have a .txt suffix, MobileMe's iDisk for iPhone just won't display them.

UPDATE 2:

It turns out that Dropbox isn't perfect with regards to extended attributes after all. While my Dropbox files on my work machine do seem to retain the labels and icons, the same files at home lack these attributes.

Despite these discrepancies, Dropbox considers these files properly synced. Without the reliable retention of icon data, I will not be able to store my icons using Dropbox's service. And the fact that my home and work Dropbox folders are inconsistent does a great deal to reduce my confidence in the overall reliability of the service. Big ticks in Dropbox's CON column, if you ask me. Bummer.

As per one reader's suggestion, I think I will go ahead and try SugarSync.

A Few Surprises

First off, I had no idea that the Mac OS X 10.6.4 update affected Mail. Probably because Apple never bothered to mention it in the release notes. Nonetheless, this greets me after launching Mail post-update:

I'm also surprised at how much I'm liking iBooks for my iPhone. There are tons of free, interesting-sounding books, and it's great to have these handy when I just need a little something to keep me occupied. It also lets me read PDFs, which is awesome.

But maybe the biggest surprise with iBooks is that if I want to sync my books to my computer I'll have to delete all the songs, movies and TV shows from my iPhone:

Hmmm... That seems awful drastic. I think I'll pass.

If anyone knows how to sync my books to my computer — and what I might do with them once I have them on there — let me know. For now I think I'll forego deleting all my data.

And check out iBooks. It's surprisingly good.

A Day Without Firefox

I'm not sure I'm ready to ditch Firefox. In fact, on my home system I have no need to. It does everything I need and is reasonably fast and responsive enough.

But at work it's another story. Because at work I'm relegated to using old, outdated PPC hardware. For most of the work I've been doing lately — mainly programming and web development, of all things, which mostly amounts to the editing of various kinds of text files — this has been perfectly adequate. Where I suffer most is in the browser. Firefox, whose functionality and flexibility I love, just dies a horrid death on slower kit. And this has me looking for alternatives at work.

Chrome is out, of course, because it only runs on Intel boxes, and for some reason it always crashes my home system in serious ways I don't understand. So I've been steering clear of it, though I do like it a lot in theory.

But Safari 5, with its new extensions functionality and its blazing speed, offers hope. I started off as a Safari user, but ended up moving to Firefox way back when I needed certain web app functionality that broke in Apple's browser. But, over the years, Safari has matured. Safari 5 looks to be a possible contender for my main browser, especially at work. But since it runs well on both PPC and Intel Macs, I could also, theoretically, use the same setup across machines.

So I've decided to spend the day using Safari — and only Safari, no Firefox allowed — to see how she fares. So far, I have to say I'm impressed. Many of the features I simply can't live without have already been mitigated by the appearance of extensions. There is already an extension for restoring your browsing session after a relaunch. Nice!

In addition, I'm also enjoying some extensions that I don't have on Firefox. Namely Gmail Checker, which keeps a button in my toolbar to notify me of any new Gmail. I like this a lot!

I'd be surprised if there weren't something similar for Firefox out there, but a quick search doesn't yield quite what I'm looking for.

Anyway, I published my initial observations on Safari 5 last week. Here are some more after using it exclusively for a day.

What I Like:

  • Fast! Even with many many tabs, and on PPC hardware, Safari 5 ususally stays very responsive.
  • Keyboard commands work great.
  • Extensions really improve functionality and there are lots already. I'm using:
  • Safari's Autofill is pretty nifty and I'll use it because it uses Keychain, which I trust. Though I do prefer Firefox's ability to remember only usernames, and not passwords by default.
  • Gmail Checker is fantastic. It lets me keep Gmail closed — before I always kept it open in a tab — while still allowing me to stay on top of new emails. This means I don't have to constantly check the Gmail tab, since I'm always looking at the browser and the indicator, a bright red badge, is readily visible from any tab and the button opens Gmail when you want it. It really cuts down on the distraction of email and helps me focus on what I'm doing. A very unexpected perk. I find myself thinking about — okay, obsessing — far less about email.
  • So far all my web-apps work just fine.
  • I'm really enjoying having a native browser again.
  • I'm looking forward to being able to use some of the built-in OS features like the dictionary and text snippets.
  • I also like the fact that Safari supports h.264. I feel it's the wave of the future.
  • I really like Safari's built-in Developer functionality. It's much better integrated than Firebug for Firefox.

What I Don't Like:

  • So far there's very little I dislike about Safari 5.
  • One thing I'll miss at this point is Firefox's Delicious functionality, which originates from a very nifty plugin that allows the browser full access to your Delicious bookmarks. I've really enjoyed this, but I find myself using it less and less. And it's very possible we'll see this sort of thing in Safari now that there are extensions.
  • What I'll miss most will probably be Firefox's Sync (nee Weave) plugin, which allows you to sync your bookmarks, tabs, passwords — everything and anything in your current browsing session — to the cloud and across computers. At home but need a tab you had open at work? No problem; it's synced. It's very nice.
  • I also sympathize with the Mozilla crew on the h.264 front. I agree with them, philosophically, on the matter. But the practical fact of the matter is, h.264 is here now and it's very good. There simply are no good alternatives. While I understand Mozilla's point, and I almost feel that they have to stick by there guns on it because it's who they are, I worry that it will ultimately render Firefox obsolete. Still, part of me wishes Firefox could win on this issue.
  • I may miss AdBlocker somewhat as well, though to be honest, I only used it to speed up Firefox's shoody performance. So I may not even need it much in Safari.
  • I also vastly prefer the way Firefox handles a very large number of tabs, which is to allow you to scroll though them. While probably not a deal-breaker, for someone like me Safari's implementation can be limiting form time to time.
  • There are little things I'll miss, like the ability to keep the download window closed when initiating new downloads. Just little niceties.

But so far, I have to say, I'm enjoying using Safari as my main browser quite a bit. I have yet to run into any serious limitations, and that's the main thing. Will I switch over completely? It's too soon to tell. But I might, and that's big progress for Safari in my book.

In fact, things have gone so swimmingly that I'm extending the experiment. I'm now trying Safari as my primary browser for a bit longer, and I'm trying it at home on my Intel hardware as well.

Just one note on that front: I did a very unscientific speed test of the two browsers, at home, on my fast, relatively new Intel MacBook. I tested launch and quit speeds for each browser with two tabs open, my Gmail and my Netflix queue. Firefox took a full 30 seconds to completely finish loading both tabs at launch; and it took a perplexing 12 seconds to quit. Safari launched and loaded both tabs in about 13 seconds — less than half the time it took Firefox — and quit nearly instantly, the only thing slowing it down being the confirm dialog at quit (which you can turn off). These are major speed gains, and it's here that Firefox has always lagged. If the features have gotten good enough in Safari, I may well switch. Only time will tell.

Either way, I'll keep you posted.

ADDENDUM: Today I performed the same tests on Firefox and Safari and both browsers performed much better. Both Safari and Firefox were able to launch and load their pages in about 7 seconds, and both quit immediately. I'm not sure what the difference is between today's tests and yesterday's. Perhaps there is something funky with my account or my computer. Perhaps our Internet connection was slower yesterday. In any case, I think it's still fair to call Safari the faster browser, particularly under adverse conditions. And when those conditions exist the difference can be fairly pronounced.