Dropbox or Sparkleshare?

When the files are very large and we cannot send them by mail we have two options to send it, one is to fragment it and send the parts one by one but it is very dirty because we flood the other's mail with all the parts and if it is an uneducated computer scientist you won't have a clue to rebuild it.

The other way is to use a service that allows us to upload the files to a server and send the link by mail for the contact to download.

On Linux we have a service called Dropbox that allows us to do this, but is Sparkleshare really worth it?

Let's compare Dropbox with Sparkleshare:


  • 2 Gb of free storage
  • Available only for Gnome (like Dropbox)
  • 300 Mb limit per file without using your app


In Sparkleshare your computer is the server, so the limit is the size of the hard disk

It is not only available for Gnome, but also for all desktops and more non-Linux operating systems

It also allows you to use another server like Dropbox

My opinion:

Having Sparkleshare not use Dropbox, why ?:

  • We don't have to pay for extra space
  • We use our hard drive, which gives more confidence
  • You don't have to resort to other programs as you have to do with Dropbox in KDE

The content of the article adheres to our principles of editorial ethics. To report an error click here!.

34 comments, leave yours

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *



  1. Responsible for the data: Miguel Ángel Gatón
  2. Purpose of the data: Control SPAM, comment management.
  3. Legitimation: Your consent
  4. Communication of the data: The data will not be communicated to third parties except by legal obligation.
  5. Data storage: Database hosted by Occentus Networks (EU)
  6. Rights: At any time you can limit, recover and delete your information.

  1.   Gregorio Espadas said

    Note: Dropbox (live synchronization, with its corresponding icon in the systray) does not work exclusively in GNOME, since I have used it in KDE, Xfce, LXDE, and even without using any desktop environment (with OpenBox, Fluxbox, etc) , and it works perfectly. I think it is one of the few applications that, after using it for several years, has never given me problems.

    1.    Courage said

      Yes, but the application they offer is exclusive to Gnome, which is what I mean, let's not forget that it integrates into Nautilus or something like that

      1.    Gaspar Fernandez said

        But Nautilus integration is overrated… to flip an emblem while uploading or downloading a file? I have also used the application in KDE, Fluxbox, etc. without problems.

      2.    VaryHeavy said

        There is already a servicemenu for Dolphin that integrates Dropbox in KDE, or at least it exists in OpenSUSE, Sabayon and Chakra.

        1.    taregon said

          We could also talk about OwnCloud if we refer to integration, but this is more designed in KDE.

      3.    cryotope said

        Well, I have it integrated into Thunar, that is, I have a folder that is synchronized with Dropbox every time a change is made to it. And by the way, it's either my computer or the web version works worth it.

        1.    Courage said

          Dropbox's web version works great, it's not you alone

  2.   SaulOnLinux said

    Personally I have used Dropbox in XFCE without problems, for me the fact that it does not integrate with thunar is not a drama for me. But I would rather they give official support for other desktops, not just gnome.

    Sparkleshare I have not tested it, see if I take a look.

    1.    Courage said

      Welcome to the site.

      Well, yours is a very good point of view

  3.   fredy said

    I have used dropbox for a long time, but I am interested in sparkleshare, can you tell me how it works and how safe it is?

    1.    Courage said
      1.    fredy said

        OK thanks.

  4.   Erithrym said

    Yes, it is true that it integrates with Nautilus, but even so, I have tried Spideroak (Sparkleshare not) but what keeps me trusting Dropbox is that if I accidentally delete any of my files, I can recover them without problem! So I have a copy of my files on the hard drive of my two computers and another in the cloud, and that is something that other programs do not do

    1.    Courage said

      Having been younger so that you do not get Parkinson's and do not delete the files JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA

      1.    Erithrym said

        JAJAJAJAJAJA I'm only 20 years old and just turned eh !!! Not a month ago! XD
        But still, in this way I can also access my files even from a foreign computer through the web page, which I think is quite useful

  5.   Gaspar Fernandez said

    What pulls me back is Mono ... I would like the same software, but not use Mono, I have to install many dependencies for that ...

    1.    Courage said

      That's what they complain about, because I'm not wearing Mono at all

    2.    pandev92 said

      Well, I don't know what you have with mono, highly superior and easier to make programs than with pure C, perhaps C is more language, but mono simplifies life for developers.

      1.    ErunamoJAZZ said

        If we are going to talk about languages ​​and that ...
        I do not take away the validity that C # is a very simple and quite powerful language, and much more if we are going to buy it with "pure C". I don't know the technical reasons why they used Mono instead of another language like python or something like that, however, I would think differently: I should rather use vala, which in syntax and quality of the language is equal to or even better than C #, and that it allows to use Libraries of other languages ​​very easily (gObject introspection) in a transparent way.

        Perhaps the big downside to Mono (speaking as a CRL interpreter), is that it is generally still behind the official .NET interpreter (although on the compatibility website, it seems that it is not so serious with respect to .NET4 http://www.mono-project.com/Compatibility )

        Personally, the fact that I have to install pure Mono xD dependencies also pulls me back!

    3.    Manuel de la Fuente said

      There's Syncany, much better than Sparkleshare in my opinion. In fact, on their official site they make a comparison with Sparkleshare, Dropbox and several other synchronization services.


      The problem is that it is in full development and there are still no versions ready to install. In case you want to try it, the only way is to download the code from Launchpad and compile it yourself, understanding that it should be only for testing and not to use it with sensitive information.

      The only thing I don't like is that it is partially developed in Java, which for me is almost as bad as Mono, but I will wait to see the finished product and then judge.

      Even so, I prefer Dropbox for a simple reason: I consider that my information will be much more secure stored on their servers than on mine. I don't trust my hosting, much less being there, being able to tinker with what I shouldn't and send everything flying in an instant. 😀

  6.   Manuel Escudero said

    SpiderOak, Definitely:


    Greetings and Happy New Year 😀

    1.    VaryHeavy said

      Totally agree

    2.    VaryHeavy said

      Totally agree, together with Minus as they say below. Next to that, Dropbox is nothing.

    3.    dwarf said


  7.   Edwin said

    I always use opera unite, and the media streaming application is super easy to use.

  8.   StuMx said

    The biggest drawback that I see is that the files are transferred at the upload speed that your ISP gives you, and normally this is usually less than 1Mbps.

    In my view, it is not worth much if you have to leave your computer on all the time to be able to download a file at a laughable speed, and if we add that the idea they put in the post is to share large files, the It gets even worse.

  9.   ErunamoJAZZ said

    It only has one very important drawback: It still does not work in windows uu

  10.   Thunder said

    The best is Minus, without a doubt, 10 Gb, free and does not need to register, very easy to use, intuitive and fast, one of the best things I have ever tried ^ _ ^

    (It's my opinion xD)


  11.   Fernando said

    I use Dropbox on KDE (Debian Squeeze) and it works perfect.

  12.   Courage said

    For all:

    Let's see, it's not that Dropbox doesn't work in KDE, what happens is that it doesn't work like Dropbox

    I explain:

    I, who use Arch, have an application in AUR that allows me to use Dropbox in KDE, but the application is not called Dropbox, it is called Kfliebox

    That's what I mean

    1.    StuMx said

      But according to the archlinux wiki it is not necessary to do something special to make Dropbox work under KDE, just install the Dropbox package that is in the AUR https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dropbox

      Kfilebox is an alternative to the Dropbox client for KDE, but it is not "THE" way to use Dropbox on this desktop.

  13.   Yoyo said

    I use Dropbox 1.2.49 on my Pardus KDE (not kfilebox) and it has full integration with Dolphin, I don't use Nautilus packages if not one built by Pardus people

    However, by downloading the source to your / home and linking the startup of this, you can also use it in KDE Dolphin perfectly, you do not need Nautilus for Nothing

    In reference to the article, I keep Dropbox of all of them, I have everything in Dropbox on my iPod, Windows, Linux and Mac

    Like I'm lazy to switch to something else xDD

    1.    Courage said

      Damn well I'll have to kill Malcer for misinforming me hahaha

  14.   Christopher Flores said

    do not fuck with dropbox I use it from my cell android with my laptop with linux those of my girlfriend with windows (she likes linux = () from the desktop for my dropbox send but if they can improve !!! I can connect to any question but I have the applications I only connect from the internet and now ... .. problem solved from the official website and drop ... for everyone