It takes a long time to read but we hope it is worth it. You will also find lots of ideas about further reading and where to find it. Here we’ve compiled a mixture of explanations, advice and recommendations about technologies for working together remotely. But it’s not – and shouldn’t be – that simple. There is an urgency to the situation and people are concerned about the choices they make, so we often end up suggesting some easy-to-use alternatives that demand less investment in skills, resources and time. People want the list of tools they should install and they might not want to work through the questions about why to use them or why not, which are in truth difficult. The expectation is that we, or other entities working with technology and society, will recommend the ultimate infallible toolbox of ready-to-use tools. These questions have become much more frequent during the current coronavirus pandemic. Many people ask us to recommend communication, collaboration and networking tools that are designed with users’ rights and privacy principles as their primary design choice – and that work without the big data-hoarding complexes of Facebook, Alphabet or the like. In either case, we have to deal with the long-term political and social consequences - giving up on our values or investing in equitable tech. Whenever something happens that forces us to rethink what kind of technology is available and how we should use it, Tactical Tech is asked by its partners and through its public engagement activities such as the Glass Room: what tools do we recommend that are user-friendly, functional and won’t risk our safety, privacy and security? In other words, we are often asked for alternatives to the most commonly used tools. We are facing trade-offs between what seems efficient and quick versus what seems ethical and safe. In this time of crisis we are at a technology crossroads. Trade-offs are usually not very appealing How do we decide which technology we should trust? It also discusses what could be done in the future to make answering this question much easier than it is now. This text, also available in French, addresses questions about which tech is good, safe and appropriate to use in these complex times if we want to act and work responsibly and remotely. I'd sum it up as both used to be reasonably distinct uses (focus on local sharing via SMB/NFS vs synchronising local and remote versions via clients), but each is taking on a lot more of the capability of the other so the two applications are somewhat converging.And because of that we have to write a very long text about it For example on a mobile device it's simpler to set up a mobile app like MS Office to store stuff to a NAS than to NextCloud, although of course part of that is also MS wanting you to use their own cloud rather than a self-hosted one. These days though the capacity of NAS's to do both is strongly blurring the distinction - I can for example also use my NAS as the host for a cloud-like file sharing set-up (either through their proprietary software or via a NextCloud docker container).įile serving can be somewhat more complex to set up in the cloud environment than it is for a NAS, at least outside of the native cloud clients. It is possible to use each the other way around, but it's more normally designed that way. Generally the local cloud is more for sync'd data between a local and remote (at home) store, with the NAS more for file serving without a local version. There is certainly a lot of cross-over between the two these days. My NextCloud server sits on the latter (although the former can support such an install too) and it's reasonably reliable and stable.įorgive my ignorance, but what's the difference between a NAS/Server and your own cloud? I thought a local cloud WAS a NAS? No? Thanks for helping me learn. Personally I've run both over the years, but blew away the OMV device and replaced it by a DietPi-based Pi and the original tasks are now shared between that and a second Pi running Docker via HypriotOS. You just connect to it over the network as you would any other server, without a specific local client. OMV on the other hand is a NAS/server solution, again with drop-in plugins for stuff like Plex servers and web servers. There are ways and means to expand NC with various other stuff like calendar management, team collaboration and other bits, but underneath it's essentially your own cloud (hence the name of the project it forked from, OwnCloud). NextCloud is more or less a "local cloud storage solution", in that it runs as a server and then there are client apps that go on your devices and the two sync up. Key question is what you're actually looking to use it for?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |