this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
23 points (96.0% liked)

Selfhosted

60281 readers
780 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
23
File Browser vs Nextcloud (lemm.ee)
submitted 2 years ago by shiftymccool@lemm.ee to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
33 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hey all! I'm still in the somewhat early stages of setting up my home server. I have Nextcloud installed for file storage/management. However, realizing that it would be nice to have access to the entire storage drive for the server, I installed File Browser.

Now I'm having a hard time justifying having both. I have a handful of services that could be run as individual services (calDav, notes, news, etc... although, phonetrack seems to be hard to replace).

I've noticed lists that people have posted of the "must-have" services on their home servers have included both. My question is "why?" It seems like, at a basic level, they serve similar roles. If you remove the app-platform role from Nextcloud by separately hosting the individual apps, what benefit do you get from having both Nextcloud and File Browser?

I really like NextCloud, but i'm having a hard time justifying the resource usage if its functionality can be replaced by a handful of containers. Or, is that the reason to have it, so you don't have to do that?

Any opinions on the subject would be appreciated.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Shady_Shiroe@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

After using owncloud, nextcloud, and file browser, I found file browser to be a lot easier to use and it does everything I need. I don't need video players or PDF viewer, just simple ui for file broswing.

[–] shiftymccool@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Exactly! It's just so convenient from an app platform standpoint, though... But, it just feels strange to keep a tool around, who's main job is basically file management, just for an app platform when those apps' functionality can be found elsewhere. I may just keep Nextcloud around as a testbed for new functionality via its apps, then reproduce that functionality with another service in a separate container if it turns out to be useful.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I have nextcloud and don't even use it for file management (in that sense). It's a joplin sync server, I use the Cookbook app probably as my most used thing on nextcloud, I use phonetrack, sync tasks.org to it for task management, use the Bookmarks app for keeping track of links.

Plus I never feel bad for running extra services. Idle services use a pretty tiny amount of resources. I had 15 or 20 on a Raspberry Pi 4 before I switched to using an old laptop.