File Browser vs Sync-in

A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.

Not the right match-up?
FeatureFile BrowserSync-in
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0AGPL-3.0-or-later
LanguageGoTypeScript
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM64 MB1,024 MB
Deploymentdocker, binarybare-metal
GitHub stars★ 35,800★ 1,630
First released20172025
ReplacesDropbox

Why pick each one

Choose File Browser if…

  • Extremely lightweight
  • Trivial to deploy
  • Good for quick file access
File Browser details

Choose Sync-in if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0-or-later license
  • Active community (1.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in TypeScript
Sync-in details

Frequently asked questions

Is File Browser or Sync-in better?

File Browser is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Sync-in if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are File Browser and Sync-in free and open-source?

Yes. File Browser is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Sync-in under AGPL-3.0-or-later. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run File Browser and Sync-in with Docker?

File Browser: yes. Sync-in: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons