What is the main difference between Puter and Sync-in?

Puter and Sync-in are both cloud file sync & share tools but differ in their approach, features, and target audience. Compare their GitHub stats, technology stack, and community adoption to make the best choice.

Which is better: Puter or Sync-in?

The choice between Puter and Sync-in depends on your specific needs, technical requirements, and team preferences. Both are quality open source solutions with active communities.

Can I migrate from Puter to Sync-in?

Migration between Puter and Sync-in is possible but requires careful planning. Consider data export/import capabilities, feature parity, and potential workflow changes.

Windshift – The self-hosted platform that replaces Jira.

Learn More

Puter vs Sync-in

Learn how Puter and Sync-in differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these cloud file sync & share tools is best for you.

Puter

Puter is a cloud-based desktop OS you run in the browser, with built-in apps, file storage, and support for hosting web apps and sites.

Visit Puter Read more

43,518stars+464(+1.1%)

Last 30 days

Last commit
11 hours ago
Repository age
3 years
Version
26.09
License
AGPL-3.0
Self-hosted
Yes
Repository
heyputer/puter

Sync-in

Secure, open-source platform for file storage, sharing, and collaboration. Host your data on your own infrastructure with full control and transparency.

Visit Sync-in Read more

1,767stars+130(+7.9%)

Last 30 days

Last commit
3 days ago
Repository age
1 year
Version
v2.5.0
License
AGPL-3.0
Self-hosted
Yes
Repository
sync-in/server

Sponsor Sync-in ongithub.com

Detailed Comparison

Both Puter and Sync-in have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.

Puter wins

Community & Popularity

Puter significantly outpaces Sync-in in community adoption with 43,518 stars compared to 1,767 stars on GitHub. This 24.6x difference suggests Puter has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Puter has 4,051 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.

Sync-in wins

Growth Momentum

Sync-in is growing faster, adding 130 stars in the last 30 days (+7.9%) against adding 464 stars for Puter (+1.1%). Sync-in is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.

Comparable

Development Activity

Both projects show recent activity, with Puter last updated 11 hours ago and Sync-in 3 days ago.

Comparable

Technology Stack

Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Puter uses CSS while Sync-in leverages SCSS, NestJS.

Puter wins

Project Maturity

Puter has been in development longer, starting 3 years ago, compared to Sync-in which began 1 year ago. This 1.4-year head start suggests Puter may have more mature features and established processes.

Comparable

Licensing

Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.

Comparable

Use Cases & Features

Both tools serve similar use cases in Cloud File Sync & Share. However, they also have distinct specializations: Puter also focuses on Cloud Storage, Encrypted Storage while Sync-in extends into Collaborative Workspaces, Secure Document Sharing.

Comparable