Learn how Puter and Twake Drive 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.
Last 30 days
Last commit
5 hours agoRepository age
3 yearsVersion
26.11License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
heyputer/puter
Last 30 days
Last commit
4 hours agoRepository age
10 yearsVersion
1.108.0License
AGPL-3.0Repository
linagora/twake-drive
Both Puter and Twake Drive 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 significantly outpaces Twake Drive in community adoption with 44,178 stars compared to 997 stars on GitHub. This 44.3x difference suggests Puter has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Puter has 4,159 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Puter and Twake Drive are moving at much the same rate, adding 420 stars and adding 9 stars respectively over the last 30 days (+1% vs +0.9%). Neither is pulling away from the other on momentum alone.
Both projects show recent activity, with Puter last updated 5 hours ago and Twake Drive 4 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Typescript. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Puter uses CSS, Bash while Twake Drive leverages JSX.
Twake Drive has been in development longer, starting 10 years ago, compared to Puter which began 3 years ago. This 7.3-year head start suggests Twake Drive may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Cloud File Sync & Share. However, they also have distinct specializations: Puter also focuses on Encrypted Storage.
Puter provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Twake Drive may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs