So far, here my impressions of dropbox vs sugarsync:

• Two slightly different markets. Sugarsync seems more like a package design for a single user to keep data in sync between different machines. I.e. if you have a Mac at home, PC at the office and Mobile phone and you want to be able to acess the same files and keep them in sync from all of devices, this is sugarsync's market.
• Dropbox is great for collaboration. You can share files or folders to anyone you want (although you use up one of your 10 invites every time you do this) and share only these folders. Sugarsync cannot do this, its designed with all or nothing access for one user or a group of users wanting to collaborate.
• Dropbox looks better at first glance (the little green ticks make it easier to see whats in sync, but dropbox is more effort to setup and less intuitive to work with, I think Sugarsync did a better job of this.
• Sugarsync seems far easier to install and configure. The install process prompted you for what it wanted and when it was done, the syncing started.
• Dropbox forces you to use specific folders in a dropbox directly, while I prefer Sugarsync's model of allow you to select existing folders on your machine to add to the system
• Dropbox forces you to do most of your configuration from the website while Sugarsync allows you to work in the Sugarsync Gui on the machine. Personally, I find the web a little slower and I'd like to see Dropbox add this functionality
• Sugarsync offers different forms of synchronisation options, i.e. you can hard or soft sync (hard sync a copy of the file is kept on your drive, soft sync the file is stored on the web and accessed when you double click on the file - nice for things that you don't necessarily want to download to you machine.

At the moment, I'm in two minds. Dropbox has opened my eyes to a lot of functionality that is sorely missing in Sugarsync which I wanted, but also proves to be a solution that is not perfect either. Both products expose the others weaknesses. Sugarsync is simple and effective while Dropbox adds a host of additional functionality that some users may need but at the cost of being more cumbersome and less user friendly.

Right now, if you were looking to simply synchronise files between machines, I'd take sugarsync hands down, it just works so much better. If you want any form of collaboration, then sugarsync starts to take second place to dropbox, although if you're prepared to forego any document specific security (i.e. all users can access everything) then sugarsync will still be a good option.

At the moment, Sugarsync is up against another product in Beta which is free, which may sway a lot of users into using Dropbox, but thats only until Dropbox announces a price model, if they do eventually start charging.

Have fun an invite is on its way. If nothing appears check the spam folder.

I'd be keen for an invite too peoples...

PM me an email and an invite is yours

I posted a message above asking you and the others to PM me your email so I could send you the invites, you must have missed it.

This is meant to be coming in an upcoming release of Dropbox before it hits 1.0.

I'm not sure what you mean about using the web interface for configuration, I've hardly used it.

They have stated (in their forums) that there will always be a basic, free version with 1 GB or so of data and paid versions for higher data usage, specifics won't be released until it comes out of beta. However, they have also said that beta users will get more free data than people who sign up after the beta, but again no specific details.

Thanks for the update. 1GB would probably suffice for most users.

For those using VM's to test this, it doesn't work properly if its a shared Mac directory its using I.e. if you using the "Share My Documents" function of Parallels. You have to switch this off and let it use the Windows My Documents or the Windows Side won't synchronise.

BTW, when I refer to using the web inteface, if you want to do something like share a folder, it takes you to the website to configure this. I'm not a fan of this because it removes any offline capability. I.e. you have limited capability until you regain internet connectivity rather than full capability with synchonisation occuring when you regain internet connectivity.

Okay, here is the next bit of feedback on the Sugarsync vs Dropbox question.

After another couple of days of working with Dropbox and Sugarsync, we've dropped Sugarsync in favour of Dropbox. There is just too much functionality in dropbox we need so we didn't have much choice so dropbox wins this but it may not win for everyone for the following reasons:

Without looking at the cost equation, if you are trying to share between two machines, I'd stick with my original choice of Sugarsync. At this point its been far more reliable and its pretty clear why Dropbox say theirs is still a beta, it is a beta and it gives errors often. I've had issues with syncing larger files (10MB) and where Sugarsync had no issues, and the speeds on dropbox are definitely a little slower. I'm a little concerned at this stage that if I do a big upload we may have issues. I picked up quite a few sync errors and had to reset Dropbox a couple of times. I've posted on the Dropbox forums and generally the guys have been pretty quick to respond to the questions and the issues I've had have either been resolved or they've let me know they will be in the next release. Sugarsync on the other hand didn't respond to any questions I put to them about functionality.

Sugarsync - more reliable at this point, faster uploads
Dropbox - way more functionality, including versioning, multiple users

anyone got invites still?

I still got a couple. PM me your email

I have two invites left if anybody wants one. PM me your email address and I will have it sent.

Does anyone have any invites left? I'd love one please. Thanks.

invite please!!!

a.

If anyone wants a Dropbox invite PM me with your email address.

I have 8 invites left if anyone would care to PM me with their email address