return to table of content

LocalSend: Open-source, cross-platform file sharing to nearby devices

behnamoh
15 replies
18h25m

Every few months there's a new tool for this and none of them gets widespread use.

api
11 replies
18h9m

It’s 2024. There is still no good generally available way to send files between systems on the same LAN, let alone over the Internet.

These kinds of blind spots exist because not only is there no money in solving them (and open solutions are too hard to use as usual) but in this case there is money in not solving them. A great simple ubiquitous solution would reduce demand for large complicated cloud storage systems that allow cloud data mining of all your files and/or require subscriptions.

userbinator
2 replies
15h2m

There is still no good generally available way to send files between systems on the same LAN

For me, a pair of netcats has served that use-case quite well.

esafak
0 replies
13h30m

How do you do this with an Android phone and iPhone, one of which is yours and others is some friend's? My most common problem is sharing media.

api
0 replies
8h7m

Okay I’ll just tell my finance department head to netcat from port 5000…

prmoustache
2 replies
10h44m

This very hn entries is bust contradicting your statement.

Also what about syncthing[1] (for recurrent/permanent sync) and croc[2] (for one time copies) ?

I have used both for a number of years already. Before croc, magic wormhole was available for even longer.

[1] https://syncthing.net/

[2] https://github.com/schollz/croc

api
1 replies
5h19m

All the replies to this show me just how little your average HN user understands the difference between "nerds can do it" and "anyone can do it and it's a standard part of the ecosystem."

Obviously I can move files around. I can also program in 10 languages. I am not normal.

But even for me, it's not convenient. I don't "need" a friendly ubiquitous way to do it, but if I had one it'd be really nice and would save me time.

prmoustache
0 replies
4h22m

OS vendors aren't interested in "ubiquitous" because they want to capture people in their walled garden.

Regardless of the quality of any tool, most people will not necessarily use the most friendly way. They will use the tool they already know and have. Reason most people have been using Microsoft Word over the year with very crappy results to share screenshot to people for example. There were plenty of available screenshot tools that would save wherever you want in the format you want, but you had to install them, they were not installed on their windows XP computer out of the box. So you would see people preferring copy/pasting to Word, not even paint or that other image tool I don't remember the name that was available ou of the box on windows.

So nowadays, there is only one thing that is ubiquitous and available in most people devices that allows them to reach other: messaging tools. In the past it was email, nowadays it is Whatsapp. You can make the nicest, fast and friendly tool to share files to others, people will still use Whatsapp to send files to others and even themselves.

LittleFreak
1 replies
17h56m

there is enough good software out there. If it's only file sharing, then I'd prefer 'LocalSend' . For anything more complex, like send clipboard, push notifications or remote control is 'KDE Connect' my first option, since it's also available for almost any platform.

blooalien
0 replies
17h6m

I've personally had great success with KDE Connect on the LAN for all that (and also as a handy touchpad / keyboard input device for PC). It's one of those "Just Works" tools I always reach for. Also have found SyncThing to be really excellent for keeping folders auto-sync'd between devices. (One personal use-case example for that is keeping my "Pictures" folder in sync between my phone camera and a local folder on one or more of my PCs.)

raffraffraff
0 replies
11h24m

Because people are lazy, and phone makers haven't all agreed on a single sharing app that's preinstalled on every device. Apple own their own ecosystem but are famously "FUCK YOU" to every other platform, but inside their walled garden, AirDrop.

minhmeoke
0 replies
13h13m

A useful utility for sharing (upload and download) files over a local LAN that a friend wrote is https://github.com/akovacs/uploadserver - it's basically a nicer version of:

    python -m http.server 8000
You first start one server on a desktop/laptop which has the software, and then any client (Android, iOS, PlayStation, Kindle, etc) with a web browser (no need to install any client software) can upload or download files from it.

You can download prebuilt binaries for x86-64 Linux, Windows 7 or higher, or Mac OS 10.7 Lion or higher (sorry, no prebuilt binaries for Apple Silicon, but they could be added if there is sufficient demand) from https://github.com/akovacs/uploadserver/releases/ or compile from source using a nightly rust toolchain if you prefer.

Start the file server on a desktop machine:

    chmod +x upload_server
    ./upload_server
Determine your machine's IP address using:

    # Linux
    hostname -I

    # Mac
    ifconfig

    # Windows
    ipconfig
Navigate to the server's ip address port 8000 (indicated by the hostname -I command you ran earlier) in the web browser of your choice on any device (no need to download or install any client applications) and upload files using the web UI or directly via curl:

    curl -X POST --data-binary @file_to_upload.txt http://192.168.1.X:8000/uploaded_file.txt
Then download the file to another machine or mobile device either from the web GUI or via a commandline tool:

    curl http://192.168.1.X:8000/uploads/uploaded_file.txt --output downloaded_file.txt
If you don't have a local network, you can setup an adhoc hotspot on any Android 9+ (Settings > Network & internet > Hotspot & tethering https://support.google.com/android/answer/9059108) or iPhone (Settings > Personal Hotspot), then connect to it using any WiFi-enabled device.

Compared to cloud services or `python -m http.server 8000`, this is extremely fast since the server is written in rust, it is fairly simple (compiled and stripped binary is typically less than 3MB), it sends everything over local LAN, it seems to handle large files (over 4GB) fairly well, and you only need to install the software on one machine.

Geezus_42
0 replies
14h2m

Rsync has been around along time and works great. I use it almost daily. SFTP has also been a solid option for quite a while. If you want a more permanent network share there's NFS.

yjftsjthsd-h
0 replies
17h47m

I had the thought once that it would be a useful - if not easy - to submit patches to as many of these projects as possible to allow interoperation (probably by implementing the same protocol(s) in as many as possible). It's the kind of thing where you really want enough common protocol use that most apps can communicate to get network effects.

(But of course, I hardly have the time or perhaps even ability to really go far with that thought. Oh well.)

anon115
0 replies
16h35m

what does widespread mean I always use https://www.sharedrop.io/ for myself only tho.

acidburnNSA
13 replies
13h47m

I was talking to my brother about phones the other day and he has to have an iphone for work. He's a federal firefighter in the USA who was hot-shotting all last summer. When they're way out in the middle of nowhere with no cell and no central wifi routers anywhere they use AirDrop to transfer maps and stuff to team members before splitting up. Kinda interesting. Would this tool allow that kind of thing, e.g. for Android to iphone?

sedatk
12 replies
13h41m

Yes.

cl3misch
11 replies
11h52m

Can you elaborate? How does it work without the devices sharing the same Wifi?

I just skimmed the readme. It states a "local network" multiple times. So in this example, the firefighters need a Wifi network to connect the devices. Not because the files are sent over the internet, but because LocalSend doesn't create an ad-hoc network unlike to Airdrop.

So OP: technically yes, but the experience is not quite the same.

cl3misch
2 replies
9h37m

Yep, that should be possible and does not require a router. I would think it is significantly less low-friction than native Airdrop for a firefighter on mission though...

k4rli
1 replies
6h9m

It could have an option to create a hidden hotspot and have the other phone also be able to discover the hotspot automatically (app specific SSID name is searched for and if user is not already in wifi, and hidden hotspot doesn't exist, then it will be created for the duration of transfer). Airdrop doesn't seem too different.

baruz
0 replies
2h38m

A hotspot requires a cellular connection to an existing network. AirDrop creates a ZeroConf network, which advertises its presence to other devices.

t0bia_s
2 replies
10h36m

VPN on devices to same network, ie Wireguard or Tailscale.

RF_Savage
1 replies
6h7m

Won't this still require network connectivity to function?

zie
0 replies
2h36m

I mean you could build a little server that offers all this one per fire-truck or something, but it's probably overkill when simpler solutions exist :)

Then you could have the fire-trucks mesh network with each other!

Sarcasm alert: I'm sure that is bound to be 100% reliable out in the middle of nowhere, with whatever cheap power converter they used to provide power from the 12V batteries in the truck, and hopefully doesn't drain them :)

johnchristopher
1 replies
10h16m

Are Airdrop networks wifi or bluetooth based ? (or something else)

cl3misch
0 replies
9h39m

Handshake is bluetooth, transfer is wifi

sedatk
0 replies
11h11m

Sorry I missed the part “no wifi routers available”. They need to be on the same Wifi with this app, you’re right.

ianburrell
0 replies
2m

AirDrop uses Bluetooth and UWB to find nearby devices and then creates Wifi Direct network between devices to do the transfer.

SiDevesh
12 replies
14h0m

Its amazing to me how AirDrop is such a big plus for Apple ecosystem even in 2024 given technologically it is one of the simplest things possible. The innovation is purely on the alignment of interests Apple has and its competitors don't because they are all competing with each other and then also Apple.

Almondsetat
7 replies
12h13m

technologically it is one of the simplest things possible

then how come there are zero FOSS "AirDrop replacements" that seamlessly create an ad-hoc wireless network between two devices to allow for truly p2p high speed transfers?

agazso
4 replies
7h58m

There is KDEConnect, which has apps for all major platforms (iOS, android, macOS, Windows and of course Linux) and some more. I even used between Apple devices when AirDrop did not work for some reason.

https://kdeconnect.kde.org/

Almondsetat
3 replies
7h2m

KDEConnect does not implement what I've said

berkes
2 replies
6h59m

It doesn't?

JeremyNT
0 replies
4h50m

Kde connect requires two devices already connected to the same local wireless network.

Almondsetat
0 replies
5h43m

Does it create a seamless p2p wifi connection between any pair of devices it's installed on?

g_p
1 replies
10h4m

My guess is that it's difficult to interface with the system's Bluetooth and WiFi sufficiently without a native app on any modern platform (iOS, Android, Mac, Windows, Linux) enough to create and advertise that kind of ad hoc network, without a native app on the device (perhaps even with system permissions).

Since Apple won't implement any third party one, and theirs is natively integrated with their platform, half the ecosystem won't implement or adopt any FOSS alternative.

Since such an alternative won't be pre loaded on handsets (and the Android ecosystem is complex without one single vendor producing firmware everyone ships), the rival would need to be installed manually by users before use.

Not impossible - WhatsApp and other apps have (in some markets) gained near-ubiquity without being built-in, but I think the native app barrier here will always be a hurdle. And Apple presumably knows and strategizes that an alternative won't gain adoption if their half of the ecosystem won't adopt it, therefore holding back the wider market and keeping airdrop functionality as a USP.

Almondsetat
0 replies
7h1m

If that were the case someone would at least have made a version for Linux devices since you can have full access to them

popcalc
1 replies
8h59m

I dusted off a Samsung dumbphone from 2011 and was amazed to learn it could send files directly to my PC over Bluetooth and vice-versa.

bmicraft
0 replies
6h15m

That still works, as it always has.

lofenfew
1 replies
12h48m

if everyone has samsung they all have quick share or whatever. lockin isn't laudible

JeremyNT
0 replies
4h51m

Google calls this feature "quick share." Of course the problem is that it's all proprietary and Apple has no interest in supporting transfers with non Apple devices.

It's pretty typical on HN to see somebody singing the praises of apple while failing to notice the competition provides similar functionality.

andrewSC
11 replies
18h37m

Devil’s advocate: why would I choose this over Syncthing?

lknuth
7 replies
18h32m

This is really more like AirDrop, where Syncthing is more like DropBox.

Not to say they have no overlap, I use both. LocalSend is nice to quickly send that one picture from my Android to my MacBook

factormeta
5 replies
18h27m

So it requires lan network? Can it work over bluetooth? Like Briar https://briarproject.org

LittleFreak
4 replies
17h54m

it can't, Bluetooth has a very limited datarate anyway

tjoff
3 replies
13h18m

That's why many only use Bluetooth to create an ad-hoc wifi network and do the transfer on that instead.

Airdrop even requires bluetooth.

fddrdplktrew
2 replies
10h47m

why not do straight up ad-hoc wi-fi?

pastage
1 replies
10h29m

It is easy to do Bluetooth discovery between apps on Android/ios. I have not seen the same for wifi.

fddrdplktrew
0 replies
9h53m

that's because Google actively won't implement it... not sure why but there was issues with "thousands" of comments requesting it (because it is part of WiFi standard). Not sure about Apple.

https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/36904180 (won't fix, obsolete, according to these mofos)

https://i.imgur.com/xei98fy.png (who the fuck knows how many more comments it would have got if they didn't block commenting)

It was implemented once on Cyanogenmod thought...

A lot of the posts about this have been de-indexed from Google Search too.

masklinn
0 replies
7h25m

I assume localsend can’t buffer files?

That’s what I’d really like when sending stuff between my devices because my most common use case is I see or think of something work-related when I’m off and don’t want to dig out the company laptop to make note of it, or the other way around see a personal interest or a nerd snipe while at work and want to stash it for off-the-clock.

I usually sling mails between devices, less commonly stash something in iCloud (or similar), but those are pretty noisy and high overhead workflows.

earthling8118
0 replies
18h33m

Upon first look this doesn't appear to serve the same purpose as syncthing. It sends files individually instead of keeping a folder synced.

atlas_hugged
0 replies
18h31m

This isn’t really competing with syncthing it doesn’t look like. This is more of a cross-platform AirDrop. Syncthing is more for, well, syncing.

Saris
0 replies
17h50m

Completely different use cases, this is for quick transfers of a file or several.

tjoff
9 replies
13h26m

Doesn't say anything about what they share other than that they don't collect personal data...

Brian_K_White
7 replies
12h52m

Yes they do?

There's only a few lines in the entire thing, so I don't know how you can miss that twice they say they don't collect anything in the first place, and then they say: "Since we do not collect such information, there's no possibility of us using, sharing, or selling this data."

If you want to say that this technically isn't a declaration, I would simply disagree and count it as one.

Frankly, being an open source app, I would be fine if it even said something like "It's open source. If you think it does anything nefarious, go ahead and show it." without even a suggestion of a promise. But they actually do make a declaration of both intent and action.

Any other data that isn't personal data they might have, like their download estimates or something, is theirs none of our business.

tjoff
6 replies
12h40m

What? Collect anything? They say they don't collect personal data. They don't mention what they do with non-personal data.

Frankly, being an open source app, I would be fine if it even said something like "It's open source. If you think it does anything nefarious, go ahead and show it." without even a suggestion of a promise. But they actually do make a declaration of both intent and action.

That is just horrendous. No. That is not a bar that is acceptable for any app, free, paid, open source or not. Likely illegal too.

Any other data that isn't personal data they might have, like their download estimates or something, is theirs none of our business.

Or something... such as information about files being sent... Or app telemetry etc.

That was my point.

I don't have reason to distrust them, but calling it the best "privacy policy ever" is a huge stretch given what it lacks.

xeyownt
4 replies
11h28m

What would be non-personal data in this case?

tjoff
3 replies
11h6m

? > "Or something... such as information about files being sent... Or app telemetry etc."

Information about files being sent could be anything from metadata, checksums, to something like (but not likely) CSAM.

Could also be data about your device(s), anything really.

Brian_K_White
2 replies
4h27m

But what though? Do you have an example of any such thing? Github makes it effortless to link righ to a specific line of code in a file. Show us a single one of these anythings.

tjoff
1 replies
3h41m

There must be a disconnect here.

We are talking about the privacy policy. Nothing else.

The policy says that they don't collect, store, or process any personal data. That is great!

What is not great is that the policy does not discuss whether or what type of other non-personal data is collected/stored/processed. That makes it a bad privacy policy. That is what I commented on.

2024throwaway
0 replies
2h11m

Could you explain in what way sharing non-personal data could violate someone's privacy?

You mention earlier data about your devices, this seems to me like it would fall into the `personal data` category, and be excluded.

Brian_K_White
0 replies
4h31m

Less is better. It has nothing because it needs nothing. That's the point.

This is a stupid thing to try to contrive some way to criticize. It's literally as good as it can get.

Also, not doing your homework for you for some free software where you can not only take or leave the software as you please, but have the source too, is maybe illegal? Dude you kill me. Say stuff like that for another 40 minutes and you got a Netflix special.

fddrdplktrew
0 replies
13h24m

I guess they send it straight to the spying agencies from your personal computing device...

dolmen
0 replies
3h53m

But they also have Terms of Service (https://localsend.org/#/terms-of-service) which are not so great:

    You represent that you are over the age of 18. The Company does not permit those under 18 to use the Service.
I planned to use it with family (kids).

astkaasa
8 replies
18h20m

tailscale's taildrop is an good alternative and maybe more secure(?)

refulgentis
7 replies
18h16m

I don't think it's a good alternative.

Via https://tailscale.com/kb/1106/taildrop:

- "Since Taildrop is an alpha feature, you’ll need to opt your network in to the test to use it."

- "Taildrop is only available on Synology with Tailscale v1.18.2".

- "Currently that means you need to manually install Tailscale on your Synology NAS."

Taking Occam's Razor to it:

- Buy Enterprise™ hardware to use alpha software.

- "more secure" has a prefix of "maybe" and a suffix of "(?)" in the comment recommending it

I'm ruling it out altogether.

PKop
5 replies
17h33m

You misunderstand this documentation. It is available on other platforms besides Synology; it's just also available on Synology which is a good thing.

refulgentis
4 replies
16h34m

You sure? "Taildrop is only available on Synology NAS" could certainly use some workshopping.

PKop
2 replies
15h39m

Am I sure that I've used Taildrop on my Android phone, Linux, Windows, Mac and Synology? Yes I am sure.

Maybe not great wording or arrangement of statements on that page since it seems to have stopped you in your tracks reading at that point, but you can scroll down and see discussion of using it on other platforms. What you're hyper-focused on is a subsection under the heading specifically dealing with Synology.

refulgentis
1 replies
15h24m

Geez, that was rude. I don't think assuming that the literally first requirement mentioned conditions the rest is "hyper focusing." It seems prudent to assume the rest are conditioned on it. It's not outlandish to assume you have to be on that style of network to use it, especially since the pitch is to enterprises for secure file transfer.

pastage
0 replies
10h16m

Taildrop is "a filetransfer for your personal devices", it only works if you have a Tailscale network transferring to QNAP/Synology is a nice feature. We all see thing from different perspectives it really helps to try understand why that might be.

d-z-m
0 replies
15h42m

That's not the whole sentence. The whole sentence is:

"Taildrop is only available on Synology with Tailscale v1.18.2 or later."

That sentence is the first sentence under the "Setting up Taildrop on Synology" section of the documentation.

evanriley
0 replies
17h52m

You don't need any enterprise hardware to use taildrop.

- "Taildrop is only available on Synology with Tailscale v1.18.2".

- "Currently that means you need to manually install Tailscale on your Synology NAS."

Only apply if you're installing it ON Synology hardware, otherwise it is matter of installing the tailscale client and opting your network in.

brucethemoose2
7 replies
18h17m

Is there an equivalent of this with an http front end, so the client doesn't need to install anything?

I have used such apps before, but it seems they have gone unmaintained and don't work anymore.

rcarmo
0 replies
17h11m

I have a Snapdrop fork running on my LAN that works wonders when sending files across platforms.

brucethemoose2
0 replies
16h20m

- A: I didn't know this, awesome.

- B: Yes, uploading via a web page would be nice too. I have seen other apps do this.

minhmeoke
0 replies
12h56m

One option is https://github.com/akovacs/uploadserver - it's basically a nicer version of:

    python -m http.server 8000
You first start one server on a desktop/laptop which has the software, and then any client (Android, iOS, PlayStation, Kindle, etc) with a web browser (no need to install any client software) can upload or download files from the web GUI.

You can download prebuilt binaries for x86-64 Linux, Windows, or Mac OS (sorry, no prebuilt binaries for Apple Silicon, but they could be added if there is sufficient demand) from https://github.com/akovacs/uploadserver/releases/ or compile from source using a nightly rust toolchain if you prefer.

Compared to cloud services or `python -m http.server 8000`, this is extremely fast since the server is written in rust, it is fairly simple (compiled and stripped binary is typically less than 3MB), it sends everything over local LAN, it seems to handle large files (over 4GB) fairly well, and you only need to install the software on one machine.

For additional details, please see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39665095

imiric
0 replies
17h7m

I frequently use `python -m http.server` on my LAN.

And if I can't be bothered to setup Python on the source host, or there are network complications, running uploadserver[1] on the destination host works great.

I'm wary of all these fancy tools with "magic" in their name, that rely on external relay servers. Even if they don't, I'm quite fond of the simplicity of plain old HTTP. I don't need anything more sophisticated, and in most cases, not even encryption.

netcat/socat would be another solution, but they're not as ubiquitous as Python and HTTP. And I can never remember the command incantations ':D

[1]: https://pypi.org/project/uploadserver/

ComputerGuru
7 replies
15h55m

Best thing about this is that it is available for most of the major platforms with an easy to use GUI. iOS app is excellent.

Some important bugs to beware:

On Windows having the LocalSend app running with the Window visible (after a receive?) prevents the system from sleeping. On Linux, it does the same even if the window isn’t showing. On Linux, having the LocalSend window visible and idle consumes an insane amount of cpu with the desktop window manager constantly refreshing damages. On Windows, the app (with the “startup minimized” option checked) if configured to launch at startup will often show the window anyway (not that you want it running in the background given the sleep issues).

harikb
2 replies
14h18m

having the LocalSend window visible and idle consumes an insane amount of cpu with the desktop window manager

so Flutter :)

Alifatisk
1 replies
2h8m

Any backstory to this?

harikb
0 replies
45m

Let me see if I can explain it - These "declarative" UI frameworks work very different from any UI frameworks in the past. They (theoretically) rebuild the data structures backing the current view of the UI and do that 60+ frames per second.

Good thing is that there is very little chance of data-out-of-sync-with-UI kind of bugs. But the bad part is that tons and tons of alloc/dealloc and literally the code is executing all the time.

Now in practice, it is not all that bad. They have a magical garbage collector that makes is all better. Every release it just slightly better, but I can't help think that they are solving a problem they created to begin with. But I might be too old and may be the productivity is worth it.

This is in addition to the fact that none of the widgets are truly native. The "code" is native, but the UI is not. Even react-native apps might be this way, but they at least use Safari/webkit widgets, if not truly native iOS/Android widgets.

ahmedfromtunis
1 replies
15h14m

Thanks for the heads-up.

I just installed it and it's the most most hassle-free experience I ever had with this type of apps.

My only gripe with it is that I need the receiving device awake and the app on the foreground (at least on android) for it to work. Even with the quick save option activated.

I wish quick share (né nearby share) was available on linux (even if via chrome).

sunnybeetroot
0 replies
12h54m

Any chance you could raise an issue?

arvindkumarc
0 replies
15h15m

Yes. Love this cross platform, non proprietary software for local file sharing.

MasterYoda
6 replies
13h4m

Does anyone knows if it is possible to send folders (includings subfolders) or is just files?

Have been looking for a simple way to share files between pc and android wireless but not via internet, but seems it always is just file/s you could transfer, not folders with everything in them.

If LocalSend is the same and can only transfer selected file/s, have anyone any tips on a alternative app that do the same but also with folders?

klabb3
2 replies
4h19m

Payload lets you drag and drop directories and lists of files. It also handles gracefully resuming after network errors.

No mobile support yet but since Tauri is rolling it out, it’ll be easier to add it as soon as I can make time.

https://payload.app/

Disclaimer: I’m the creator.

Alifatisk
1 replies
2h45m

What makes it blazingly fast?

klabb3
0 replies
0m

Haha that’s currently a way to explain to people who are used to hosting/sync based cloud solutions that anything that is (a) local p2p and (b) doesn’t need to upload-before-download is much faster. It’s also faster than WebRTC based solutions which there are dozens, WebRTC kind of sucks for large stuff.

That said, the next version will have multi connection tcp striping, which is a lot faster than any single tcp solution in many cases, especially over long distances, similar to some ftp/usenet clients. (Spoiler there will be online p2p transfers. See https://github.com/betamos/rdv if curious)

minhmeoke
0 replies
12h25m

If you can install software on the computer and have an Android 11 or newer phone, one way is to use the adb tool from android sdk tools to create a connection over the local wifi network which you can adb push folders over.

# Initial Setup

1. Install Android Platform Tools from: https://developer.android.com/tools/releases/platform-tools#... and verify that you can execute the adb tool.

2. Connect the Android device and the computer to the same Wi-Fi network

3. Also connect the Android device to the computer via USB cable (just for this initial setup)

4. Pair the phone with the computer and enable Wireless debugging as described here: https://developer.android.com/tools/adb#connect-to-a-device-...

# Subsequent usage (does not require USB cable):

5. Toggle the Wireless Debugging quick setting toggle to enable adb connections from your computer to your phone

6. Retrieve the Android device's IP address in Settings → About → Status.

7. On the computer command line type: adb connect ip-address-of-device:5555

8. Push the folder to the Android device: adb push /path/to/folder/to/copy/on/computer /sdcard/path/to/destination/on/android/device

gala8y
0 replies
12h57m

Probably not what you are looking for, but Syncthing, Syncthing Fork on Android, if you have LAN. You can switch on only local announce (switch global off in adv. settings).

chaxor
0 replies
11h43m

I think you can make tar.zst pretty easily in Android?

themusicgod1
4 replies
15h43m

github only

  = this is not open source
unlike, say, wormhole

pastage
0 replies
10h11m

Codeberg has become a really great service I used it commercially for the first time this winter it should be the new Github IMHO.

ddtaylor
0 replies
15h36m

?

KetoManx64
0 replies
13h56m

I don't think you understand what open source means then

smusamashah
3 replies
16h26m

There are a few browser based p2p file sharing tools [1] and a bunch of CLI tools out there as well for the same job.

# Browser Based

1. FilePizza https://file.pizza/

2. SnapDrop https://snapdrop.net/ https://github.com/RobinLinus/snapdrop. A fork PairDrop https://github.com/schlagmichdoch/pairdrop

3. Instant.io https://instant.io/

4. file ai http://fileai.com/

5. Send Anywhere https://send-anywhere.com/

6. Just Beaam it https://www.justbeamit.com/

7. Yt2fb.in https://yt2fb.in/file-transfer/

8. drop.lol https://drop.lol/ https://github.com/mat-sz/filedrop

# CLI

1. croc https://github.com/schollz/croc

2. p2pcopy https://github.com/psantosl/p2pcopy

3. pcp https://github.com/dennis-tra/pcp

4. wormhole-william https://github.com/psanford/wormhole-william

[1]: https://gist.github.com/SMUsamaShah/fd6e275e44009b72f64d0570...

crazylogger
3 replies
7h44m

Great stuff! I wonder if it's possible to make it available as a web app? It would be even cooler if no app install is required, just send the link to a receiver via text message.

aPoCoMiLogin
1 replies
6h23m

i'm using it from time to time, for quick share of small files, and it always works great

zikduruqe
0 replies
6h12m

And when I have larger content that needs to be shared, Signal's "Note to Self" works across platforms also. (It's the only reason I have Signal installed since I don't use it for communications)

sinuhe69
2 replies
5h40m

I use LANDrop, another open source project, with satisfaction. The thing about LocalSend is its low transfer speed. Somehow it’s even slower than LANDrop and much lower than SMB or Croc.

I have also a very weird problem with detection: my iPad can’t send to my Windows PC, but my PC can! Restart server, turn off firewall … all no help. My LAN is a bit complex with VLAN so I didn’t report the issue because it might just be me.

However, LANDrop doesn’t seem to have the same problem. That’s weird square.

sunshinesnacks
1 replies
3h44m

I just got setup to use LocalSend, but then saw your comment and was having second thoughts.

Comparing the GitHub repos for the two, it seems like LANDrop is pretty stale, while LocalSend is very active.

https://github.com/LANDrop/LANDrop https://github.com/localsend/localsend

Something to consider, although I'm not sure how much it practically matters.

devmor
0 replies
3h4m

I've been using LANDrop between 2 iOS devices, an Android device, 2 Windows devices and an Ubuntu device since I first saw it posted on HN and have never had an issue with it personally.

sedatk
2 replies
13h14m

It’s not in Microsoft Store, but it can be installed via WinGet on Windows machines:

  winget install LocalSend.LocalSend

Alifatisk
1 replies
2h44m

Is there a website where you can search for packages for winget? Like homebrew.

mherrmann
0 replies
2h36m

https://winstall.app. There's also winget.run, but it's no longer updated.

pbnjeh
1 replies
4h56m

A lot of mentions of Airdrop, here. Didn't some versions of it expose unique identifiers, that became a problem in e.g. Hong Kong?

I'm not on Apple, so I didn't sufficiently retain the details, but I remember reading about this a year or two ago.

ho_schi
1 replies
10h41m

I miss Bluetooth for discovery. And Bluetooth for transmission of small files.

    * Eliminates the need to be in one network of any kind.
    * Allows nearby detection.
    * Nowadays good for laptop <-> smartphone
    * Possiblilty to create AP with WiFi for big transfers
Bluetooth discovery is the strength of AirDrop. I’m not sure but I think Apple creates a temporary WiFi and the other party is connecting to it briefly for big transfers?

The application Teleport [1] uses Zeroconf for discovery. It misses cross-platform support. Probably it is better use Multicast directly, setup of Avahi is complicated (conflicts) and requires a Daemon.

PS: People often forget that Bluetooth has already the built-in capability to transfer files (e.g. vCard). I only remember GNOME to present it and then also not in Nautilus. Same as WebDAV which works much better than SMB for me. Again, most people just don’t know that there is WebDAV built-in.

janandonly
0 replies
10h36m

The screenshot on the landing page is a slap in the face of Apple, for good reasons, I think.

Yesterday, a friend tried to airdrop a picture to me from his iPhone 11 Pro to my iPhone 15 Pro. Touching the top of the phones did the funny jiggle, but didn't send the file. He then clicked on my picture in AirDrop, which showed him "waiting on confirmation" but I never got a pop-up. After a few retries and reboot, we gave up. He sent me the picture over WhatsApp, which, ironically, "just works."

Apple needs to get these bugs fixed. I lament the fact that they remain more focused on hardware then software.

hacker_88
1 replies
8h0m

Use NearbySharing app for Android to Any Window,it uses windows built-in nearby sharing ) .

Use Quickshare (built-in app for Android, previously called Nearby Share)for other androids .

berkes
0 replies
7h0m

Won't share to and from a Linux desktop though.

LocalSend works on all platforms.

fddrdplktrew
0 replies
10h45m

aren't ssh and ftp/sftp also good alternatives?

treefry
0 replies
11h22m

I tried to set up Dart runtime and run cli on a Linux server. Then I realized that it just prints a message and quits. Maybe it's better to directly tell user cli isn't implemented yet.

tamimio
0 replies
16h5m

From my experience where I wanted to send some files from my iPhone to an android based screen in my car, local send and landrop where the best, the rest needed internet or didn’t work properly, like sharedrop, snapdrop, pairdrop, and arc.

pkalinowski
0 replies
16h42m

I'm using snapdrop.net for that. It requires a server, but clients only need to open a webpage, so it's easier after initial setup. I run mine on Synology server.

Too bad it seems to not be mantained anymore

olgs
0 replies
16h47m

Agree, this tool is fantastic for adhoc transfers on my Android, iOS and Mac devices.

Even works over tailscale on Wifi with Client isolation on.

lukesalis
0 replies
9h13m

I used to use a program called dukto to send files and text to other devices on my network.

dolmen
0 replies
4h5m

From the Terms of Service [1]:

    You represent that you are over the age of 18. The Company does not permit those under 18 to use the Service.
[1]: https://localsend.org/#/terms-of-service

dheerajvs
0 replies
9h40m

I continue to use TrebleShot[0] although it's repo is archived since it also enables browsing files using a Web browser. So you don't need to install it on the receiver side.

Does LocalSend also have this capability?

[0] https://github.com/trebleshot/android

anon115
0 replies
16h35m

wifi direct would be nice

anon115
0 replies
16h36m

som1 consider making 1 in bluetooth since now bluetooth web api exists

Solvency
0 replies
15h47m

Would've been cool if they concat'd LocalSend into simply "Lend".

Saris
0 replies
16h59m

Love this tool, great for moving a few files between devices.