Have you tried Proton Docs? While not the exact same thing as Standard Notes, the editing and history seems to be quite similar. All "notes" files are stored in Proton Drive too.
Or are there other features in Standard Notes not to be found in the Proton suite?
I kinda struggle to believe it's that difficult. I mean, Tresorit has a pretty good and functional Linux client. What have they done which makes it sustainable for them?
Filen.io also has a pure sync-client, which is distributed as an AppImage. This also works, but the FUSE integration Tresorit provides is quite awesome and performing quite decently.
I would actually recommend Proton to start the development on an older Linux distro. Like RHEL/Alma/Rocky 9 or Debian 11 (which is EOL, though) and make it run there. Moving from that distro to newer distros will then go smother and you'll get other distros supported quicker.
The mistake too many Linux efforts does is to take the "latest and greatest" distro version - often coupled with what a single Linux developer considers the "most used distro" and then hits lots of challenging when needing to support older distros. That's going to be painful.
@protonprivacy Please take note and forward to Andy and other managers.
@Dave It actually works quite nicely with Tresorit. And the latency lag is acceptable.
I've been doing this via Rclone + Jotta Cloud with Rclone encryption, which still works better than Rclone + Proton Drive. But not as smooth as Tresorit. Rclone + Backblaze B2 + encryption is also better than the Proton Drive approach.
I've also used this approach in read-only mode with @borgmatic too, which is a great way to restore data from a backup. And that's almost as smooth as Tresorit (even though a very different use case).
I've used Rclone with Proton Drive to mount a directory .... it is dreadfully slow. Maybe directory/file sync (where copies are both places) are better.
I cannot recommend Rclone for Proton Drive in "mount mode" currently.
@protonprivacy This is why I'm still using Tresorit on Linux .... One of two reasons (the other one is access to shared folders with read/write access).
I can understand the confusion. But it kinda makes sense.... if my hypothesis is correct.
Proton Drive has the concepts of "My Files" and "Computers". Files stored under "Computer" (where you can have synced files for up to 10 computers, according to docs) tracks the files for each computer individually.
So when you uninstall Drive and delete the files, they are only stored in the cloud. But after reinstalling it again, it sees the files locally for that computer is gone ... so it gets removed in the cloud.
Had these files been moved to "My Files" in before the reinstall, this should not have happened.
At least, that's my theory.
So once again it is basically a premature announcement; since all of those features already available, already exists in the ordinary Proton Business plan ... As none of them are basically Pass specific.
And the difference then between "ordinary" Pass and business "Pass" is zero .... Both have unlimited vaults and 2FA in the more costly plans.
What is the difference between Proton Pass for business vs ordinary Proton Pass?
To me it looks like "same sh*t, new wrapping".
Uhm ... ever heard of Computer Science at universities and such?
Just one quick example:
https://www.eecs.mit.edu/research/computer-science/
So I spent a little bit time to dig up what Notion is.
This is what I found when searching for it ... https://www.notion.so/about
And I honestly have no idea why Skiff would be interesting for Notion. From what I can grasp the only Notion features overlap are Skiff Pages and perhaps Skiff Calendar. It's so off I struggle to fully grasp this.
First of all, Notion is not a service talking about privacy at all, afaict. And that was one of the main arguments Skiff had.
And then the first thing this merges states is that Skiff services are closing down.
I hate to say this, but Skiff founders couldn't really have cared that much about privacy then, when they chose to close down so quickly and abruptly like that, without a continuation plan on bringing privacy to Notion.
I believe the Skiff founders, if they really cared strongly about privacy, realised their service was not sustainable in a longer run, with too high running cost and too low income. In addition they might have seen that they would need to invest a lot more into further development and that it was too hard to improve their revenue stream. So the alternative was either to go down with a bang (bankruptcy), or they could sell "something" to another company and make it sound nicer.
Right now I just wonder what Skiff managed to actually sell to Notion. Most likely manpower, if I should guess.
Tuta seems to be driven by idealists and privacy activists as well. AFAIK, they also don't have venture capital and their user base of paying users is what keeps them alive. Which is also why it's still a small company.
I don't recall how Tuta got their initial funding to get startet. I don't think they were crowdfunded in the same way Proton did.
But the idealsism goals of both Tuta and Proton is what generally makes it less likely they will sell out.
AFAIR, Skiff was VC funded. The idealism of the founders are easily ignored when the VC backing wants to cash in on their investments. And that's what happened here, in some way or another.
@[email protected] I use a plethora of browsers.
I'm migrating fron Firefox to LibreWolf (sorry, I prefer non-chrome based browsers), but have a Ungoogled Chromium as a backup those times Firefox/LibreWolf doesn't cut it (I thought the world had learnt a lesson from the IE days; seems we need to educate a new generation web hipsters).
On Android I use the default browser (in @e_[email protected]) for a few news/blog sites, Mull and Vivaldi for some other sites and DuckDuckGo when searching. Default browser is Mull with Privacy Mode enabled by default.
I honestly don't like that the Chrome based browsers seems to be dominating these days. We need a heterogeneous web render environment to ensure a single dominant player dictates how things will be for users.
And without such competition, I fear there will be a lesser drive to further improve browsers. Just like when Netscape seemed too complacent with their own browsers back in the days.