AList vs SeaweedFS
| Tagline | File list program supporting multiple storages, with WebDAV and web UI | Fast distributed storage system for blobs, objects, files and a data lake |
| Category | File Storage & Sync | File Storage & Sync |
| Replaces | Google Drive, Dropbox | Dropbox, Google Drive, Box |
| GitHub stars | 50k | 35k |
| Language | Go | Go |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 4/5 Involved |
| Deploy options | Docker Manual | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 4 days ago | yesterday |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
AList
- Primarily a read/list and aggregation layer; not a true two-way sync engine like Dropbox
- No native desktop/mobile sync clients (relies on WebDAV)
- Limited collaboration, versioning, and team permission features
- Documentation is partly Chinese-first and can lag for some backends
SeaweedFS
- Storage infrastructure, not an end-user product: no consumer sync app, sharing UI, or collaboration
- Requires assembling master/volume/filer components and a frontend to behave like Dropbox
- Steeper operational knowledge needed for distributed deployment and tuning
- Documentation assumes infrastructure familiarity
Bottom line
Choose AList if you want the lower-effort setup; choose AList for the larger community and ecosystem. SeaweedFS has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
SeaweedFS
Fast distributed storage system for blobs, objects, files and a data lake