I tried ExpanDrive to work on invoice folders from my laptop, but renamed folders kept showing their old names until I reconnected. Would a replacement that mounts storage work better, or should I be looking at sync options? I’m not sure which term fits working directly on those files.
A mounted drive isn’t a full local copy
The mistake I keep seeing is treating an ExpanDrive replacement like it has to be another folder-sync app. That’s not the job we’re talking about. These tools mount remote or cloud storage so you can work with it as a normal drive in Finder or Explorer.
That distinction matters to me. I want access to the files, not an assumption that everything needs to live on my disk. CloudMounter, for example, lets files open straight from cloud storage without syncing the whole collection locally. That’s a more useful starting point than another list of supposedly interchangeable apps.
Decide how much setup you’ll tolerate
I get a little tired of “just use rclone” being handed out without the rest of the sentence. rclone mount is free and open source, and it supports a huge range of providers. It’s also command-line based. Setup and tinkering are part of that choice, not some irrelevant detail.
If that sounds fine, it’s a sensible option. If you’re trying to avoid fiddling with commands, calling it free doesn’t make the setup disappear.
At the other end, CloudMounter is described as about as easy to set up as ExpanDrive. I’d separate those approaches before comparing anything else. Being comfortable with maintenance and wanting a straightforward setup are different requirements, and neither needs defending.
Match the connections you actually have
A single SFTP server on a Mac is a different problem from a collection of cloud accounts. SSHFS with macFUSE is a free option for that narrower Mac setup. It works fine for one server, but managing a bunch of connections gets clunky.
That’s why I wouldn’t make provider count the whole argument either. A long compatibility list is useful when you need it. When you don’t, I’d rather focus on whether the tool fits the connections I actually have to manage.
Familiar tools can save some bother
If you’re already using Cyberduck, Mountain Duck deserves attention for a concrete reason: it’s from the Cyberduck developers and can import your existing bookmarks. It works on both Mac and Windows. That gives you an existing setup to carry over rather than another connection list to rebuild.
For a mixed collection of services, I’d look at CloudMounter setup instead of assuming a server-focused option covers everything. Its supported connections include SFTP, FTP, WebDAV, S3, Google Drive, Dropbox, OneDrive, and Box. The appeal is the combination of straightforward setup and access without syncing everything locally, not a claim that everyone should pick it.
Test your routine, not the sales pitch
I’d start with a small folder of nonessential files on a service you already use. Mount it, browse it, open files in your usual apps, and try saving changes. Check what happens to local disk usage rather than assuming “mounted” tells you everything.
Then add your other connections and repeat the routine. Notice how much setup you tolerate and how awkward account management feels. Pick based on that, not on somebody else’s insistence that their preferred option is automatically yours.
16 Likes
If you spend most of your time browsing through old invoices whilst connected, I’d go with a mount. If you edit current invoices throughout the day, and need to have them available even when not connected, I’d go with syncing that working directory. I wouldn’t dismiss sync because keeping the whole archive locally would be wasteful.
Those old folder names are a separate issue. That sounds more like a stale directory listing, though reconnecting will fix that it doesn’t prove it. Mounted tools can cache those listings meaning that switching to another mount isn’t necessarily a cure. Rclone for instance specifically has directory-cache refresh controls. Before swapping out a replacement, I’d ask if you renamed the folder through the mounted drive or elsewhere, such as the storage providers website. That’s a useful distinction to troubleshooting.
For a Mac, I’d throw CloudMounter up there for the inclusion of macOS Keychain. Having the connection credentials stored there in Keychain is a welcome bonus. But for your invoice needs, my deciding question would be whether you need dependable offline access to the active folders, rather than something that looks like it’s under a drive icon.
“Mount versus sync” isn’t enough to decide this. For invoices, I’d care more about what happens between clicking Save and closing the laptop. The folder name annoyance matters, but I’d put a missing revision ahead of it. Whichever route you choose, check whether you can tell when a changed file has reached the remote storage and whether a failed transfer is obvious.
I’m less sold on the CloudMounter pitch based on setup and connection lists. Neither answers your complaint. It still earns a place in a head-to-head trial specifically to see whether you can rename a folder and continue working without disconnecting. Use a disposable invoice, rename its parent folder, edit it, then check the name and contents through the provider’s website. I’d judge the replacement on that whole sequence, not whether the drive appears correctly when first connected.
For your laptop, I’d lean toward syncing the active invoice folder if you often save something and immediately head out. A mount would be my choice for occasional access while connected. In either case, make “everything has uploaded” a visible checkpoint before shutting the lid, rather than assuming the Save button settles it.
Check if someone else can edit the invoice folders before picking a replacement. The advice with offline access makes sense if you are using it alone, but I would be less enthusiastic about using sync in a shared workspace. You can easily get two people editing different local copies of the same invoice. A mounted drive doesn’t guarantee you have exclusive access to a file either. I would make syncing a working folder a test case for collaborative invoice editing. Throw away a file and see if the second save attempts makes a conflict copy or overwrites your changes.
I am not convinced by the Keychain argument as a reason to prefer CloudMounter for this use case. Storing credentials does not address the problem of two people editing the same invoice. It is still a valid comparison candidate as the mounted drive option, but to actually test how it would handle changes made by another editor while you have a file open. If you are the only editor, I would prefer to sync the working folder. If there are others who might edit it, I would make my selection based on how much conflict resolution is required to merge their changes with what I have.
A folder of finished invoice PDFs is a different case from a folder containing your invoicing app’s working data. Before choosing mount or sync, I’d check which you’re actually moving. “Invoice folders” could mean either, and I wouldn’t give them the same advice.
First, separate ordinary documents you open individually from anything the app manages as a project or database. For ordinary documents, the mount-versus-sync advice here makes sense. For app-managed data, check the app’s storage requirements before relocating it. Look specifically for support for network locations or synced folders. I’d put that ahead of testing replacement drive tools. Syncing the active folder sounds convenient, but I wouldn’t make it the default until that check is done.
Next, repeat your normal opening routine with disposable files. If you usually open an invoice from the app’s recent-files list, use that route after renaming its folder, rather than browsing to it manually. That checks whether the replacement solves your actual interruption, not merely whether it displays the new name. I’d lean toward sync for individual documents you need while away, but let the invoicing app’s requirements decide where its working data belongs.
Browsing to a known invoice and performing a search for a customer’s name throughout the invoices are two different tasks. I would put search on the checklist before selecting a mount. The rename test is significant, but I wouldn’t consider an exercise a win if you can’t even find your documents. For generic PDFs, I would sync the folders that you routinely search. If you use a mount, consider using document-content searches or the filename as a search criterion instead of relying solely on browsing as your primary criterion.
Skip anything that autosaves while it sits on a mounted drive. Invoicing apps that write a temp file every few seconds will crawl over a remote mount, and if the connection hiccups mid-write you can end up with a half-saved file instead of just a slow one. That’s the risk nobody’s naming yet, and it’s bigger than a stale folder name.
@prime_daemon has the right instinct with the ‘did it actually upload’ checkpoint. I’d go further and say the ghost names you saw are almost certainly a listing cache, not proof the mount is broken. Swapping to CloudMounter or anything else won’t magically kill that behavior, since caching directory listings is how these tools stay responsive in the first place. If you renamed the folder through the provider’s website while the mount was still showing the old view, that’s exactly the symptom you’d get.
So my rule would be simpler than the mount-vs-sync debate everyone’s having. If an app owns the invoice data, let it save locally and point your backup at that folder. If you’re just reaching for finished PDFs now and then, a mount is fine and you don’t need the whole archive on disk. The thing I’d actually test before committing is a forced disconnect mid-save, not a rename. Pull your wifi while a file is open, reconnect, and see what state the file is in. That tells you more about whether the tool is safe for real work than any clean browse-and-open run ever will.
Don’t treat a synced invoice folder as your backup. I’d lean toward sync for everyday document work, but @the_beacon’s suggestion to save locally and back up deserves a separate check: can you recover an earlier version or an accidentally deleted invoice without depending on the working folder? A replacement that fixes the stale names still wouldn’t get my vote if its recovery process is a mystery.