Thursday, June 10, 2010

Firefox Sync vs. Xmarks

The "Mozilla Weave" extension was recently brought out of beta testing and renamed Firefox Sync.  I decided to try it out, and compare it to the add-in that I currently use for browser sync, Xmarks

First, the similarities:  Both Xmarks and Firefox Sync work basically the same.  You install a browser extension, and your bookmarks, passwords, and open tabs are kept in sync across all your browser instances (each browser on each computer that you use).  This is accomplished by keeping a master copy on a server.  Both Xmarks and Firefox Sync will host your data, or, for advanced users, will allow you to set up and use your own server.

There are a number of differences between the services, however:
First off, Firefox Sync doesn't work with Chrome, MSIE, Safari, or Opera, at least not yet.  Xmarks works in pretty much any browser.   I don't anticipate that this will be the case for too much longer, but it is worth mentioning at this stage.

The major difference between the two services is encryption.  Both services encrypt the data that you send to their servers so that no one can snoop in on the traffic as it's sent over the Internet.  The difference is that Xmarks can read your data on their server, and Firefox Sync cannot.

Firefox Sync encrypts your data on the client side (before it leaves the browser), and therefore its servers have no access to the data that it stores.  The obvious advantage to this approach for the user is that you don't need to worry that they will sell your data, or analyze it, or do anything with it other than store it for you and allow you to retrieve it.  If the servers get hacked, there won't be anything usable on them.  If Mozilla turns evil and wants to snoop on you, they can't: they don't have the decryption key.  You do, and it was never sent to them.

This is not to say that Xmarks' approach is a bad one.  Yes, Xmarks can read your data.  Therefore they can enable you to easily share portions of it.  They can also provide you with easy access to your bookmarks on their website, for those instances when you don't control the browser you're using. They also keep a history of changes, so you can restore from back before you shortsightedly deleted that folder a few months (or even years) ago.

Xmarks also lets you create profiles and manage them from their website, which can contain a subset of your bookmarks, so it's possible to sync certain bookmarks with one group of browsers, but not with others.  This is useful if you have a folder or two that you only need on certain computers, or if you want to have a stripped-down set of bookmarks on your media PC or netbook.

The Xmarks approach isn't all good, though.  They have "discovery" features that I prefer to turn off, since their business model relies on "recommending" links, their extension will alter search results pages by default in order to show you their recommendations.  Still, you can turn them off, which prevents it from being a real negative in my book.

So, what am I going to use going forward?  Both, at least for now.  As you can see from the screenshots above, I have disabled password and tab syncing with Xmarks, and only use that for bookmarks.  This enables me to easily share certain content, use profiles, and manage my bookmarks from the web interface.  There's no reason for me to have my passwords on anyone else's server in an accessible form, or my currently open tabs, for that matter, so I'm using Firefox Sync for that.  Firefox Sync is also set up to sync my History, Preferences, and Settings, which is something that Xmarks can't do.

I'm syncing my bookmarks to Xmarks on my Linux box only (which is always on, and usually has Firefox open), that way it will keep up-to-date with changes that happen over Firefox Sync which is enabled and syncing everything on all of my Firefox browsers.  I'm currently not doing much with Xmarks profiles, but if I want to use them in the future, I can have Xmarks handle bookmarks sync on the browsers with non-default profiles.  I use Firefox by default, but I also occasionally use other browsers, so I have Xmarks set up on non-Mozilla browsers as well.

15 comments:

  1. I am just on my way to find a solution for my Linux box (Firefox) and Macbook (Safari)... Wouldn't it be possible to circumvent the security issue with the Xmarks server by using your Linux box as your personal Xmarks server? That is my plan, but haven't found much information about it so far.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you want the "Bring Your Own Server" edition of Xmarks, it's a separate add-on. The problem is that it doesn't (at least, not automatically) provide any sharing features, which is the whole reason I'm still using Xmarks.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If Firefox Sync have options to do profile backup like FEBE, that would be good. Sometimes you just want to have that consistency across a few machine, and sometimes not.

    For now, I'll stay with Xmarks in view that it works with FF and IE. That's the wonderful thing about FF... ability to choose add-ons and not be stuck with something useless.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks for your clear explanation! I'm going to use both now I know that you can't access your bookmarks on-line with Firefox Sync.

    ReplyDelete
  5. and Xmarks has some "hotkey" conflicts with "webdeveloper" which is a must in my career.

    I'm switching to Firefox Sync

    ReplyDelete
  6. One problem I have with Firefox Sync, is that it doesn't always keep things in order. This is especially a problem with the bookmarks toolbar, speaking of which, it doesn't sync favicons, which is a problem since none of the bookmarks in my toolbar have names.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I've been an xmarks user for a while now and I'm grateful to them but I'm glad firefox is moving in the right direction. Chrome had already implemented a kind of bookmark sync in the past.

    There's nothing healthier than the "browser wars"! The quality and services offered by Firefox & Chrome keeps growing every day.

    Thumbs up!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Nice post. I am currently an xmarks user (been using it since it was called foxmarks) and wanted to see what FF's sync offered. I will give sync a try. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I used to like Xmarks before they started altering search results, adding ratings and so on. It is a long time that they promised a real profile management that does not add bookmarks to all profiles by default, but instead it seems they would rather spend their time on data mining part of their business. So I wait and as soon as FireFox Sync brings the profile feature I switch to it, I do not care about IE or other browsers either.

    ReplyDelete
  10. tnks, my vote goes to Firefox Sync, higher security, less adds

    ReplyDelete
  11. Excellent Review, my vote goes to Firefox Sync also, they respect privacy as private!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. thanks just the info i needed before choosing firefox sync

    ReplyDelete
  13. if the decryption key is not stored on firefox server, how can my other computer decrypt data from server if the key is stored on my another one pc?

    ReplyDelete
  14. The key is generated from a passphrase, which must be entered on each computer before sync will function.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Doubt FF sync will be available for other browsers any other time - I imagine it's called Firefox sync for a reason!

    Think I'll be sticking with xmarks for a bit longer yet.

    ReplyDelete