[scarface74]

How is this better than CloudBerry + AWS S3? Cloudberry allows you to map a drive and makes an AWS S3 bucket look like a standard Windows drive. It also supports multi part upload and supports retrying failed chunks.

It's intuitive, built on top of AWS and you can take advantage of all of the other AWS features -- i.e. send an email notification when a file is received, supports versioning, fine grained access control. as much storage space as your budget will allow etc.

CloudBerry drive has a one time cost of $40.

[stephengillie]

Is there a way to transfer ownership of an S3 bucket? Like, can I upload a file in my AWS account, and by some means transfer the bucket and files to your AWS account? Without the actual data bits moving and incurring a bandwidth charge? That would be ideal for some scenarios.

[scarface74]

From the CLI you can copy files to another bucket in another account owned by someone else within the same region without any bandwidth costs. You only pay for the copy requests. The copy request is $.01 per 1000 requests.

You could also create a lambda function that is triggered any time a file is copied with a certain key prefix (like a directory but not really), that copies to the other account. Of course you both have to set up permissions.

https://serverfault.com/questions/349460/how-to-move-files-b...

[auslander]

Use Signed URL feature - the link is valid for set period of time.

docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/ShareObjectPreSignedURL.html

[stephengillie]

This is a URL that expires, yes? What if I wanted to close my account, but let them retain the bucket and data?

[auslander]

Just one of the ways to share. Or you may set bucket replication to target account, or just aws s3 sync two buckets...

[stephengillie]

Thanks. Those require 2 buckets, one in each account. The one-bucket solution is elusive.

[halbritt]

CloudBerry is an application that needs to be installed on the client workstation, something which many corporate IT departments do not allow.

[scarface74]

If you're working for a company whose business is to transfer massive files, the IT department should be more than willing to pay for CloudBerry. They would need to set up the AWS account and S3 permissions.

It should be a lot easier sell to an IT department an AWS + Cloudberry solution than an unknown company's solution.

[halbritt]

My point was that a browser-only solution is more tenable than installing an application in many cases.

I get files from customers in Fortune 100 companies and many of their IT departments absolutely prohibit the installation of something like Cloudberry. It was explained to me that getting IT to approve the installation of a particular application was a multi-month endeavor.