Box Sync vs. Box Drive: Which Is Right for Your Team?Choosing the right synchronization tool for cloud file access affects productivity, storage costs, collaboration speed, and IT support overhead. Box has offered two client apps for desktop access: Box Sync (the legacy sync client) and Box Drive (the modern, streaming-first client). This article compares their core designs, user experience, performance, security, IT management, and migration considerations to help you decide which fits your team.
Executive summary
- Box Sync is best when teams need local copies of selected folders on disk and must be able to work offline with those exact files.
- Box Drive is best when teams prefer virtualized access to all Box content without consuming large amounts of local storage, want simpler management, and expect better performance and feature parity with web Box.
Choose based on offline needs, storage constraints, and administrative preferences.
What each product is and how they work
Box Sync
Box Sync creates a local mirror of selected Box folders on a user’s machine. Files in chosen folders are downloaded to disk and kept synchronized in both directions. Users open and edit files directly from their file system; changes sync back to Box when connected.
Key characteristics:
- Selective sync at the folder level.
- Files are stored locally (consumes disk space).
- Designed primarily for offline work and fast local access.
Box Drive
Box Drive presents Box as a mounted virtual drive on the desktop (appears as a local drive letter on Windows or a mounted volume on macOS). Files are streamed or fetched on-demand, so most content remains in the cloud until a user opens or marks it for offline use.
Key characteristics:
- Virtual drive with on-demand streaming.
- Minimal local storage usage by default.
- Easy access to the entire Box content hierarchy without full downloads.
User experience and workflows
Box Sync:
- Familiar folder structure in the OS file explorer.
- File open/save flows are identical to working with local files.
- Good for power users who need guaranteed local copies.
- Requires manual selection of folders to sync; users may miss files if not careful.
Box Drive:
- Seamless access to all Box files without long sync waits.
- Searching and browsing shows the full folder tree even for items not locally downloaded.
- Context-menu actions (right-click) integrate with Box features (comments, version history).
- Users may need to learn “Make Available Offline” or “Always keep on device” options for files they want local.
Performance and bandwidth
Box Sync:
- Initial sync can be heavy on bandwidth and disk I/O when large folders are selected.
- Ongoing background sync may generate more continuous upload/download traffic for frequently edited files.
- Local access speed is fast (local disk reads/writes).
Box Drive:
- Significantly reduces local disk usage and initial sync traffic.
- On-demand fetches cause bursts of bandwidth when users open files; good caching reduces repeated fetches.
- Better for distributed teams with limited local storage or users who rarely access many files.
Offline access and mobile/remote work
Box Sync:
- Designed for offline-first workflows. Files selected for sync remain available offline automatically.
- Reliable when users need to work from locations without network access.
Box Drive:
- Supports selective offline availability per file or folder. Users mark items “Available Offline” as needed.
- For teams with intermittent offline needs, Box Drive is flexible but requires users to proactively mark files for offline use.
Storage and device considerations
Box Sync:
- Consumes local disk space equal to the size of synced folders. This can be a problem on laptops or SSD-limited devices.
- Users with limited storage must be conservative about what they sync.
Box Drive:
- Uses minimal local storage by default; downloads files into a cache when opened.
- Better suited to devices with constrained storage (thin clients, BYOD laptops).
Comparison table
| Feature | Box Sync | Box Drive |
|---|---|---|
| Local disk usage | High (folder contents stored locally) | Low (on-demand streaming, cached files) |
| Access to full Box tree | Only for synced folders | Full hierarchy visible |
| Offline availability | Automatic for selected folders | Selective per file/folder |
| Initial sync time | Potentially long | Fast (no full download) |
| Performance for frequent edits | Fast local I/O | Good, with cached files; may re-sync frequently edited files |
Security, compliance, and IT controls
Both clients respect Box enterprise security features (SSO/SAML, enterprise device trust, enterprise policies). Differences to consider:
- Box Sync increases the attack surface because full file copies exist on local disks; if devices are lost or not encrypted, data exposure risk increases.
- Box Drive’s streaming model reduces the amount of persistent data stored locally, lowering risk and simplifying compliance for regulated environments.
- Box Drive generally offers more modern device management integration and telemetry for IT.
- Consider device encryption policies, endpoint protection, and whether offline copies should be allowed at all.
Administration and deployment
Box Sync:
- Legacy product; may require more manual management across diverse endpoint types.
- Policies around what users can sync must be enforced by IT and communicated to users.
Box Drive:
- Easier mass deployment and management through modern tooling (MDM, deployment packages).
- Centralized features and updated more actively by Box, leading to potentially fewer compatibility issues with OS updates.
Feature parity and collaboration
- Box Drive better mirrors Box web features (preview, comments, version history) from the desktop context-menu.
- Box Sync supports basic sync and offline editing, but may lack some newer integrations and context-aware features.
- Collaboration features like real-time commenting, tasks, and versioning are more seamlessly surfaced in Box Drive.
Migration and coexistence
- Box has encouraged migration from Box Sync to Box Drive. Many organizations run both during transition periods.
- Migrating requires planning: identify users/folders that must remain available offline, communicate training, and configure policies to prevent accidental data loss.
- Test migrations with a pilot group (power users, remote workers) before organization-wide rollout.
Migration checklist (brief)
- Inventory synced folders and total sizes.
- Identify users needing full offline access.
- Communicate change and train users on “Available Offline” in Box Drive.
- Deploy Box Drive in parallel, monitor behavior, then retire Box Sync.
Cost implications
- Direct licensing costs depend on your Box plan; migration itself is typically an admin and support cost rather than a license change.
- Indirect savings with Box Drive: reduced support for disk-space issues, less data loss risk, simpler endpoint management.
- Box Sync can increase costs if IT must upgrade device storage or provide extra support.
Recommendations by use case
- Teams that need guaranteed local copies and frequent offline access (e.g., field engineers, video editors working with large files offline): Box Sync or consider hybrid approaches, but verify local disk capacity and security controls.
- Teams that need access to a large corpus of files without large local storage, desire modern collaboration features, and want simpler device management: Box Drive.
- Organizations with strict data residency or compliance requirements should prefer Box Drive for reduced local data footprint, unless specific offline regulations mandate local copies.
- When in doubt: pilot Box Drive with a subset of users and gather feedback; migrate once offline-use patterns are understood.
Practical tips for rollout
- Provide short training: how to browse Box Drive, mark files “Available Offline,” and use context-menu Box features.
- Configure endpoint policies: enforce disk encryption, disable sync for unmanaged devices, or set limits on offline availability.
- Use monitoring during pilot: track cache sizes, network patterns, and user-reported issues.
- Document recovery procedures for users who relied on Box Sync folders—explain how to mark items offline in Box Drive.
Conclusion
If your priority is minimizing local storage use, simplifying device management, and getting the latest Box desktop integrations, Box Drive is generally the better choice. If your workflows require persistent local copies and uninterrupted offline access without manual marking, Box Sync remains useful but is a legacy approach and carries higher device storage and security considerations. For most modern teams, migrate to Box Drive after a small pilot and targeted training.
Leave a Reply