FireFTP vs Cyberduck Comparison

Compare features to find which solution is best for your needs.

FireFTP icon

FireFTP

FireFTP was a free, open-source, cross-platform FTP client deeply integrated into the Mozilla Firefox browser as an add-on. It provided a familiar two-pane interface for easy file transfers between local and remote servers, supporting both FTP and SFTP protocols. by Nightlight Productions

Open Source
Categories:
Available for:
Mac OS X Windows Linux Firefox
VS
Cyberduck icon

Cyberduck

Cyberduck is a free, open-source client for file transfer, supporting FTP, SFTP, WebDAV, and major cloud storage services. It provides a user-friendly interface for managing files on servers and in the cloud. by iterate GmbH

Open Source
Categories:
Available for:
Mac OS X Windows

Summary

FireFTP and Cyberduck are both powerful solutions in their space. FireFTP offers fireftp was a free, open-source, cross-platform ftp client deeply integrated into the mozilla firefox browser as an add-on. it provided a familiar two-pane interface for easy file transfers between local and remote servers, supporting both ftp and sftp protocols., while Cyberduck provides cyberduck is a free, open-source client for file transfer, supporting ftp, sftp, webdav, and major cloud storage services. it provides a user-friendly interface for managing files on servers and in the cloud.. Compare their features and pricing to find the best match for your needs.

Pros & Cons Comparison

FireFTP

FireFTP

Pros

  • Integrated directly into Firefox for convenience.
  • Free and open-source.
  • Supports secure SFTP connections.
  • Easy-to-use dual-pane interface.

Cons

  • Not compatible with modern Firefox versions.
  • Development is effectively discontinued.
  • Features are basic compared to standalone clients.
  • Performance can be impacted by browser load.
Cyberduck

Cyberduck

Pros

  • Supports a wide range of protocols (FTP, SFTP, WebDAV, S3, Azure, etc.)
  • Clean and user-friendly interface
  • Integrates with major cloud storage providers
  • Ability to mount remote storage as local drive (via associated tool)
  • File sharing and preview features
  • Open source and actively developed

Cons

  • Synchronization features are basic compared to dedicated sync tools
  • Performance can vary based on connection/service speed
  • Some advanced features require paid extensions

Compare With Others

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare

Compare features, pricing, and reviews between these alternatives.

Compare