What is going to overtake FTP and why aren't we using it yet?

Question

Is it just me, or does FTP seem a little archaic? It seems slow and inefficient, and its over 30 years old, not that all old things are bad :)

What protocols exist out there that might become successors to FTP?

I've used webdav a little, but don't know much about it. Is it faster? More reliable? More secure?

Why isn't there widespread adoption of a newer technology (yet)?

Update: Specifically, I'm referring to downloading/uploading files between developers and their web server.

I am aware of other mainstream protocols for other uses such as web browsing, file sharing, etc.

Answer 1

FTP has been mostly replaced, by HTTP, SCP/SFTP, and so on. You'll still find the odd FTP server here and there, but they're dinosaurs.

Answer 2

The nice thing about FTP is that it works, which is a major improvement over, for example, Windows filesharing (or for that matter, Win7's Homegroups).

There are plenty of other technologies for transferring files though. HTTP is commonly used for retrieving files, SCP or SFTP handle the secure aspect, basically running the usual protocol through a SSH tunnel. As for inefficient? How so? Just because it's old doesn't mean it's inefficient.

How would a more efficient protocol work?

Anyway, FTP has its niche. It is used for transferring files where security is not important. It does the trick there, and I'm not aware of any superior alternatives, nor can I think of any obvious ways to improve the protocol.

Answer 3

FTP used to be the One True system to move data around. That's pretty much fragmented now:

• for public data distribution: HTTP, BitTorrent
• for sharing data inside an organization: web-based tools, SMB and other native filesharing platforms
• for moving data between boxes: scp, rsync
• for sending data to an individual: email, web-based tools

Answer 4

Here's a discussion about the future of FTP and related file transfer protocols that I blogged about recently.

Answer 5

Actually, I find FTP one of the most efficient protocols, as there is only minimal protocol overhead. Also, FTP commands are plain english words, instead of binary commands.

It's main weakness is the lack of encryption, which puts it IMHO into the same category as Telnet, which has been replaced by SSH mostly.

There are replacements (i.e. SCP), but frankly, FTP is a fine protocol and with FTP over SSH, there is an alternative to it's main weakness available. But yes, nowadays I would use SCP whenever possible.

Answer 6

This was a provocative article: Wish More Hosts Offered WebDAV? Blame PHP!

A useful thing about WebDAV is that it tends to be more firewall-friendly, you don't need to muck around with PASV. Since it can use HTTPS you can obtain better security that way than you get with FTP.