<p>If you're finding S3's web interface limiting, particularly for tasks like case-sensitive searches and bulk downloads, you might consider using CloudMounter to mount S3 as a local drive. This approach can provide a more familiar and flexible way to interact with your S3 storage, especially if you're more accustomed to traditional file systems. While tools like Cyberduck also offer similar functionality, mounting S3 as a drive can streamline workflows, making it easier to manage files without needing to switch between different interfaces or rely solely on command-line tools.</p>
<p>A simplified way to work with S3.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-08-27T12:28:11.693Z
2024-11-26T19:34:32.000Z
2024-11-26T19:34:32.000Z
lostmarien
<p>If you're looking to mount the S3 bucket as part of the file system, then use S3 Drive</p>
<p><a href="https://www.callback.com/s3drive" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.callback.com/s3drive</a></p>
<p>This is a solid product, easy to use, fast, does exactly what I need for accessing S3 files from my local machine. It works on Mac, Windows and Linux.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-10-23T17:13:02.653Z
2024-10-23T17:14:18.160Z
2024-10-23T17:14:18.160Z
sakshi
<p>Bruce already answered the How, so here's the Why: (<em>why is it missing so many features?)</em></p>
<ul>
<li>A lot of people interface with AWS not over the web, but via the command line.</li>
<li>There are already external programs for accessing S3 via a friendly interface, like <a href="https://github.com/iterate-ch/cyberduck" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Cyberduck</a>.</li>
<li>People use AWS for work, and thus have more time to deal with user interfaces. Contrast that with a casual app or website, where if the user doesn't figure out what they want in 3 seconds they might just leave and never come back.</li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-08-28T03:28:34.153Z
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you weren't trying to be intentionally patronizing. I use both the web interface and the command line quite frequently--almost daily. I'm a devops engineer with 12 years in the IT industry, so I would consider myself very technical--there's no reason technical people can't prefer a user interface that's actually functional. I exclusively use AWS for work--why would you insinuate that means I'm fine wasting my day with unnecessary tedium? None of the points you made excuse AWS from having UI that's not a pain in the butt.
jeremywat
CC BY-SA 4.0
2024-08-29T02:41:42.957Z
I'm not saying the command line is better than the web, or that the web has an acceptable interface. I'm just explaining why it's designed like that. I think my third bullet point might have unintentionally came off as patronizing, I'll remove it.
Almenon
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-07T00:41:38.807Z
2024-08-29T02:43:02.900Z
2024-08-29T02:43:02.900Z
Almenon
<p>This was going to be a comment, but I'll add it as an answer and take the consequences.</p>
<p>Yes, you are doing it wrong. S3 is an <strong>object store</strong>. The things you are looking for (search, directories, etc) are for <strong>filesystems</strong>. You are asking <a href="https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/04/06/fish-climb/" rel="noreferrer">a fish to climb a tree</a></p>
<p>You can mount S3 onto a filesystem, but it is not a filesystem.</p>
<p>If you want an object storage to do filesystem things, then mount it into a filesystem. See:</p>
<p><a href="https://github.com/awslabs/mountpoint-s3/" rel="noreferrer">https://github.com/awslabs/mountpoint-s3/</a></p>
<p>However if you actually want a filesystem, why not use a filesystem:</p>
<p><a href="https://aws.amazon.com/efs/" rel="noreferrer">https://aws.amazon.com/efs/</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-09-07T05:19:17.247Z
2023-09-07T05:19:17.247Z
Bruce Becker
<p>I'm not sure if it's something I'm doing wrong, or if the S3 web interface is just trash. There are a ton of basic capabilities that work in pretty much any other file storage product (Windows Explorer, Google Drive, OneDrive etc.), which don't work in S3:</p>
<ol>
<li>The search string must be 100% exact--case-sensitive (if I search &quot;myfile&quot; and the file happens to be &quot;MyFile&quot;, it won't find it), no wildcards or searching multiple words (if my file is something like &quot;puppy-picture-2340987254309874345.jpg&quot;, I can't just search for &quot;puppy picture&quot; or even &quot;puppy-picture-*.jpg&quot;, I have to already know the exact filename I'm looking for), etc.</li>
<li>I can only download 1 item at a time?? If I select 1 object, the Download button is available but if I select a second object it's not. I don't think I've ever seen any file store site/product that won't allow you to download multiple files, it's one of the most basic capabilities.</li>
<li>Can't rename directories.</li>
</ol>
<p>Again, I'm not sure if there's something I'm doing wrong but I've never been able to get the above issues to work. It just blows my mind because these all seem like very simple, basic functions.</p>

<amazon-s3><s3>
How can I use S3 as a filesystem
jeremywat
# How can I use S3 as a filesystem

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-09-06)

I'm not sure if it's something I'm doing wrong, or if the S3 web interface is just trash. There are a ton of basic capabilities that work in pretty much any other file storage product (Windows Explorer, Google Drive, OneDrive etc.), which don't work in S3:

1. The search string must be 100% exact--case-sensitive (if I search "myfile" and the file happens to be "MyFile", it won't find it), no wildcards or searching multiple words (if my file is something like "puppy-picture-2340987254309874345.jpg", I can't just search for "puppy picture" or even "puppy-picture-\*.jpg", I have to already know the exact filename I'm looking for), etc.
2. I can only download 1 item at a time?? If I select 1 object, the Download button is available but if I select a second object it's not. I don't think I've ever seen any file store site/product that won't allow you to download multiple files, it's one of the most basic capabilities.
3. Can't rename directories.

Again, I'm not sure if there's something I'm doing wrong but I've never been able to get the above issues to work. It just blows my mind because these all seem like very simple, basic functions.

**Tags:** amazon-s3, s3


---

## 4 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2023-09-07. Score: 6 | Accepted answer

This was going to be a comment, but I'll add it as an answer and take the consequences.

Yes, you are doing it wrong. S3 is an **object store**. The things you are looking for (search, directories, etc) are for **filesystems**. You are asking [a fish to climb a tree](https://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/04/06/fish-climb/)

You can mount S3 onto a filesystem, but it is not a filesystem.

If you want an object storage to do filesystem things, then mount it into a filesystem. See:

<https://github.com/awslabs/mountpoint-s3/>

However if you actually want a filesystem, why not use a filesystem:

<https://aws.amazon.com/efs/>


---

### Answer by username_1 on 2024-08-27. Score: 0

If you're finding S3's web interface limiting, particularly for tasks like case-sensitive searches and bulk downloads, you might consider using CloudMounter to mount S3 as a local drive. This approach can provide a more familiar and flexible way to interact with your S3 storage, especially if you're more accustomed to traditional file systems. While tools like Cyberduck also offer similar functionality, mounting S3 as a drive can streamline workflows, making it easier to manage files without needing to switch between different interfaces or rely solely on command-line tools.

A simplified way to work with S3.


---

### Answer by username_2 on 2024-10-23. Score: 0

If you're looking to mount the S3 bucket as part of the file system, then use S3 Drive

<https://www.callback.com/s3drive>

This is a solid product, easy to use, fast, does exactly what I need for accessing S3 files from my local machine. It works on Mac, Windows and Linux.


---

### Answer by username_3 on 2023-09-07. Score: -1

Bruce already answered the How, so here's the Why: (*why is it missing so many features?)*

* A lot of people interface with AWS not over the web, but via the command line.
* There are already external programs for accessing S3 via a friendly interface, like [Cyberduck](https://github.com/iterate-ch/cyberduck).
* People use AWS for work, and thus have more time to deal with user interfaces. Contrast that with a casual app or website, where if the user doesn't figure out what they want in 3 seconds they might just leave and never come back.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you weren't trying to be intentionally patronizing. I use both the web interface and the command line quite frequently--almost daily. I'm a devops engineer with 12 years in the IT industry, so I would consider myself very technical--there's no reason technical people can't prefer a user interface that's actually functional. I exclusively use AWS for work--why would you insinuate that means I'm fine wasting my day with unnecessary tedium? None of the points you made excuse AWS from having UI that's not a pain in the butt.  
> **username_3**: I'm not saying the command line is better than the web, or that the web has an acceptable interface. I'm just explaining why it's designed like that. I think my third bullet point might have unintentionally came off as patronizing, I'll remove it.  

---

