You can use both.
With LiteSync you can have one separate database on the server for each customer.
With the new product it will be a single database on the server that aggregates the data from all the users.
If you want to have public data with LiteSync, then you will need to open the 2 databases locally on the devices, each one connected to a different instance on the server(s).
Regarding scaling, with LiteSync if there are too many users you can add new servers to hold their replicas. With the new product you will need more storage space on the servers, as all data is aggregated into a single database (on each server). The advantage of the later is that you can run normal SQL queries that can process data from all the users, and with LiteSync you need to open each db file separately on the server(s) to query, insert or update data.
Also with LiteSync you will need to manage the TCP ports, as the server will need one dedicated TCP port for each database. I plan to develop an example program for that reason that also manages the instances in a "serverless" container based cloud environment.
With the new product all nodes can connect to the same TCP port.
With both options it is possible to have redundancy on the servers, by having multiple copies of the databases to avoid data loss.