Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

More on Super Flexible File Synchronizer; Updates Anyone?

<< < (6/8) > >>

Darwin:
-superboyac (February 04, 2008, 11:00 AM)
--- End quote ---
Hey Darwin!  Yeah, I saw that, but it doesn't show the things I was asking about.
[/quote]

Oh, a stickler for detail, eh  :D? Details, deshmails, I say  :P

I was about to start grabbing screenshots for you when I noticed that you've installed the beta  :Thmbsup:

Hirudin:
I think he gets a lot of e-mail regarding queries about functionality that already exists, therefore he's taken steps to make functionaltiy more accessible. Which hopefully will be a good thing as I think I don't use 80% of the features because I'm not sure if I need it or how it impacts.
-justice (January 24, 2008, 04:13 AM)
--- End quote ---
I bet he does too. I like to think of myself as an advanced software user guy, but the interface of SFFS is quite confusing. I too think there's probably options in there that I would want to use, but of which I'm not aware.
...
From what you told me, it is still the internal scheduler where SFFS must stay running, plus you cannot do anything within SFFS unless you stop the scheduler. (Worst config I've ever seen for a scheduler in an application!!)

Or the "Extreme Sync" service. No comment on that.  But no use of the Windows Task Scheduler in this version. Doesn't sound like much changed at all, except some GUI changes which just have you use more views to accomplish the same things.
...-J-Mac (February 03, 2008, 02:39 PM)
--- End quote ---
Personally, I'm glad he's not using the Task Scheduler... I'm on Vista 64 and the Extreme Sync service works perfectly, I have a few backups scheduled to run at 5:00 am, if I'm on the computer at 5 they run, if it's off they run the next time I start the computer. I also have a backup setup to run every time I shut down the computer, this also always works.

Not being able to use the program without stopping the scheduler is dumb in my opinion too, but it's something I can live with. I can't imagine that will be the case once V4 comes out though.

In fact, the thing works so well I haven't updated for months; I'm still using 3.67.

tinjaw:
I'm debating whether to pay for an upgrade to version 4. Anybody got any comments on their experience?

cranioscopical:
I'm debating whether to pay for an upgrade to version 4. Anybody got any comments on their experience?
-tinjaw (May 20, 2008, 12:34 PM)
--- End quote ---

Here's mine, though unrelated to performance.
I recalled Tobias offering a free upgrade to 4 somewhere on DonationCoder...

I am the developer of Superflexible. It is true that in the current version, it takes a bit of hand work to make it auto-start with Windows. This will be made much easier in version 4.0. I hereby promise a free 4.0 upgrade to anybody who reads this. Just send me an email when you need the updated registration code.
--- End quote ---

...so I emailed him to ask about it. His response was rewarding.

FWIW I prefer the layout in 4, though I see that some do not.

Darwin:
I'm one of the nay-sayers to the new layout in version 4. After three months or so of near daily usage, I can't imagine going back to version 3 (not that I didn't like version 3, mind you!). I've had no trouble with it and depend on it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page