same here. synbackse works well for me.  It has plenty of features.

I should've kept notes about why I decided to keep syncbackse instead of sffs but... I didn't. One thing I remember though: I was interested in the delta updating of files but it didn't seem to make a big difference in speed in the end.

People seem to find syncbackse unreliable... but it's always been pretty reliable to me. :)

-Armando (November 02, 2007, 12:26 AM)

Armando -

I think it was your original message following mouser's review of other backup programs that alerted me to SBSE. Glad to know it is still your choice. As to the reliability issue, this may be the downside of having a public forum. On cursory inspection these often give a misleading impression of software unreliability, when in fact they are mainly about getting users to read the manual.

With SFFS - which I am sure is as reliable as SBSE, incidentally - it would be difficult to asess its relative reliability as against SBSE as there is no data other than individual users' reports on private communications with the develper. This is why I like user forums.

DBC   

Any donationcoder members still using SyncBackSE?

-DBC (November 01, 2007, 07:54 PM)

Yes - I haven't tried SFFS because I'm happy with SyncBackSE.  From a brief look at feature lists, it seems that SFFS might have some more powerful features, but I don't need them and SyncBackSE has plenty of options and features, too.  I think that Zaine's advice to try them both is what you need to do.  Sometimes, a lot of what makes a program good (or bad) boils down to personal preference.  If your SyncBackSE trial has expired, try shooting them an email for an extension, some outfits will do that.

-mwb1100 (November 01, 2007, 08:11 PM)

Thanks for answering my plaintive cry. Yes, I've contacted SB for an extension. As you say, sometimes it's possible to get one, sometimes not. I think it depends on the way the trial software is set up.

DBC