ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

SyncBackSE vs. SuperFlexible

<< < (14/16) > >>


specifying username and password for the service is only needed when you want to access network drives. If you don't specify an account, then the service runs under the "Local System" account which has access to local drives only. I think it can access most files, depending on the security settings. Maybe on some systems it can't read some user's files.

Also if you want to access network drives, you can't use mapped drive letters because the service won't see them. To access network drives, the UNC syntax must be used, such as \\Computername\Sharename\Foldername.


Tobias, will SFFS put anything in the log for inaccessible folders/files? I guess that would be a good way for people to make sure that it's doing what they need with the service settings they are using.

- Neil.


oh yes, inaccessible folders and files are mentioned in the log files. You can also use email notification to be notified of any problems.


Thanks everybody for a very helpful thread. In the end, and after a lot of comparing, I chose Backup4All rather than either SBSE or SFFS, although both of the latter are rather more powerful and flexible. My reasons were as follows:

1. The DonationCoder discount! (SFFS has one as well, of course...)
2. Very clear and simple method of selecting folders and files to back up across my four partitions.
3. Clear documentation.
4. My simple requirements: don't need ftp for the moment, or synchronization.
5. Only using Backup4All for once-a-day or less versioning (using Caddais or FileHamster for minute-by-minute versioning on crucial files when drafting).

What the thread helped me to do was sort out what I didn't need, what software I was likely to keep using, and what I needed to aim for in terms of proper strategy - in my case, Ghost for imaging; Backup4All for important folder and file backups with versioning to reflect daily changes; and near-continuous versioning using FH or Caddais for drafting.

Thanks again everybody.


Not a bad choice at all, DBC.  I use BackUp4All also, along with SFFS and FileHamster.  I love FileHamster for its ease and the fact that it just works so well - I will most likely purchase a Pro license shortly.

Of the remaining two, I would make the same choice that you did.  BackUp4All is excellent.  I'll leave it at that...



[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version