upcboy
-
Posts
70 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by upcboy
-
-
I think what we would need for mobile would be more like what Dropbox does. When You use the Dropbox App on your Mobile Device you get a list of files that are Available. Since Mobile Phones have limited Storage and Limited bandwidth I think it should be an on demand type access not sync all files. IE Sync has Files A, B, C, D, & E I need file C on my Mobile Device so I'll Just download File C.
-
I think our first step would be Backwards compatibility The Newer builds never work with the older ones. Not that its a major issues but would be nice.
It is still an Alpha build after all.
-
I can't wait for R/O Sync! Any update on having sync app run as a service on windows?
-
Does it mean that torrent is involved in any transfer ?
If the problem of transferring data is not fixed in the client code ("No new client, the fix is on our side.") what was necessary to fix the problem ? This question raises especially because you say "... the fix is on our side" ?
I've asked this before What is on their Side? I've seen Kos mention its on the server side and i'm wondering what the server does? is it a tracker and are we still dependent on them? if thats the case i'd love to see server side software being released in the future to run this 100% on your own.
-
We had some issues on backend, so specific types of NAT can't be bypassed. This is fixed and should work now
Issues with the back-end... what is actually running on your "server" is it a Tracker type server? will this be released so that we can run the software completely independent of you? or will that not be possible?
-
MonoTouch does raise an interesting point!
I wonder though if by simply setting SyncApp to use a "standard" port - i.e. Port 80, this would have got around this particular issue of SyncApp raising alarms with corporate IT departments, as it would then just look like standard internet traffic?
But what IT Departments need to realise is that P2P itself is NOT inherently illegal - downloading & publicly sharing illegal .torrent files, etc may well be, but the P2P technology itself isn't, and SyncApp has nothing to do with downloading and sharing .torrents!
So there are plenty of misconceptions about. For example, on Cubby's forums, when SyncApp was mentioned as an alternative, one user commented "Sorry, I would not allow bit torrent anywhere near my data!"
BitTorrent do have a great product here... but I think a lot of education is going to be needed to change some people's perception and understanding of what exactly SyncApp is/does!
Anyway, getting back to the original point - maybe if/when sync "scheduling" is introduced to SyncApp, this will be all that is needed to address this issue i.e. if you use your laptop at work during the day time, set up a sync schedule so that SyncApp only syncs data in the evenings when you're back home?
I work as IT. And our Whole Team is backing this project. b/c of its advantages. The issue is most Buisnesses are limited to a 10meg fiber line. (thats the lucky ones) with 20-100 people on it. Any Software that isn't work related and increased Bandwith Usage is deemed unacceptable.
-
One thing I'd like to request is for Sync app to run as a service as it is on my server I must be logged in for files to sync. If this ran as a service and synced with my other Headless linux server that would be amazing.
-
My files are 700meg-4gb The issues is Its a server in France and I'm in the US. and at peak times I can't pull data down from the server at full speed b/c of the congestion unless i open multiple streams from the server. The way i compesate this currently When using FTP is I use CuteFTP and split the large file in to 8 parts and download 8 streams it gives me a significant speed boost. Even if splitting isn't added for larger files id like to be able to choose how many files i can sync at once to a single client. ie anything coming from my server can open 6 streams.
-
If I am following your math correctly you are utilizing your client's full connection. Everything looks to be running as fast as it can (based on your numbers). Is this a troll?
Not trolling. Looks like I explained it Poorly. the 3 connections together are using 1/3 the bandwidth. Its not Each connection using 1/3. Sorry for the confusion.
-
I understand how to set up a password protected. My issue is this is not running off the apache webserver. I'm lost as to what is hosting it. It seems to be "hosting" its self the port 8888 only shows Syncapp running on it.
-
Can you explain how you did this? I already have a secure websever(apachee) but i'm not sure how to proceded to put this behind that "wall"
-
the issue i'm having is 3 open connections are only using about 1/3 of my Downstream and 1/10 of my up. 100/100meg connection on server 30/3meg on the client. by opening more connections (via other protocols FTP) I can max out my connection.
-
Is there a limit on the number of files that can sync at a time? I'm running an Ubuntu Server in a data Center and using this to sync data to a local Server and a second pc at another site. It seems like the max files that can sync at a time is 6 (3 from one sever 3 from a Second PC) is this the way it should be working? is there a way to increase the number of connections?
[Now Implemented!] Btsync As A Windows Service
in Feature Requests
Posted
Any update on when this will show up?