trevellyan

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    142

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Posts posted by trevellyan

  5. Can Bittorrent Sync Be Used For Game And Art Collaboration?

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

    We need our game data folders to match at all times, so anything i change is updated for them, and anything they change is updated for me.

     

    The sync will be made through the internet and not a local LAN connection.

     

    Our largest game  folder at the moment is 50 GB.

    How long would it take for a 50 GB folder to sync? Putting our internet speed aside, what is the upload seed limit for BitTorrent Sync?

     

    It is also important it leaves the folder in its proper place, since it is located in a game data directory program file. This is why dropbox or Onedrive just doesn't work for us. because you have to use a separate folder.

    The bottleneck for sync speed will be your internet bandwidth. Sync does not impose bandwidth limits unless you tell it to.

     

    To keep folders where you want them, you need to read and understand the help guides for setting up Sync and managing folders, and recognize that you want to start all clients in Disconnected mode (if you're using Pro). This will give you the opportunity to choose where to place each shared folder.

     

    As for reliability, there's no such thing as bug-free software, so you should continue to maintain backups of everything you consider important, and start out syncing a subset of your data to see how it goes before you go all-in.

  8. 2.0 Post-Upgrade Issues

    in Sync Troubleshooting

    Posted

    this isn't so much a request for help. it's more a statement that the upgrade experience is attrociously broken, the messaging is ambiguous at best. really, this isn't a great way to advertise a product you want us to pay for.

     

    I don't work for BitTorrent, so I guess the "you" you're referring to is someone else.

  14. Sync Separate Folders

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

    Seriously? There has to be a better way. This would mean that, depending on the number of shares, you would have to purchase additional subscriptions. And in any event, requiring a different identity removes any of the supposed convenience of having the identity in the first place. 

     

    One of the key benefits of the identity model is to make it really easy to get any of your folders onto any of your devices. You can set devices with the same identity to not automatically sync everything, but if you want to restrict what's actually available to a device, as far as I know, a different identity is the only way.

  20. Btsync 2.0, Why Change, It's Working Like A Charm

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

     

    You perhaps didn't read this blog post, by Erik Pounds, VP of Sync back in November, which stated:

     

    "We’re improving the free edition over what’s available in version 1.4" (emphasis added!)

     

    I therefore stand by my subsequent comment made after this public blog post (in fact, in the dedicated forum thread where it was being discussed!) that "To the best of my understanding no current functionality will be "removed" from the Free version of Sync 2.0.", as that was indeed my understanding at the time back in November - it was not a "promise" (it was, as stated, "to the best of my understanding"), nor was it "setting expectations" that hadn't already been set by Erik's original blog post!

     

    You're right, I didn't reread that blog post, and I'm not arguing with your subsequent, qualified statement based on your understanding of it. Please don't think I'm here to pick a fight with you (or anyone).

     

    It is a PR disaster, no matter how you parse the official statements.

  21. Btsync 2.0, Why Change, It's Working Like A Charm

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

    OK, you're right again, I was giving them a pass for not removing features, but limiting the number of folders does limit functionality.

     

    The ironic part of this, to me at least, is that having just reread everything I could find about what would or wouldn't be in the free version of 2.0, I could only find one direct reference to functionality being on par with 1.4 (by GreatMarko, who is a forum moderator but as far as I know, not employed by BitTorrent):

     

    "To the best of my understanding no current functionality will be "removed" from the Free version of Sync 2.0." (emphasis added)

     

    I wouldn't exactly call that a promise from BitTorrent, but it does set expectations that are not being met.

     

    :unsure:

  22. Btsync 2.0, Why Change, It's Working Like A Charm

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

    First I am reiterating the argument others are making as to why they do not think that Sync does not deserve subscription pricing second.  No one says that Sync has no infrastructure however that infrastructure is minimal compared to Dropbox and the heavy part of the infrastructure requirements (things like hard drives, computers, and bandwidth) are actually placed the use.  Third the tracker, relay servers, and even DHT are more for making things easier for the user - Sync though can function without them, although you will have to do more of you own configuration

     

    When you said "Sync is simply a program that provides functionality and does not have the infrastructure that needs to supported like Dropbox many people feel that a reoccurring charge is unjustified" I misunderstood "does not have the infrastructure" to mean "does not have infrastructure". Fair enough.

     

     

    Really, you can't see that in one version you have unlimited folder for without having to pay a dime is different and more functional than a version that has a folder 10 limit?  I get loving Sync.  I get we may disagree on how important this difference is.  I even get that it doesn't affect you, but that doesn't mean it isn't affecting somebody.  How about a little intellectual honesty here though.

     

    How about a little realism here though? I guess when you're stuck on semantics, the argument will never be settled.

    "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

    s/'is'/functionality/

     

    Besides, whether the 10-folder limit affects you or me or "somebody" doesn't answer the question of whether it represents a broken promise about functionality.

     

    More importantly you are ignoring the larger issue which is one of trust.  They said none of the features of 1.4 would be put behind a pay wall.  Regardless of how important you think unlimited folders is, they have gone back on their word, and they did it to make money.  I don't know about you but in my world when someone doesn't do what they say they will, that erodes my trust in them.  When it is a company to whom I am entrusting my data going back on their word because they think it will yield more money - well we may disagree, but I am seriously going reconsider whether I want to do business with that company because who knows what other promises they think are worth breaking.  If a suitable alternative is available - it is certainly grounds for switching.

     

     

    No, I'm not ignoring the issue of trust. Clearly I must choose to trust any vendor of a closed-source product when I choose to use that product. You said "They already have an issue by not being open source", and I asked why, if you really believe that, were you using Sync at any stage in its development?

     

    By the way, I have tried several alternatives. Syncthing is a wonderful project, except that it doesn't work very well, at least not for me. The flaw that I couldn't get past is its inability to delete a folder that contains ignored files. AeroFS seems to work pretty well, albeit rather slowly, at $10/month per user. Seafile is open source, but it needs a central server and the server update process kinda sucks. ownCloud requires a central server and is absurdly slow for lots of small files. Here I am, still using Sync - for $0!

     

    Anyway, I feel like an idiot for getting involved here, but I'm just so tired of all the whining and complaining and bitching and moaning. I think I need to take a break from these forums.

  23. Btsync 2.0, Why Change, It's Working Like A Charm

    in Sync General Discussion

    Posted

    1) Subscription plan - most people don't object to paying for Sync but they do object to paying for a subscription for a couple reasons.  First off because Sync is simply a program that provides functionality and does not have the infrastructure that needs to supported like Dropbox many people feel that a reoccurring charge is unjustified.  There is also a independence factor.  Many people like Sync because unlike say Dropbox if Bitorrent being a company then the program keeps working.  Now that it is tied to a subscription who knows what happens if Bitorrent disappears.

     

    This is incorrect. First, there is infrastructure to support, in the form of tracker and relay servers. You can argue over relative costs and reasonable pricing, but don't claim there's no infrastructure to support. Second, Sync has always used those servers (at least as long as I've been running it), so if the company disappears and takes those servers with them, it will affect all versions equally. Remember, a subscription only pays for additional features, the base product requires no activation, nor even any internet connection.

     

    2) The 10 folder limit - for most people the 10 folder limit isn't the problem in and of itself.  The problem is that when 2.0 was announced they said none of the functionality in 1.4 would become a paid feature.  Well 1.4 has unlimited folders.  So now they have violated the trust they built up.  This a big deal for a product that needs to be trusted to move personal data securely around the Internet.  They already have an issue by not being open source.  This just makes it worse because if you can't trust what the developers say, then who knows what they are doing with your data.

     

    This is a specious argument. There has been no loss of functionality, only an imposition of numeric limits. You can still use all the features from version 1.4, but you can't use them on unlimited folders. As for the question of open source, if you truly consider that to be important, you should not have been using Sync at all, since there has never been any indiction that the product would be made open source. To describe these as trust issues just smacks of trolling.