jalcide

New Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About jalcide

  • Rank
    New User
  1. Over a week and It never moved past 1% and never finished. I've had to switch to a different sync solution (out of respect, I won't name it here). The sync of 532GB (the differences) took 14 minutes. Done. So there was nothing wrong with my LAN.
  2. I've been attempting to sync around 532GB over a Gigabit LAN for about a week and it still shows 1%. The "days left" seems to fluctuate between 2 and 4 days (always, for days now). With the number of days trending downward. One would think this would obligate the percent progress to increase, even if only to 2% Transfer rate hovers around 1.2 MB/s. Windows 7 on both PCs. Sync version 2.0.105 on both. They're being synced as 1.4 style folders. Is the progress status in Sync 2.0 reasonably accurate? Why is it taking so long? 1.2 MB/s (if that is accurate) seems very low for small GBit
  3. BTSync.exe stays steady around 20% CPU utilization, but the system acts and feels like it's > 90%. The Sync UI takes about 5 minutes to open from its notification icon. Once open, the UI is extremely unresponsive and shows "(Not Responding)" in the title bar about every 30 seconds and seems to re-instantiate itself in an endless cycle. It's simply trying to sync one folder (read only) from one computer. The transfer speed stays mostly steady at about 1 MB/s (which seems on the slow side). 2.0.105, Windows 7 x64, AMD Phenom II 6 core, 16 GB RAM, SSD drive. It's using the onboard graphi
  4. I know simply this: they'd have had my money already, if there were a purchase option. Because there's only a rental option, they'll get nothing. The only reason to not provide both options, to literally turn down money, is if they have calculated that those who would prefer to purchase, but can't and so will begrudgingly subscribe, will be large enough in number to offset the loss that is the purchasing model (as compared to the subscription-based cash-cow). This alone, speaks to how overwhelmingly profitable the subscription-model is. Aside from this, the four biggest issues I have w
  5. This software subscription model frenzy is getting out of hand. There is no way I'm adding local file syncing software to my monthly budget alongside Adobe and others. The growing trend of essentially renting software and losing control of when, why and how one decides to upgrade to new versions, is extremely troubling. It's why many of us were attracted to BTS to begin with; to avoid the cloud subscription model. How ironic that BTS's first monetization should be so cloud-like. I understand the need to monetize and might be willing to pay a good amount (more than 40.00, even) for the
  6. I was sad to see "quick view" dropped as an option for PDFs in the latest iOS version. Might it be coming back, or is it gone for good? Having to switch to another app, and back, for each viewing really kills this kind of workflow (and a very useful workflow). If it might be returning, I'd love to see an option to have it automatically use the built-in PDF viewer without additional choices (for fast, fluid reading of PDFs). Obviously, this "advanced" feature would not be the default and could be disabled in preferences at any time. Cheers.
  7. The latest beta is maddening. Generally, just not syncing. Rebooting and sync will sometimes start, but stop after a minute or two. Endless "out of sync" statuses; showing that it's in sync when it's not. Not showing peers when they're there. When peers do show, it often shows them as offline when they're not. Often not even attempting to sync when several volumes are mounted and creating a situation where only removing all but one volume (on a particular server I use to Crashplan all my BTSync volumes), will restore BTSync's attempt to sync (but it still doesn't). For the few mi