Existing users, 
Advanced Search
 Synk Standard - 6.4.1backup & synchronization utility |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Feedback Summary:
| This Version: | |||||
| Overall Rating: | Not rated (0.0) | Features: | Not rated (0.0) | Support: | Not rated (0.0) |
| Ease of Use: | Not rated (0.0) | Quality / Stability: | Not rated (0.0) | Price: | Not rated (0.0) |
Key to Types of Feedback:
Reviews 
Troubleshooting 
Usage Tips 
Developer Notes 
Commentary 
Featured Reviews
best of it's kind 
- Version: 6.4, 5/28/2008 09:19AM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
trance
Most Recent Replies: View All 1 Replies
- best of it's kind
Stay away from this software! 
- Version: 6.3.3, 3/11/2008 01:58AM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
arrakis2
I use to really like this software for it's simplicity and reliability.
But since version 6 I've only had troubles.
I guess it's fine if you have a very simple backup setup.
But I'm backing over a network to different machines every time I check if everything is ok I found out that the backups were running for 2-3 days and then stopped for unknown reason.
I'm having this troubles on different machines and networks.
And now, what made me really give up on this software:
Yesterday my Mac OSX server ran out of space on the system drive! 0kb left on a 350Gb HDD!
I only have the system installed and a couple of extra applications.
After searching for a while, I found out that Synk has created a log file of more than 300Gb hidden in the invisible /var folder.
So I'm switching to Synchronize Pro today hoping to have a better user experience.
Thanks.
But since version 6 I've only had troubles.
I guess it's fine if you have a very simple backup setup.
But I'm backing over a network to different machines every time I check if everything is ok I found out that the backups were running for 2-3 days and then stopped for unknown reason.
I'm having this troubles on different machines and networks.
And now, what made me really give up on this software:
Yesterday my Mac OSX server ran out of space on the system drive! 0kb left on a 350Gb HDD!
I only have the system installed and a couple of extra applications.
After searching for a while, I found out that Synk has created a log file of more than 300Gb hidden in the invisible /var folder.
So I'm switching to Synchronize Pro today hoping to have a better user experience.
Thanks.
Version 6 difficulties - Version: 6.3, 12/14/2007 12:04PM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
cordy1
I'm a long time (many years) Synk user and owner of a 5.2.3 license that I use all the time. Last week I bought 6.3 as well. It has a very nice interface and some great new features I like.
Unfortunately, even though I've only been using it for a week, I've had to revert to 5.2.3 for my use due to speed and reliability problems. The speed issue is simply that a null synchronize (one where everything is already up to date) of several thousand files of about 6 Gb total size between my laptop and my desktop is noticeably (i.e. at least two times) faster in 5.2.3 than 6.3. I have no idea why, and I don't have time to experiment. As far as I know, I have the settings set identically.
But worse, after using 6.3 the sixth time or so, it came up the next time with a message saying something about the Synk preferences being corrupted and that it would move them and make new ones. I knew why they were corrupted, since 6.3 crashed on the previous run (which is in itself worrisome), but I didn't worry about it since I figured it would make new prefs and I could start over.
But instead, when it made the new prefs, it went into a a never-ending wait state where the window was only half drawn, and eventually I had to force quit Synk 6.3 to continue working. After retrying a couple of tries I gave up, removed all Synk files and reinstalled 5.2.3, which is working just fine for me now.
In case you're thinking the obvious, there is nothing at all wrong with this machine and it's working reliably in every way. (Trust me, I work on it 10 hours a day, every day, including Parallels and SheepShaver runs, so it's solid.)
So unfortunately I can't continue using 6.3 even though I now own one. I just can't afford the risk of unreliable backups. Synk is a wonderful product, but this version doesn't work well for me, and I'm permanently reverting to the very reliable 5.2.3. Your mileage may of course vary.
Unfortunately, even though I've only been using it for a week, I've had to revert to 5.2.3 for my use due to speed and reliability problems. The speed issue is simply that a null synchronize (one where everything is already up to date) of several thousand files of about 6 Gb total size between my laptop and my desktop is noticeably (i.e. at least two times) faster in 5.2.3 than 6.3. I have no idea why, and I don't have time to experiment. As far as I know, I have the settings set identically.
But worse, after using 6.3 the sixth time or so, it came up the next time with a message saying something about the Synk preferences being corrupted and that it would move them and make new ones. I knew why they were corrupted, since 6.3 crashed on the previous run (which is in itself worrisome), but I didn't worry about it since I figured it would make new prefs and I could start over.
But instead, when it made the new prefs, it went into a a never-ending wait state where the window was only half drawn, and eventually I had to force quit Synk 6.3 to continue working. After retrying a couple of tries I gave up, removed all Synk files and reinstalled 5.2.3, which is working just fine for me now.
In case you're thinking the obvious, there is nothing at all wrong with this machine and it's working reliably in every way. (Trust me, I work on it 10 hours a day, every day, including Parallels and SheepShaver runs, so it's solid.)
So unfortunately I can't continue using 6.3 even though I now own one. I just can't afford the risk of unreliable backups. Synk is a wonderful product, but this version doesn't work well for me, and I'm permanently reverting to the very reliable 5.2.3. Your mileage may of course vary.
Most Recent Replies: View All 1 Replies
It even clones signifigantly faster than both superduper and CCC, and produces error free drives, unlike both SD and CCC which I have to fix with diskwarrior and every run.
The only problem is that it leaves some folders visible on the destination disk which should be invisible.
And it's a little expensive too imo, considering Time Machine is free.