Talk:File synchronization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Anybody know which software is the best (typically)?
see my review at http://www.tomkelsey.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/projects/synchronizer_review.html Plastic rat 10:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
btw feel free to copy anything from the above page, it has a list of typical features of syncing programs Plastic rat 10:53, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Commercial Software Reviews
I have reviewed a commercial piece of software on my website. I tried to link directly myself on article page, but Feezo believes it's a conflict of interest unless others support that content. That seems reasonable to me, so I'd like to inquire if this article seems worth citing as an external reference:
I have not made and do not intend to make any money on this article. I do not advertise or otherwise profit from my website. It is a purely informational destination. Thanks for any comments on this. Stevemidgley (talk) 23:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Program List discussion
It seems like there is a lot of back and forth with software link listing going on. One edit there are lots of programs listed, another and the list is shorter. Typically the shorter lists remove all of the commercial programs but leave the open source programs. I think this introduces some bias to the article. Either commercial programs should be included on the lists, or the open source software should be removed as well. Personally I favor having example programs listed and think what is missing is more information about them as seen in the Office suite and Comparison of office suites articles. 216.31.247.114 20:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I think an article about file synchronization without links to software (commercial/open source/free) is not very useful.
See Wikipedia:External_links#What_to_link. Point 4 is relevant "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article". So any relevant notable program web site should be linked.
Having mostly Open Source or other programs isn't 'bias', if the most notable programs are Open Source. Most spam will come from commercial sites, which might be why people are more keen to remove these links. Plastic rat
@Plastic rat: How would you define "notable" file synchronization programs? Do you have any usage/download stats that show that the open source programs listed are more popular or in higher regard than commercial software titles? Personally I work for Siber Systems makers of GoodSync and think that its exclusion from this list is an oversight. The same can be said of other prominent commercial titles. RF Simon —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 16:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
@Plastic rat: To start with, Plastic rat's definition of "notable" file sync programs is not relevant to the mass: what's notable to you is not necessarily notable to other people, you don't have any objective proof supporting your claim that these open-source programs are more "notable", and your definition of "notable" isn't even clear. System administrators and computer geeks are only a fraction of the people that use file synchronization software. The mass don't use command line or ugly looking programs, thus the need for nice looking GUI's that simply do the work, like Microsoft's SyncToy. Discrimination of software because of their source availability is a problem You have: people here are looking for a file sync program that works, whether if it's Open-Source or Closed-Source. Wrap around your head that this article is about File Synchronization software, and Not "Plastic rat's vision of notable file synchronization software". Stop trimming information because of your vision of "notable" programs, closed-source applications belong to this list as much as Open-Source software do. Cheers. Wadih7 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wadih7 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Windows Offline Folders
Shouldn't this be included in the software list? 69.95.237.77 15:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
How about Windows' concept of the "briefcase"? Naptastic 02:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
