DSynchronize V2.30.1    Suggested by milentechie - Added on 8 Jan 2007 177KB (uncompressed) - Popularity score (1127) Website - Screenshot - Download - Comments (20) - Post comment - Permalink

Posted comments:

 BigD: The executable depends on MSVBVM60.DLL - MS Visual Basic VM, so isn't truly portable. [2006-06-01 13:00]

 Cosmin: actually all you have to do is place the dll in the same folder as the application. So I'd say it is portable. [2006-06-01 23:27]

 Kataphract: The MSVBVM60.DLL is bundled in Windows 2000/XP/2003, so isn't necessary to place the dll in the same folder. [2006-06-09 21:04]

 MrK: The app may be found here:
http://www.snapfiles.com/get/dsynchronize.html [2006-12-21 13:37]

 Webfork: Although not the most user-friendly sync program available, I've tested it for two months now and found it to be excellent for portable syncronization.

From the makers of the excellent DTaskManager http://www.portablefreeware.com/?id=944 [2007-08-06 18:16]

 joe: The only thing I don't like is it cannot work on unicode file name. [2007-08-12 07:23]

 linuxamp: Joe, it displays UTF filenames as gibberish in the source and destination panels but if you try to synchronize you'll see that it both UTF folder and filenames sync properly. [2007-08-31 02:11]

 linuxamp: Certainly doesn't win any beauty contests but functionally perfect... almost.

1) Interface is intuitive
2) Includes just about every option one could want in a synchronizer
3) Good command line support for task scheduling or scripting

I only have one tiny gripe with this program. If your source directory is C:\folderA and your destination is D:\backup, it will put folderA contents in D:\backup not D:\backup\folderA. [2007-08-31 02:17]

 fredbackup: I'd agree with Webfork ... not the most user friendly but does the job. The ability to specify individual files as well as folder level sync is the differentiator. I use this forend of day back-up to a portable HDD ... it's a great little tool, is portable, and it's free! [2007-09-24 19:31]

 jcatech: Great utility but the filter does not work in service mode. [2007-09-27 20:32]

 Webfork: Addendum to my previous note: been using the program regularly and often for about 6 months now on multiple computers and multiple configurations. To this point, there is NO OTHER sync program for my purposes.

Some requests: An "rsync" style sync method that only transfers *changed* data; resending an entire 1 gig file when only a few bits have changed is time-consuming and wasteful. Also FTP capabilities would be nice. [2007-11-20 15:56]

 Turpin: It doesn't allow you, by default, to have different synchronization settings (2-way or 1-way, etc.) for each sync pair, BUT you can run multiple copies of Dsynchronizer from seperate folders, each doing seperate jobs simultaneously, which totally solves that problem for me. I just create a group of shortcuts, one for each synchronization job, each leading to the dsynchronizer.exe in the specific dsynchronizer folder. If you plan on running more than one, I don't recommend running it as a system service. I had some sort of problem with that. [2008-01-30 20:53]

 Hephaestus: Good but not great. It lacks is good file and folder attribute support, it does not, for instance, copy the attributes that let folders have special icons defined in a "desktop.ini"... [2008-08-28 16:16]

 NeedAnswer!!: okay there is always but. :D
I found this program useful in every case i faced but it doesn't function when you run it as a service.
set and enable timer works in normal mode but doesn't in service mode
also the real time synchronization option doesn't work for me :(

can you tell me your opinion about that.??? [2009-01-27 06:13]

 Webfork: To NeedAnswer's real time issue:

Make sure you run a system sync all the way through before enabling "real time" sync. Otherwise, I don't know what the issue is. In the limited tests I've done with this feature, its worked fine. I recommend contacting the author (click the "Website" link at the top of the page). [2009-02-17 15:54]

 Hugh H.: BE WARNED!!!!!!
When you "sychronize" with this software, the FIRST thing it does is DELETE every file in the destination path that isn't in the source path!!!
And it does it in a flash! It does not default to leaving your files alone! It defaults to kill.

This has to rate as the stupidest "default" behavior in the universe. [2009-04-07 14:48]

 Chris L. Franklin: @Hugh H. : Why did not run it in test mode first.. did you not see the test mode check box, did you not see the DO NOT DELETE checkbox.. are you sure it's not just your "stupidest "default" behavior" (aka being a click happy end user) that caused/is the issue ?



I'd have to say I love this program, although I do wish it would support shadow copying and per source+dest scheduling (I don't need or want everything to have to be real time, when I really only want 1 thing to be real time).
But other then that, it runs GREAT. [2009-04-24 11:30]

 Jens: Well, there may be issues with this program but it is BY FAR the very best synchronization and/or backup program I've used. There's only one tiny thing I dislike about it: When looking in the log file it does say "OK" under the summary in the beginning even if a file has been marked "FAIL" and not been copied. [2009-09-25 13:38]

 Erase+undelete: Be sure to enable "do not delete any file" during testing :)
It saves you a lot of work, it should be a default entry.... [2010-01-18 18:43]

 Turpin: Dsynchronize is one of the most complete and straightforward solutions for file synchronization for windows that I've found. Do pay attention to the "do not delete files" option and make sure it's checked if you need it. And I recommend testing synchronization between two newly created folders with no important files contained within before risking your important data. It's standard procedure for me, because you should never take for granted you know what any software will do. [2010-01-25 09:19]

Post your comment:

All HTML tags will be removed from your comment. URLs (http, https, ftp) will be automatically detected and hyperlinked. I reserve the right to delete irrelevant, frivolous or offensive comments. For more general topics (eg. whether apps that write to the registry, leave traces on the host machine, rely on certain versions of IE etc. can be considered portable), please post to the Portable Freeware Discussion forum. If your virus scanner has detected a virus in the application, please email the author directly or post to the forum. Note that false positives (i.e. flagging a virus when there is actually none) are extremely common for virus scanners. When in doubt, try an online scanner like Online Malware Scanner or VirusTotal, which scans files using multiple anti-virus engines. It is very likely to be a false positive if only a few engines raise the red flag.