Talk:Comparison of file synchronization software
unnecessary "cleanup"
Someone ( Hm2k ) has deleted CleanSync and other items in Revision as of 21:06, 10 May 2010
:-(
--—Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.195.191.96 (talk • contribs)
system requirements
It should be useful to list also system requirements of compared software , because it has impact on performance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.195.191.96 (talk) 11:29, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
wrong license type
Some items requests license agreements other than listed in the table ! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.55.255.41 (talk) 10:17, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Three tables?!
I really don't understand this format. Like people only did care about certain features if tool is proprietary. They should be compared altogether, with the Licence as a column.
Having two tables would be useful if we want to split: general information, more important features, less important features.
And a column for "Paid version" is almost a joke. If there is no paid version available, I guess the software has no interest at all. --LQST (talk) 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)