|
Originally Posted by axim_wannabe
|
|
yes - for something that performs already at 100% reliability for one minute - do you think a software developer would risk making it perform in 30 seconds and not sure of the reliablity?
|
Are you telling the developer to stop all future development of the program because it may change it's current reliability ?? It doen't even have to affect the current way of backing up. Incremental backups could be made an option only.
|
Quote:
|
for one, backing up an entire set of files is MUCH FASTER (especially for a small sized amount like a few MBs) than (1) finding which ones have changed, (2) creating a list of that has changed, and (3) backing up from that list and making sure that it changes those specific files inside the ARCHIVE set...
but yes, incremental backup has its advantages (as a previous post has mentioned) - for say, a TERABYTE HDD...
|
I disagree. Why don't you try the incremental backup option in Activesync and compare the speed to the full backup option in Activesync. The incremental option is much quicker. Processing speed is usually quicker than physically writing data (on hard disk or on memory card).