slawson2000

Members
  • Content Count

    49
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

About slawson2000

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Awwwwww... crap. I just upgraded my computers to 2.2 and was feeling all happy until I realized my home server was not liking the change. It is just running Win7 and I tried to do the workaround and start Sync with the Task Scheduler, but it does not seem to work. Back here I came looking for the answer and I got a little lost. Can someone walk me through the work around for 2.2? I think is has to do with the /config setup but I am not sure after that. Thanks
  2. I would like to say that I am quite pleased with the choice to modify the pricing structure. I am on board again.... Well done.
  3. +1 for a running as a service - or at least being able to access the GUI using this workaround... Our of curiosity, it has been over two and a half years since this feature was requested. Is there some reason that this has not been incorporated into the software?
  4. As I have stated before, I have no problem paying for a product as long as it is a fair price and fits my needs. However, paying for a "service" when all that is provided is a "program" rubs me the wrong way, especially when promises were broken. And I understand some need tech support. In my case, all I have done is pointed out and provided debugging information to help them better their product. I do not see why I need to pay yearly for that privilege..
  5. And they tell two friends, and they tell two friends and so on.... I'm with you. However, due to a lack of response or any new "promised change" it seems the BTSync staff has adopted the "bury your head in the sand" option of addressing the problem. "Don't worry, remain calm, it will blow over". A typical neophyte mentality of hiding from the problems instead of addressing it. I would like to hear from the staff as to their philosophy and any potential change they might make to the model. I even like to hear that it is what it is even after all the back lash. A thought for you software developers out there, now would be a good time to create something similar taking into account what has been said in this thread... Simple, clean, powerful, reasonably priced (for purchase, not rent). It is just an idea... Without a response, I can only assume BTSync is content with their thought process. I will give them a little more time, but then I must start over again evaluating different softwares. Reminds me of what happened to LogMeIn (completely different kind of software). They changed their model an promises one day. Tons of people jumped ship. I was one. Ended up with TeamViewer. Not quite as easy to use as LogMeIn, or as clean, but for what accounted to me as $240/yr - worth the savings. Now I recommend TeamViewer... I digress. So staff, how about a reply?
  6. Well, it is what it is... I guess. Have not seen any updates from BTSync since the weak response from Mr.VP. I was content with continuing to run 1.4.111, but it appears (at least with one of the issues I was having) that updates (e.g. fixes) will only be coming to version 2.0 and higher. So if you are experiencing bugs now, you will probably continue to do so. That being said, if there are any future compatibility issues with 1.4.111 are we to be stuck with those and forced to the subscription model?
  7. At the moment, I am on the shelf regarding 2.0. With the limitations on the new version (especially the number of folders) I am still trying to figure out how make it work for my data structure. I am not sure I want to restructure all my data just to use a program. Anyway, that is another issue. So if the causes are not going to be fixed in the 1.4.111, what do I need to do to collect logs for the 1.4.111 and get it to the appropriate people?
  8. I have tried to include any and all temp files in my exclusions list. I thought that would have fixed it. Anyway, when is this fix coming out? It is destined only for the 2.0 crowd or will 1.4.111 get it as well?
  9. I have been reading all this with interest and a taste of distain. In general, I agree that BTSync has broken promises with the capabilities of its current release 2.0, but that is nothing new. Even in development many feature requests were promised and never delivered (even a year after the promise). The sad part is that this time BTSync has now taken away something people have become accustom to. This is typical marketing/political methodology to make people pay for things they previously had not instead of instilling a feeling of having to do without. Is it ethical? I guess that all depends on everyone’s own tolerances, but I am of the school that you say what you mean, and do what you say. Everything else just lessens who you are, be it a person or a company. As for the price structure, well… First, I do not believe in a subscription based program. A subscription based service, yes, but a program… no. I know companies need a revenue stream to continue, but a subscription is a bad move. Providing tech support is one thing, but in my experience, the only tech support questions I have asked have ended up being short comings of the software, not my laziness to find out how to use it. $40/yr to point out shortcomings in the software is a bit absurd in my view. That being said, would I buy the program, if reasonably priced, yes I would. As far as future development, that is a mixed bag. Some of us just need a simple platform without limitations to use. Think of Windows OS, the bells and whistles are nice, but how often do you really use them, and how much of an added cost is put into the software for things people really do not use. I would think that perhaps different levels of bells and whistles could be had in different levels, say Free, Lite, Full, and Pro versions. I see that there is also some limit to mobile devices; however I cannot seem to find it in the product description. Same holds true for the folder limitation. As for epounds (VP of Sync) neophyte comments “10 active folders is a lot of syncing activity and we feel that those who need more capabilities will benefit much from Sync Pro” Folders are a function of structure, not a function syncing activity. Changing files defines the activity. Forcing people to restructure their data to fit the confines of the program is a huge leap backward. This should not be a limitation (at all). I also realize that being just one person, my comments may not hold very much weight. I have hopes that the voices of the masses will account for something and that BTSync will rethink its current undertaking and not screw so many people that have helped them up to this point. There are many other options out there in various stages of development from full blown and established to just getting started. I am hoping I do not have to go through selecting another program as I thought I was done based on the previous promises made by BTSync, and now broken. Time will tell…
  10. I have been reading all this with interest and a taste of distain. In general, I agree that BTSync has broken promises with the capabilities of its current release 2.0, but that is nothing new. Even in development many feature requests were promised and never delivered (even a year after the promise). The sad part is that this time BTSync has now taken away something people have become accustom to. This is typical marketing/political methodology to make people pay for things they previously had not instead of instilling a feeling of having to do without. Is it ethical? I guess that all depends on everyone’s own tolerances, but I am of the school that you say what you mean, and do what you say. Everything else just lessens who you are, be it a person or a company. As for the price structure, well… First, I do not believe in a subscription based program. A subscription based service, yes, but a program… no. I know companies need a revenue stream to continue, but a subscription is a bad move. Providing tech support is one thing, but in my experience, the only tech support questions I have asked have ended up being short comings of the software, not my laziness to find out how to use it. $40/yr to point out shortcomings in the software is a bit absurd in my view. That being said, would I buy the program, if reasonably priced, yes I would. As far as future development, that is a mixed bag. Some of us just need a simple platform without limitations to use. Think of Windows OS, the bells and whistles are nice, but how often do you really use them, and how much of an added cost is put into the software for things people really do not use. I would think that perhaps different levels of bells and whistles could be had in different levels, say Free, Lite, Full, and Pro versions. I see that there is also some limit to mobile devices; however I cannot seem to find it in the product description. Same holds true for the folder limitation. As for epounds (VP of Sync) neophyte comments “10 active folders is a lot of syncing activity and we feel that those who need more capabilities will benefit much from Sync Pro” Folders are a function of structure, not a function syncing activity. Changing files defines the activity. Forcing people to restructure their data to fit the confines of the program is a huge leap backward. This should not be a limitation (at all). I also realize that being just one person, my comments may not hold very much weight. I have hopes that the voices of the masses will account for something and that BTSync will rethink its current undertaking and not screw so many people that have helped them up to this point. There are many other options out there in various stages of development from full blown and established to just getting started. I am hoping I do not have to go through selecting another program as I thought I was done based on the previous promises made by BTSync, and now broken. Time will tell…
  11. Helen, This is somewhat true, I followed the links provided to submit my problem. After I received the initial response I posted here. By the time the confusion was worked out, I could no longer edit my posting. For all others, it should be noted that the Sync team has found the issue and the fix will be coming out in a future update. Thanks.
  12. It happened again. Created a PDF in one sync'd folder. Moved it to another sync'd folder and it ended up showing 0k. I found a copy in the .sync folder of the original location. Anyone?
  13. The clocks on all computers are set to auto sync to the same site. I thought there might have been an issue with one computer being on DSL instead of Cable, but it happens with files generated on that computer as well. It seems to happen when either saving, renaming, moving, or copy/pasting the files... File that are there seem to stay, but I am not 100% sure.
  14. We have a problem. Some of the files we have are disappearing. The file name is left, but the file shows 0k and it is empty. I just did a search for empty files and found about 15 file that this has happened to. Apparently, it appears that it mostly happens with files that are renamed or moved (cut and paste). I think I have ruled out it being a single computer issue as the files have been added from different computers. All computers (5 in all) are running the most current versions of BitTorrent Sync and all are running Windows 7 or 8. I tried Customer Support after I could not find a similar issue in the forum. Apparently they no longer provide help, only to Pro and Ad-Free (not sure what that means). Anyway, any ideas?
  15. Why that feature only for the Business/Enterprise edition? If that is the case, why not just say so. That way many of us would not be wasting our time...