• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About T42

  • Rank
    New User
  1. I disagree - the closed source is an aspect of trust, and broken trust is the heart of what's happening - BTSync claimed one thing, then changed their tune. Since they're source is closed, how do we know their claims about their source are any more valid than their claims about features not being deprecated/removed?
  2. Well put - I think you hit on a number of accurate points here. And as you said before, BT needs to come out with a real mea culpa - one that includes a change to their fee model to something more like we've described - free version of the app, with additional features in the pay version to entice users to upgrade, *without* deprecating features in v1.4. Otherwise the audience will be much smaller, and frankly the kind of userbase their targetting with this new model isn't very large. BTSync is by it's very nature a functionality for more than the average user, but their new model is insulting
  3. Thanks kram. Yes, taking this approach (kill 1.4, start at 2.0) could work well if: 1. Grandfather in existing accounts to still have unlimited sync "sets" (folders) 2. Setup v2 with two account options - Free and Pro, with the Free version limited to 10 sync sets, and pro unlimited 3. Instead of subscription let the user buy the app version as I described. You buy v2 Pro, you get v2 Pro functionality forever (including incremental) updates to v2. 4. Continue working on value-added features, to entice users to upgrade to v3. Perhaps improved compression, performance, transmission speeds, e
  4. What seems to be most frustrating is the combination of how they transitioned to a pay model and the blatant denial of what was previously said and how this technology works. This is 2015, not 1995 - far more people understand how tech works today than 20 years ago, so can see through the (non)techo-babble being spouted. It's really unfortunate the BTSync marketing/CFO/whatever team didn't take the approach that many other bits of freeware are taking today - continue providing the free functionality, and provide additional *new* features in the pro version to entice people to upgrade.I'm s
  5. They don't solve the same problem - one is a storage system that uses a sync architecture, the other is *just* a sync architecture. BTSync is much more like a VPN (you control the secure chanel between your devices) and something like Robocopy over that channel, Dropbox, etc are a storage system using a VPN-like channel. They are not the same, and while they *can* solve *similar* problems, the storage aspect of Dropbox, etc make them very different tools. People compare them because some of using BTSync want JUST the encrypted channel, without our data being stored elsewhere (on someone
  6. Um, no, they aren't, AT ALL. BTSync is a sync ARBITRATOR - your data doesn't (necessarily) transit their servers (probably doesn't ever, since that would cost them more), nor do they store any of your data. BTSync is much more like a peer-to-peer VPN than Dropbox, etc. There's NO comparison to file-storage services, except that those services may add sync to their transport component. File storage services have to subsidize extensive datacenter, storage, deduplication,and replication/backup, transport (upstream/downstream/replication), for many terabytes of data (petabytes?). None of which i
  7. I think the current "Read Only"/"Full Access" model needs to be improved. While it's been good as a start, I think directionality should be more configurable (and referrred to as such). It would be useful to be able to dictate on a per-machine basis the directionality of a Sync Folder, rather than only at initial setup. For example, take Machine A, Machine B, Machine C. If I configure a SyncFolder on A, then share the Full secret with B and Read-Only with C, then the only sync I can get is: All from A to B, C All from B to C, A With no way to change any of that. With the current options, this
  8. Most things have been covered by other posters, but I'd like to add/reiterate/clarify: 1. Scheduling - enable, on a per-sync basis, the ability to limit transfers to set times. My specific application is to sync my phone backups to my own server on a nightly basis (I use Titanium Backup on a nightly schedule, and currently FolderSync copies the backups to my SFTP server after TTBackup completes. Unfortunately, Foldersync has some consistency issues). Limiting this sync to late-night hours (and wifi) means it happenswhile I'm asleep, and doesn't kill bandwidth/battery during the day. 2. Push On