Hi, I have not been involved in beta and created an account on the forum here just to voice this opinion. One that I think will be very mainstream. As an ex-user of Live Mesh and other sync products before and after, I was very excited to finally see bittorrent tech being applied to the task of syncing. That's when I discovered this product and Pulse/Syncthing simultaneously and have been trying to decide which to devote myself to. Sync 2.0 looks amazing, and it will be interesting to see how things play out. You almost had me until this thread about monetization of additional features for Pro. Like most people, I'm willing to pay fair value for features that enrich or simplify my life, but at that price, it had better do so a *lot*. For me, the chart posted that compares against "competitors" including Drop Box, is almost more of a sale for them. The highest value item mentioned on the chart is the storage space that they include, which you do not. It is easy to justify a price like that when they are paying for the hard drives, bandwidth, hardware, redundancy, energy, and manpower to make it simple. That price is simply out of line unless it is including a high value item like that. If you are only including additional software features, it is a hard sell above $10-$20 / year. Heck, even charging a re-occurring fee is a hard sell for a product whose main advertising feature is avoiding the cloud. People who are looking to do that want to untether themselves from a company who could go belly up in the future and find themselves stuck with a product's feature set which is unusable without a place to renew the service plan. Sure, if you include 500GB's of secure and redundant cloud storage, and software that intelligently syncs the flagged, most used, or most recent data up there for safe keeping and extra speed, I'm sold. Otherwise, paying for removal of arbitrary software limits on a product that uses my hardware is sketchy. Just my 2c. Standing by as this plays out.