kramttocs

Ready To Become A Paid Product?

Recommended Posts

I've been using BTSync since right before the 1.4 release and have taken 2.0 alpha/beta/RTM. And in short, I like BTSync.

But I can't imagine anyone will say that BTSync isn't without it's flaws and nuances. Be that UI or the sync functionality itself. That was fine, even expected with 1.3, 1,4, 2.0alpha/beta. Everyone knew that there would be those things.

While the 10 folder limit does affect me, my reason for not signing up for the subscription currently is that I am experiencing the same level of issues with the official 2.0 release that I did with the others. I get out of sync messages, devices that are both online but don't show each other, approvals that never come, and other inconsistencies that are evidently not correct or as intended.

 

So while there may not actually be an answer to this, why now? What was the reason for the public release *specifically that included a paid version* when it really seems like it's still in the 2.0 beta quality range? Or is that just my experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, it's a bit of a no-win argument either way! - plenty of users over the past two years have complained at various times about the perpetual ongoing "beta" tag attached to Sync 1.4,1.3,1.2... etc with calls for "when it this ever going to leave beta!?" ...now it's left "beta", the narrative appears to be "why has it left beta?!"  :rolleyes:..

 

...but going back to your question of "is it ready to leave beta?". The bottom line is that every software title out there - beta or otherwise - has the potential for bugs, but users are arguably more accepting of bugs in "beta" or free software than they are in commercial software they are paying for. So regardless of whether you feel Sync is ready to become a paid product or not, the fact that it now is, potentially means that any bugs that you do come across will be addressed quicker than they would otherwise be - which has got to be a good thing, right!? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a fire it CERTAINLY IS !! 

I am not quite sure how to vent my anger with both BTSync and myself for foolishly upgrading to V2.0.  It does not work. period.  AND to top it all, in attempting to revert to V1.4 I am left with a computer unable to install ANY version simply because the OFFICIAL page that tells you how to go back inadvertently forgets to mention you MUST check the delete settings box!!!!  The instruction is there on a page in the forum, but NOT on the official V2.0 getsync site - meaning ANY version will not install as there are folders left on the computer - all attempts to install leave the thing in crash mode (yes, I managed to hit the 'send info to the dev team button' once - I hope you got it!)

The new program so graciously given to me for free lasted 3 hours before it stopped syncing.  My usual attempts to get it working have failed and as I have become reliant on being able to edit and add files to either one of my computers I attempted to revert back to V1.4 using the instructions provided.  This has failed and I am now in the unhappy position of having to work out how to start again with 350Gb of data THANKS A LOT !!!!!!!

This program was good.  I jumped in at about 1.3.87 and bravely made the move to 1.4.  I have spent MANY hours using/testing/providing feedback on 1.4.  We were told that fixes had been done in 2.0 that were not done in 1.4 (read the threads in the forum) yet within minutes of starting 2.0 I was back in the same old position of locked files being incorrectly reported in the UI; and to have files stuck on both peers not syncing is inexcusable - the whole point of the software is to sync.  If it is incapable of syncing then it is useless.  I have NEVER experienced such a poorly executed product launch in my life.  I have spent 30 years developing product for many customers - and this takes the biscuit for sure.

OK - I have had my say.  I am thankful that I have not lost any data or money in this venture - only my precious time which I gave freely in the knowledge that I was using the software free of charge - yes it has been useful and could be again......if it is fixed and made to work properly.

Good luck to all who continue to use this software, I will try one more time to reinstall 1.4.111 over the weekend but will not be looking to 'upgrade' again.  There are too many cooks in the kitchen putting their ideas into what was once a sound recipe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quite disappointed about the announcement. Regarding "ready-for-prime-time" I would like to add that until now BTSync was not capable of identifying moving files. I like to think that this should have been in there from version 1.0

I haven't tested version 2.0, but if it still doesn't know how to mirror a file move from one folder to another... I seriously doubt that any company / professional would be happy with this software.

 

Please correct me, if I am wrong, but I can't understand, how moving files is so complicated to detect (even git does this automatically).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ctp

Sync detects file movements since version 1.2. This mechanism was improved in 1.4 and even more - in 2.0. So, Sync should track pretty well your file movements in 2.0 and not to re-download them. There are some edge cases when Sync can miss file movements, though they are rare. If you experience such issue and it is stably reproduced - I can assist in debugging it.

 

Please correct me, if I am wrong, but I can't understand, how moving files is so complicated to detect (even git does this automatically).

There are some challenges when you are doing it from pure user-space applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this such an edge case?

System A is a Synology NAS running 1.4.111.

System B is a Linux x64 running 1.4.111.

System A and B are adjacent to each other and connected via gigabit ethernet.

A: Existing share 14.96GB 50661 files.

A: BTSync Paused

Manually rsync folder from A to B. This takes about 10 minutes.

B: Add folder R/O

B: Wait until indexed

At this point, both systems have identical file trees.

B: Out of sync. 0 files. Says A has 14.96GB updates in 50661 files

A: Time = 08:35 Resume synching

B: Out of sync. 1% a few seconds

B: IO 7B/s down, 7B/s up

A: IO 0 0

There's hardly (if any) I/O going on.

B: Time = 09:15 3% - a month 423MB

B: Time = 09:38 4% - 2 years 471MB

B: Time = 09.45 1% - a few seconds 498MB

Huh? Percentage is going down?

B: IO 7B/s down, 7B/s up

Still no I/O. But also no progress.

At this point I gave up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1, but in my case I use free file sync to copy folders across and I was attempting a 100Gb sync.  it managed 23Gb in three days, so I also gave up.

HOWEVER, I ALSO have 2 very large folders syncing perfectly well with R/W permissions across the ether - and they BOTH synced in about an hour each (165Gb and 135Gb)  I have failed to get a three way 'mesh' to work (ever) and fail miserably everytime I attempt to sync one of these large folders to a third PC as R/O for backup, so I am sticking with two way syncs in 1.4.111 for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got no problem paying for a reliable and maintained solution with priority support, but right now it just feels... rushed and unsafe. NAS solution not working (all files are there) and the clients run in trial mode, with nothing to evaluate. Still alot of small counter-intuitive, un-assisted procedures (moving/adding existing folders) and missing basic functionallity (remove/rename identities, elaborate and human-understandable error messages with actual solutions, single file sharing).

 

I hope they get up-to-speed with the bugfixes and improvements, because thats the only reason I would even pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sciurius

Yes, this is the edge point. Massive files movement with tools like rsync cause a nasty issue in Sync 1.4.

 

@colinabroad

If you are willing to debug the issue - I'm happy to see logs.

 

@kreischweide

I hope they get up-to-speed with the bugfixes and improvements, because thats the only reason I would even pay for it.

We'll do our best to speed up with bugfixes and improvements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@sciurius

Yes, this is the edge point. Massive files movement with tools like rsync cause a nasty issue in Sync 1.4.

Can you elaborate? BTSync should be able to detect that a file is already there, with correct contents (hash).

Regardless of how many files it concerns, and how the files got there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@colinabroad

There is no point in getting 1.4 logs for this issue. The related code changed way too much in 2.0.

 

@sciurius

Sync 1.4 is capable on processing limited amount of OS "file change" events per time unit. This issue was discovered in support thanks to the user who did exactly same scenario you describe: moved files with rsync. I can't tell you precise limits as they depend on OS itself and how quickly it floods Sync with events.

Although, it was addressed in 2.0 and shouldn't be an issue anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"when it this ever going to leave beta!?" ...now it's left "beta", the narrative appears to be "why has it left beta?!"  :rolleyes:..

 

My guess is that people weren't talking about the label, they were talking about the quality of the software. Many people associate "leaving beta" with reaching a level of quality that allows for reliance on a piece of software as opposed to constantly having to make apologies for shortcomings or serious problems that arise without warning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, it's a bit of a no-win argument either way! - plenty of users over the past two years have complained at various times about the perpetual ongoing "beta" tag attached to Sync 1.4,1.3,1.2... etc with calls for "when it this ever going to leave beta!?" ...now it's left "beta", the narrative appears to be "why has it left beta?!"  :rolleyes:..

 

...but going back to your question of "is it ready to leave beta?". The bottom line is that every software title out there - beta or otherwise - has the potential for bugs, but users are arguably more accepting of bugs in "beta" or free software than they are in commercial software they are paying for. So regardless of whether you feel Sync is ready to become a paid product or not, the fact that it now is, potentially means that any bugs that you do come across will be addressed quicker than they would otherwise be - which has got to be a good thing, right!? :)

People complained not because they saw the word "beta", but because of the bugs here and there. If the final release is this buggy, people will have much less tolerance to bugs and start spread bad words instead of asking for help here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.