jake.sadie

Discussion: Is The 10 Folder Limit The Only Reason You Won't Be Upgrading From 1.4 To 2.0 Free?

Recommended Posts

Yes. Two reasons:

 

1) Arbitrary and capricious. A ploy to get people to go to Pro.

 

2) Given that no features of 1.4 would be lost with 2.0 promise (see separate thread) I can no longer trust this company. What's to say in 3.0 that gets reduced to FIVE folders? Or none at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the fact that there's a limit. It's the fact that BT told everyone that no features would be taken from free users when they rolled out the pro version. Syncing unlimited folders is a feature that BT took away from free users starting with 2.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the fact that there's a limit. It's the fact that BT told everyone that no features would be taken from free users when they rolled out the pro version. Syncing unlimited folders is a feature that BT took away from free users starting with 2.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, because in the 1.4 beta, there were no restriction.

Pro version have to got more features, maybe to sync more than billion of go, and i don't know, a feature you use only as a pro.

 

free version doesn't have to got less features than 1.4 beta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. 

 

As time goes by and the answer gets more complicated. If they back off of the 10 folder limit I'm willing to just forget about this mess. But I'm trying other products and sooner or later there will be a point of no return. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Offering 25% rebate to users of version 1.4 while there is absolutely no way of knowing... is one more layer of scamish coating on that turd marketing. 

 

I don't want the 30 days trial,, I want to see right away if I can live with the feature of the free version before investing any time configuring it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO !! (shock horror!!) 

I have actually tried 2.0 Pro and it simply doesn't work, so it is an irrelevant question for me.  One folder or twenty is irrelevant on a broken app paid for or not.  How many apps do we all download to try only to delete them three minutes later when we discover they are not what we thought or don't work or don't do what you wanted?  This currently would be one of them in my book.

 IMHO 2.0 is a different app doing different things in different ways to 1.4.

1.4 suits my needs and does exactly what I need a syncing app to do in real time. It is good at this and (again) IMHO is the ONLY one out there that actually does it in real time which is a massive bonus to me and I suspect many others.

2.0 does things I don't want (such as displaying ALL folders on ALL machines) and does them in a way that is too complex for me.  There are no options to turn on/off these additional features that appeared from nowhere either.

1.4 is free and unlimited in the number of folders it processes.  Why don't we ask the devs to ditch the free 2.0 and continue to work on the free 1.4 version to iron out the few bugs that are left?  THEN (when the product is ready for the general public) roll out a paid or donated version of 1.4 to keep the support running/make money (not a subscription model)

Keep 2.0 Pro as a paid for by subscription product and see how many people go for the subscription offering ?

Hope this helps, and do PLEASE keep the discussion polite :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i use 10 folders at the moment, so technically i could upgrade but then i'm stuck with the limit if i want to add another folder.

So the answer is yes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a moot question for me, now that I'm in test mode with Syncthing/SyncTrazor. 

 

The last week or two, I was all gung-ho on implementing BTSync and then read about some questionable ethics by this 'company'.

 

No amount of folders, free this or that is going to change my mind now.

Edited by GreatMarko
Edited for language which may offend

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

I am a BTSync user from the early alpha days, 2 years ago.

 

I am very disappointed that BTSync has removed features from the free version. I use BTSync for work. I simply cannot upgrade to 2.0 or I would lose hundreds of synched folders.

 

I was looking forward to paying a reasonable fee for file ownership and permissions in the Pro version.

 

Pricing for Pro is unrealistic, especially considering that this is "just" a file synchronising software. There are excellent alternatives that include CRM, project management that cost less than 40$/user/year.

 

Unless BTSync reverts to more reasonable policies I will be leaving this platform. It's a shame because I was happy with the product.

 

Listen to your users BitTorrent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually paid $30 as my way of donating to the developers when 2.0 Pro came out. I don't need the features of Pro and won't very likely be udating my subscription in a year. Ver 1.4 was working flawlessly for me, but I like to keep my software up to date and figured that this 2.0 release would be a nice, stable way to maintain this platform.

WHAT A MISTAKE!

 

1) I never received a confirmation of the license until I asked them about my subscription, 2 days later.

2) There was no indication that the BTKEY was attached to that confirmation letter (when it finally did arrive) and there was NO indication that this file was to be used to activate the pro version. Good thing I checked with Tech support....I would never have figured that out. No instruction whatsoever.

3) the upgrade from 1.4 to 2.0 was possibly one of the SLOPPIEST update/upgrade scenarios I have ever seen in a software update, with the possible exception of some of Microsoft's complete reinstall of the OS to upgrade.

It took me 1/2 day to figure out WTF to do and 1/2 day to get it all straightened out so that I'm all in sync across my machines. What a complete and total cluster fuck, guys.

 

You had it all working so well on V1.4 (at least on my 2 x MBP OSX 10.10.2 machines, 1 x Win 8.1 x64 desktop, Android 4.4.4 phone). You really needed to get this worked out before dropping 2.0 (and Pro, no less!) onto the community. You've turned a LOT of users off, including myself. I only hope that all of these BAD USER EXPERIENCES listed on this forum makes you take notice and get your act together so that I /we don't ever have to experience this crap again. I won't be installing any updates and certainly won't be renewing my license in a year, if this is what I am to expect. I'll be watching the forums before I do ANY updating.

Boyd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no. Crippling the app with only 10 folders after expressly promising such a thing wouldn't happen is one thing.

 

But a subscription license? NOPE, I don't rent software. Especially not software that doesn't even require hosting or any other significant support from the company. A subscription in this case is nothing but a cynical cash-grab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The way the 2.0 update was pushed out was more of an issue than the folder limit itself; if you're going to push an update out like that which is going to change functionality, need things to be reconfigured etc, then you need to give the user big, clear warnings about what they're going to do. When I inadvertently updated my phone, I had no clue that it was anything more than a regular point update. When it seems like you're trying to stealthily foist changes on people that them might not agree to if given the choice, that's a trust-breaker. And why act that way, unless we're now on the slippery slope of gradually degrading the free version and trying to push people on to the paid version*?

 

* a paid version which is not at all an attractive proposition for me, I'm afraid; I could see a one-off purchase, but $40 per year basically for the odd bug-fix? I'm supplying my own power, storage and bandwidth. Nah, man. You want to charge cloud storage prices, give me a cloud-based Sync node with some cloudy features, so I can do the things that Sync currently can't do, like sending files to people without requiring them to install any software, or streaming media from the cloud without requiring any of my machines to be on. Right now $24/year for 100GB of Google Dive storage seems like a much better deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always am devils advocate but I wouldnt say unlimited folders is a feature considering the program was in beta.   Sharing folders is a feature, the number of folders is one of those things that you have to expect to get adjusted.   

I will say though that 10 folders is a very restricted and seems unreasonable, and is infact a sign of greed and forcing peoples hand to going pro.  A program like this when they get it fixed up is worth 40 dollars a year, but not when its still beta without the beta tag.  So many problems and shortcomings its not ready for pro. 

I suggested elsewhere, what about the idea of syncing folders with a sync tool into a virtual folder where syncing occurs? I did this with dropbox, I got myself in trouble doing so and made a mess, but it was viable once I sorted it out.

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.