S
simonc
Some time back I made a post and projection about foldershare and where it is
going. Despite the encouraging responses from Microsoft, I find myself
bitterly disappointed by the lack of any real progress on what is
fundamentally a great product.
I have spent considerable time and cash looking at options to solve real
file sync'ing business problems and Foldershare should be a hands down win.
The grand vision of Live Mesh, Groove and Live Folders are unfortunately
more vision than grand. They each focus on niche areas and none are any real
improvement on the fundemental service of file and folder sync.
I have been a major proponent of most Microsoft software for a number of
years and for a number of reasons despite sometimes many shortcomings. The
problem with Microsofts handling of Foldershare thus far is that there are
lots of ideas in the cloud about where MS wants to go but no-one has had
their feet nailed to the floor to deliver real solutions. All but Groove are
in Beta (there must be a law against endless Beta's) and Groove just isn't
right for large numbers of files.
I think we can comfortably say that there are thousands of users who would
be prepared to pay for a limit removed Foldershare at the very least. A large
percentage I'm sure would pay for a self-hosted/server version. There are
other options out there who are catching up but not quite there yet. BeInSync
comes close except its horrible local database arrangement. Syncing.net is ok
if a little immature and sugarsync have fallen into the foolish "I want your
data hosted on our servers" approach otherwise is close to being a hot
contender.
Being both a businessman and someone who has been in some of the deepest
technical IT trenches, there is an easy business model which is both good for
MS & us, the people who need the enhancements:
- Pay for licenses for numbers of files sync'd or total GB (thus more than
10,000 files supported)
- Add run as service feature, ACL transfer (pro version?), support for W2K3
- Release a server version for the hosted part to enable private sharing
within an organisation
Windows Live feels like the original MSN (pre IE!) - its a bit all over the
place. Instead of creating the vision then trying to drop bits of
functionality in, why not use the previously successful approach of enhance
and release products and collapse them together when established (think
Win3.11 -> Win95......Vista - more and more proven add-ons integrated over
time).
Someone once asked me "how do you eat an elephant?" The answer: "one bite at
a time". Have a grand vision but also take bites before things go bad.
Perhaps not the usual post, nor the most technical - I personally feel
dragged along and I'm actively seeking alternatives. Microsoft - you can make
a difference and a profit easily, please get a grip.
yours faithfully,
simon
going. Despite the encouraging responses from Microsoft, I find myself
bitterly disappointed by the lack of any real progress on what is
fundamentally a great product.
I have spent considerable time and cash looking at options to solve real
file sync'ing business problems and Foldershare should be a hands down win.
The grand vision of Live Mesh, Groove and Live Folders are unfortunately
more vision than grand. They each focus on niche areas and none are any real
improvement on the fundemental service of file and folder sync.
I have been a major proponent of most Microsoft software for a number of
years and for a number of reasons despite sometimes many shortcomings. The
problem with Microsofts handling of Foldershare thus far is that there are
lots of ideas in the cloud about where MS wants to go but no-one has had
their feet nailed to the floor to deliver real solutions. All but Groove are
in Beta (there must be a law against endless Beta's) and Groove just isn't
right for large numbers of files.
I think we can comfortably say that there are thousands of users who would
be prepared to pay for a limit removed Foldershare at the very least. A large
percentage I'm sure would pay for a self-hosted/server version. There are
other options out there who are catching up but not quite there yet. BeInSync
comes close except its horrible local database arrangement. Syncing.net is ok
if a little immature and sugarsync have fallen into the foolish "I want your
data hosted on our servers" approach otherwise is close to being a hot
contender.
Being both a businessman and someone who has been in some of the deepest
technical IT trenches, there is an easy business model which is both good for
MS & us, the people who need the enhancements:
- Pay for licenses for numbers of files sync'd or total GB (thus more than
10,000 files supported)
- Add run as service feature, ACL transfer (pro version?), support for W2K3
- Release a server version for the hosted part to enable private sharing
within an organisation
Windows Live feels like the original MSN (pre IE!) - its a bit all over the
place. Instead of creating the vision then trying to drop bits of
functionality in, why not use the previously successful approach of enhance
and release products and collapse them together when established (think
Win3.11 -> Win95......Vista - more and more proven add-ons integrated over
time).
Someone once asked me "how do you eat an elephant?" The answer: "one bite at
a time". Have a grand vision but also take bites before things go bad.
Perhaps not the usual post, nor the most technical - I personally feel
dragged along and I'm actively seeking alternatives. Microsoft - you can make
a difference and a profit easily, please get a grip.
yours faithfully,
simon