Jump to content
Enpass Discussion Forum

pauloirply

Members
  • Posts

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pauloirply

  1. 28 minutes ago, Dentonthebear said:

    I am not trying to sound condescending (but I probably am) when I say I do not understand why people are not grasping the concept of tags vs folders when to me, it makes perfect sense.

    This is what I am about, and a considerable number of users are trying to convey, including to you, that TAGS are TAGS, and they should not be used as DIRECTORIES.

  2. 26 minutes ago, Dentonthebear said:

    I will attempt to explain as I see it, sorry if I am teaching you to suck eggs:

     

    alas, I do not understand your subtle humor.
    + to everything, you yourself have already agreed that animals are different, but you are still trying to prove something to someone.
    Let everyone keep their opinion. For me, objectively, TAGS are TAGS. CATALOGS are CATALOGS. I don’t have time to delve into someone else’s logic, which is born by finding, regardless of the real objectivity.

     

  3. 11 minutes ago, Dentonthebear said:

    Hi @pauloirply

    Yes I do realize that Tags and Folders are not directly interchangeable features, but...  At the end of the day Tags is the current feature in Enpass not Folders and I can use Tags as well if not better for my purposes as I could with a generic folder system I am happy, even if others cannot figure a way of implementing them.  But that is just me I suppose.

    When I decided to switch to ENPASS, I sent a bug report, which was just about tags and sub tags.
    The problem has been resolved, no doubt.
    In short, the problem was that earlier, for a very long time, I used the keepass password manager. And there the tree structure was presented exactly in folders, subfolders and so on.
    And when I did export from keepass and import into enpass, I saw how much the enpass logic differs from the traditional view of organizing data for MOST password managers, including keepass.
    Hence, a bunch of posts on the forums because people who have "moved" to the enpass cannot understand why on FOLDERS now we need to say "TAGS". Do you understand what I mean? In fact, this is a substitution of concepts.
    I can definitely say that I like the program, but my broken logic does not allow me to fully trust the ENPASS

  4. 7 minutes ago, Dentonthebear said:

    Hi @pauloirply

    Sorry, I almost completely disagree with you, and for you to say that the Sinew staff are 'confused' because they are not producing exactly what you want is to my mind insulting.  If I said that you do not understand how to use the Enpass because you have no common sense or you are not intelligent enough you would, I am sure not be pleased.

    Whether people want to admit it or not Tags can quite happily be used as folders, and while there is the ability and use case for them, you do not have to give each entry multiple Tags.  Just create your 'folder' structure (using Tags), go to the relevant folder (Tag) where you want to place and item and create away.  Which is exactly what I did when I transitioned from v5 to v6, not in the slightest bit confusing or difficult.  In addition, all of my entries are laid out by client name (simple A-to-Z filing) followed by a classification, i.e. Remote Desktop Setting.  This means that I do not have to look through my Tag filing system if I do not want to and the search functionality makes it quick and easy to locate any entry I am after.  If a consistent naming/filing system is maintained then truly you should never need to Tag/File anything, you could store it all in a root folder!

    There is one other major piece of software I can think of that uses Tags and I have not come across its users making any complaints, and that is Finder in Mac OS.  Windows may have something similar but I have not used it for so many years I cannot recall.

    Yes having the ability to hide the categories/tags etc would be useful to some, but if that was made a feature deleting them altogether would seem to be redundant.  See I said I did not completely disagree with you.

    Is Enpass expensive?  Well I suppose that all depends on your budget, what other packages you are comparing it to and whether you consider it good value for money.  The clients I have using it are a balance of those who just use the free desktop version and those that use it primarily on mobile devices and have been happy to make the purchase.  Enpass is free to use and learn without any outlay, so beyond a user's time, before taking the plunge and purchasing the full product for mobile devices.

    Software rarely works exactly the way an end user wants it to, unfortunately it is down to that person to either find another package that they like better, or to learn to adapt. To fall back on an old quote:

    “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”.”

    ― John Lydgate

    Finally, yes developers need to listen to their users.  But that does not mean that every user should expect that every feature they want is going to be included in a package.

    Well, first of all, I didn't want to embarrass anyone with my post. and in this situation, the opinion expressed by me is exclusively mine.
    I am very closely associated with software development throughout its entire cycle, and I know what I am talking about.
    I repeat, no one intended to offend the developers.
    Among other things, I did not write that the program was expensive, but clarified that I had purchased a paid version, nothing more.
    about tags, I answered you in another post. Tagging has nothing to do with directories. This is a fact and it is incontrovertible.
    And you still haven't answered the question as to whether you store absolutely all files in the root of some disk, directory, and just tag? I doubt very much ...
    Ultimately it's about the password manager, not the operating system. And a password manager is a highly targeted product from which the user wants to get a specific result.
    It's not so difficult to fantasize and implement this in code, but how will all this affect the end user?
    As for the ability to hide unused categories, it already exists. BUT! we are talking about the possibility of deleting standard categories.
    How strange it turns out. he can delete categories that the user has created on his own, but he can only hide the presented categories. Why?
    This is the user's password database. Why should a user keep in his database categories that he will not use?
    In general, everyone has the right to express their point of view, but with your post you have created even more questions for me personally.
    And please note, as practice shows, the more points of view are considered, the more objective and quality the final result is.

  5. 3 hours ago, Dentonthebear said:

    If you changed the name of Tags to Folders you could still achieve the same outcome, I am sorry but I just do not see the problem people are having!

    I partially agree with you, you are right, you might think that tags are folders, but this is still wrong because the very definition of a tag and what functions it performs in its direct purpose are completely different from what tags perform in the case of a password manager from enpass.
    Well, agree.

  6. Hello.
    Dear Enpass team.
    Judging by the number of topics that relate to the organization of storing password records, you are simply confused about what you are doing, and as of now you are only aggravating everything.
    I believe that there are things that are familiar to everyone, and formed a very long time.
    For example. each of you has files stored on your PC, and they are stored in some directories. each directory has its own name, making it much easier for you to quickly access a particular file.
    I agree with your logic regarding the development of data systematization, if you show me that on your PC all files are stored in the root and that you are constantly tagging new files to look for any of them ...
    Agree is it expensive?
    Why not leave everyone the familiar structure of their password database organization?
    why not give users the freedom to choose how they organize their data?
    99% of password managers do just that. Why then be so perverted and try to speak in white = black?
    Give users the ability to create an ABSOLUTELY empty password database without your predefined categories and so on. And I'm not telling you that it is possible to turn off your default categories, but to delete them completely! "
    Ultimately your company offers inconvenient software.
    I was hoping to get used to the logic of your program, but alas.
    I will say more, I bought the full version, and as of now I regret it.
    Let me add that if keepass had native synchronization tools, then acquaintance with your product might not have taken place.
    Summarizing such a long story, I ask you to pay attention to what users want, not what your developers think is right or appropriate. Or, all the same, let each user build their base from scratch. create a database without pre-installed templates, categories, tags.

  7. "unable to duplicate" or "unable to reproduce"?
    Let's try...
    New test database, created in keepassx (v2.31.1) (installed from original repos in kde neon)

    Main category Root -> next subcategory-> next subsubcategory. (see in attachments) <- in all category (exclude Root), subcategory, sub subcategory present items (see in attachments)
    after saving this database i do export to CSV
    After export, i do import into enpass, and result the same as i wrote early. 

    in attachments i add database and screenshots of structure in keepassx and result after import to enpass.
    Pass for database - justdoit 
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1lJWYXfKloymrIO8bZfILoClJL8K4miux

  8. Hello to all. I am sure that I have long been looking for this product to replace my keepass.
    Having tested the desktop version of the program for Linux, I decided to go to enpass completely, however, I encountered difficulties in importing the base from keepass to enpass.
    I have pass base in keepass with 477 item.
    My keepass db structure is:
    Root----
    ------cat1
    ------cat2
    ------cat3
    -------------subcat3.1
    -------------subcat3.2
    -------------subcat3.3
    ------cat4
    ......etc
    What i do? -> go to keepassx->export my db to CSV->go to enpass->import data from keepassx as CSV....
    The result of such manipulations is  i have all item from my keepass database, but the base structure is not similar to the structure of the keepass base, and I also don’t see some item, but they are accessible from searching... as result i recieve this structure:
    Root----
    ------cat1
    ------cat2
    ------cat3

    -------------subcat3.2

    ------cat4
    ......etc

    all category in enpass imported as tags and subtags, but after this import subcat3.1 and subcat3.3 is hidden, and inaccessible to navigation from UI.

    if I enter in the search bar the name of any item that was in subcat3.1 or subcat 3.3, then the record appears in the search results and it's is assigned the tag subcat3.1 or subcat3.3, respectively, but get access to them from the list of tags and subtags impossible because they are not displayed.
    I really NEED YOUR help.
    In fact, at the moment this is the only thing that keeps me from buying applications for android, iPadOS, windows.

    3.png

    2.png

    1.png

×
×
  • Create New...