Feature support table

@Tony I have to say that after the years of suffering and patient waiting by customers, not to mention the frustration by new customers who get roped in by slick marketing saying oDrive does all of this stuff AND makes waffles, it blows my mind that you guys do not publish a SINGLE SOURCE OF INFORMATION of which features are supported for each cloud provider for each release version of oDrive. This is CRITICAL INFORMATION and if you’d just make it public in one clear place by way of a web page in table Look, we get it. Making software is HARD. We get it. But just be TRANSPARENT! I GUARANTEE YOU that would eliminate 80% of the support work that you have to perform. If you just made it easy to find what works and what don’t. FAQ’s are for morons who have nothing but time on their hands to read entire lists of crap that may or may not be questions asked the way you ask them. Ain’t no one got time for that!

What I propose is a table that would have the following for each release of oDrive:

  • A link to the release notes which contains what was actively worded on for the given release, what problems that it turned out to be introducing by accident (whoopsy!), and what unconfirmed reports exists regarding said release that have not been verifiably confirmed or refuted. This should list any known issues that require workarounds, like how when you have sync drives with different names than their folder names in oDrive that updating your client to the given version will make your sync drives go bye-bye! (Remember that one?)
  • A section for each cloud provider that oDrive “supports”.
  • Under each cloud provider should be details on what levels of support it has broken down by feature. This would be columns of data that would have headers that are the name of a feature and the cells would either be a YES, a NO, or KINDA where “KINDA” is a link that goes to a page or footnote describing whatever caveat is needed to be known to tell you how support is limited or that some work around is needed to make it work. (Some columns, a YES or NO may not be appropriate, but instead maybe READ ONLY, READ/WRITE, or OTHER where “OTHER” was a link to a page or footnote which describes whatever the limitations are, and gosh-golly there are many, so don’t forget to number them!

Some features that should be described as “working” or not would be (depending on cloud provider, as features that don’t apply to all providers)


Okay, so since bullet lists are like, beyond the scope of what this support tool can do, here is my attempt a a list of features that you could have columns for for EACH CLOUD PROVIDER. The result would a report that was either a giant spreadsheet of a spreadsheet “book” where each platform was a page, where a column was a feature and a row was a oDrive version. Does that make sense? Good! So on that, here are some suggested columns for you to list because this is just the start!!!

Metadata Support
-Date Created
-Date Last Modified
-Date Last Touched
-Date Added
-File Mode Bite (Permission, Sticky Bit, etc…)
-Whatever Else
Support for Symlinks?
-Treat like regular files and preserve file linkage
-Traverse Symlinks and copy contents they refer too (I can’t see why this would be desired, but I hear some clouds support this awful feature.)
Native Large File Support?
-Platform specifc support, like with B2
-What’s the larges file supported?
On the fly compression for faster transfers?
Tracking of older versions of files so you can restore from old version (DropBox Plus users)
Whatever Windows Specific Junk people who use Windows like having like ACLs (One Cloud supports this stuff natively, so I hear)
Data transfer speeds that can be expected, nominally
-Wide Load
-Ass Load
And whatever else you can possibly think of that would save you the trouble of
-Angry, Sad, and Disappointed users
-Having to repeat repeat that you have already published (FAQs don’t count because blobs of unorganized information are of no use to anyone.

Think of the HAPPINESS you could create with both your already frustrated users and your overworked support staff!



Hi @DarfNader,
This is a good idea. I think the initial table would be a subset of the items you have listed, but I agree that listing the caveats/limitations/quirks would be useful.