I’m sure he has good intentions and is a capable developer, I just think he chose to release too early, and he definitely should not be taking money for the product at this stage. That’s an entirely different subject though, of releasing beta products at all, regardless of charging for them. That it’s working for many people though, is an indication that this product is still worth watching.
Well it does work in a way but just not good enough for me to pay for it yet. I will keep a close eye on it though as it would be great if it got working soon.
I just read some of the forum posts over on the site and I saw some where he had said that he wouldn’t be fixing it for a while which if people are paying for software that doesn’t work then that is pretty bad.
I won’t judge though as what he has made at the moment does work to a degree and I could never even try to figure out how to make something like that so will definitely be keeping a close eye out on this one.
At the moment though whenever I need this functionality with a server I just use the SSHFS program from Google which does exactly what it says on the tin and is free!
Hope he does get it working soon though as it would be very handy.
Yes that’s correct the server has to be SSH unfortunately. I do have a couple of servers which are SSH and this does work brilliantly on them and in fact I do use it quite a bit on them due to the files that I have on there but it would be nice to have a program like it which would just work for normal FTP servers too.
Well SSH and shell access are not entirely the same. I don’t expect it to work with normal FTP, but I do need it to work with SFTP, which is the SSH File Transfer Protocol, and really isn’t related to FTP at all.
Yep SSHFS will work with SFTP servers, in fact that is what I use it for at the moment and it seems to work quite nicely. Would be nice to be able to do the same with standard FTP though and mount them in the Finder.
Yeah Ryan, that’s essentially my hope for it as well. It basically provides the main functionality I desire from Coda, but with the benefit of retaining my application choice for working with files.
So true.
I’m still using Coda because I just love double clicking on a site and all 15 or so templates load up as I left of and are ready to use. The problem is that even with Chris’s EE Mode for Coda it was only ever a test release and it’s missing a lot of functionality.
Textmate EE pack is really quite nice so here’s to hoping the new 1.02 version will fix the bugs and I can get a Coda like experience while still using my beloved Textmate.
Agreed. I love being able to highlight tags like “exp:weblog:entries”, then hit Control-E and a window pops up with the correct page from the EE Docs. Or typing “entries{tab}” and getting the whole entries tag right there to edit as needed. All kinds of great stuff.
Out of curiousity, what is the difference between this package and sshfs? That’s what I use. Simply double-click it, connect to the server and quite the app. Your remote disk is mounted on the Desktop. Easy peasy.
Out of curiousity, what is the difference between this package and sshfs? That’s what I use. Simply double-click it, connect to the server and quite the app. Your remote disk is mounted on the Desktop. Easy peasy.
Am I missing something?
When it’s working? It’s faster, lower latency, reconnects automatically when you disconnect and reconnect to a network, or on wake from sleep, etc.
Derek and I ran into the same problem and the developer seems to be working on it.
Regarding just revising the sshfs stuff I think I its a bit more involved than that. The developer has some experience doing this sort of thing (with a fairly long standing and popular windows app that does similar stuff) and I suspect there is a lot of caching and other stuff going on that sshfs doesn’t do at all. IE its really a different product. I found sshfs unusable in a real working environment where I found this good enough after trying it out for awhile that I could really see myself using it full time.
That said I wish I had tested it a little better before purchasing it. It worked great on all of NetRaising’s servers but it fails out on the EngineHosting ones. Hopefully the dev will get that fixed soon. I would love to no longer need Transmit.
It’s working fine for me at any rate and with remote projects it’s now worth a move from TextWrangler/Transmit to TextMate. Looking forward to using Chris Ruzin’s TextMate EE bundle at last.
Just thought I’d add that the dev has since fixed 97% or so of the issues I had with the interface. And it now works fine with EngineHosting’s servers. Been using it quite successfully over the last 3 days. In fact I’ve found it keeps a connection with EngineHosting servers much more reliably than Transmit does which has saved me time quite a bit lately.
Thanks for the notice Jamie. I meant to check up on that a few days back but got so busy I just plain forgot. Just downloaded and it does indeed seem to have fixed the problems I was having with it.
I haven’t had any problems with this app at all...I really like it. The main problem for me is remembering to use it because my Textmate/Transmit workflow is so ingrained.
