I can concur with the frustration. But, as I surmised in this post back in 2007 (http://forums.thebrain.com/post/pb-on-a-pda-1824390) there is a trade-off with resources:
Quote: Personally i'd be up for the team concentrating on continued development of the PC/Mac based versions rather than investing additional effort on mobile devices, which all seem to have their individual requirements to which Harlan subsequently added:
Thanks for the feedback Jim. Yes, we're on the same page here. Unfortunately, our engineering resources are limited and the mobile device platforms are numerous indeed. There is definately a 'cool factor' here, but I'm not sure that the usefulness can justify the efforts. Anyhow, once you can put your Brain online, you could access it from your mobile device also.
Of course, the team at TheBrain have performed admirably and diligently in providing carefully crafted and integrated mobile solutions on the iOS and Android platforms. The result is that development and support on the primary desktop clients has visibly suffered. The user base demanded the mobile apps and the team responded, with predicted consequences; I am also frustrated at the slowdown in support - my megabrain limps along for 2 years now with critical crashes and latchups (seemingly every time i try and use it in meetings) but what to do. I am resigned to the issue being practically unsolvable as i reach the conclusion by evidence that the team is overstretched on mobile integration. Perhaps this will swing back within another year or two as the mobile development reaches steady state. That assumption also rests on the fact that the mobile solutions gain widespread adoption so that some well deserved additional revenue streams can be realized. However, competition in the mobile space for note taking apps is fierce and there are frankly (sorry to say) superior executions for standalone utilities. Which brings us back to a possible quandary, if the above assumptions are valid - even having tested the premise of widespread market reach by mobile utility, TheBrain may remain a niche product for enthusiastic users passionate about the product and engaged in the associative mapping approach to information management. The fact that there are still outstanding critical desktop utility and stability issues more akin to a beta after 17 years of usage, despite the beautiful feature developments gets to the heart of the problem. In trying to respond to the demands of the user base, quality has been sacrificed for quantity. All indications based on assumption, is that the team is overstretched on all these platforms. As a deliberately managed solution, I would accept an entire Brain v9 desktop version without a single new feature, but a complete overhaul of bugs, performance issues and anomalies. How about a call to action which would give the development team some breathing room? I call for v9 to be a quality consolidation release. Don't create new arbitrary features, just attend to the problems that exist. That would require a deep engagement on behalf of support to actively reach out to users on this forum and attend to the issues raised and SOLVE THEM. Not just make motion to have a call, or an email exchange but commit to solutions. I would suggest that the team commit to a Release Version 9 by January 1 2016 - yes, that's almost a year and half but if we want to fix this problem together as a community then that's what the v9 beta program will take alongside continued mobile development. All this assumes that it also resonates with the corporate strategy of TheBrain, and this suggestion is made without knowledge of their strategy so it might be total coconuts. All in favor of a V9 Quality Consolidation Release by 1st January 2016, say 'aye'! Jim
TB8022 32bit Java 32bit Version 8 Update 141 Testing 22.214.171.124 Firefox, Office 2013 Pro Plus 32bit 64bit Win10Pro 64bit Primary Laptop, 8GB RAM, Intel Core i7 64bit Secondary Laptop, 64GB RAM, Intel Xeon E3 Brain user since 1997