Tell HN: Bitwarden does not export attachments in backups
This is very salient, I just left some feedback related to lack of functionality, in their community forums yesterday. I bought a subscription to use Bitwarden against 1Password, trying to switch from 1P to BW. I dislike 1P&#x27;s arrogant customer service (Read their community forums for about an hour, and look at many of the responses from staff regarding feature requests) and my attitude towards them really soured when they flipped the switch on perpetual licensing.<p>So I was excited and went in with an open mind, and delighted to be supporting an open source company:<p>* The initial migration went off to a bad start as it didn&#x27;t include everything from 1Password. Seemingly random data, and some attachments were missing. If I remember correctly, timestamps&#x2F;creation dates didn&#x27;t seem to migrate over, and some whole passwords weren&#x27;t brought over, but no errors were reported from their migrator.<p>* When I went to setup my vault after the migration, I was disappointed to see that there was a distinct lack of password types. I have software licenses, credit cards, API keys, regular passwords, recovery tokens, (non-critical) GPG keys, SSH keys, etc etc that I store in my vault. BW only had&#x2F;has 4 item types to choose from, which just isn&#x27;t suitable if you want to correctly track the types of items for organization and filtering. There is support for custom fields, but it just isn&#x27;t the same..<p>* No support for tagging. I tried to setup a nested folder structure alternatively, but the UX was not easy to use in the desktop application (I was assuming I could do something similar to a `mkdir -p path&#x2F;to&#x2F;nested&#x2F;folder` but BW only allowed me to create a single folder item at a time. For 500 password items, and different &quot;buckets&quot; I keep to organize, I ended up abandoning folders and just kept everything in the root in a mish-mash setup.<p>I get that it&#x27;s small and open source, and you have to temper expectations when comparing David (BW) vs Goliath (1P), but BW seems to have earned more community trust, and has an engaged community of fans. BW could absolutely provide a better experience than 1P both from a customer empathy standpoint, and from a product delivery perspective. But point 2 makes a failure (IMO) on point 1. Reading through their community forums, many of these (What I&#x27;d consider) table-stakes features have been left to rot on the tree of technical debt. Which makes me sad, because I&#x27;d pay a lot more than their current pricing model if they kept an open source attitude towards the product and could deliver more than just a &quot;We&#x27;re working on it! Stay tuned!&quot; attitude after years of community comments. I&#x27;m gonna stick with 1P when the licenses come up for renewal, and use KeePass or Vault as an on-prem backup solution.<p>I truly, truly hope BW succeeds, because I&#x27;d love to move away from my current setup. But I&#x27;m not willing to capitulate my workflow because the company can&#x27;t deliver on highly-requested&#x2F;highly-coveted features.<p>I don&#x27;t squarely put the blame on BW. This feels very common in the saas lifecycle: A feature has some sort of engagement&#x2F;revenue metric attached to it, for growth tracking. Whether correlation is correct is a debate for another time, but many of these core features have an opaque effect on revenue or engagement (If you&#x27;re a cynical product manager, an efficient tagging system correlates to less engagement, because I&#x27;m spending less time rooting around the user interface, which is less opportunity to use the application minute-by-minute), or it&#x27;s considered plumbing-type work in which the revenue&#x2F;engagement potential is spread out across the entire userbase, so the effect is less explosive (SSH key management[1], a niche feature requested by a loud subset of 1P users had huge awareness. But external sharing of items[2] was something I heard very little about, even though (objectively) external sharing casts a wider a shadow of net-new 1P users.<p>I digress. This just reminded me of the frustration I have with software: Feels like everything I want to use is always missing some key element that I have to trade off for another key element when looking at competitors.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.1password.com&#x2F;1password-ssh-agent&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.1password.com&#x2F;1password-ssh-agent&#x2F;</a>
[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.1password.com&#x2F;psst-item-sharing&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.1password.com&#x2F;psst-item-sharing&#x2F;</a>