3 ms·

Yeah, I would have to agree. I am a Bitwarden premium user for my personal password management, but we use 1Password business at work. Some things Bitwarden i

Yeah, I would have to agree. I am a Bitwarden premium user for my personal password management, but we use 1Password business at work. Some things Bitwarden is missing: - Integration with biometric auth on Linux - SSH key types & SSH agent integration - API token types - Equivalent to `op run --` in their CLI client - Shared vault / folder management in Bitwarden is clunky, especially with CLI I'm sure there's more, but this comes off the top of my head. It has a lot going for it, but small things (especially with the CLI tool) make it hard to say it's superior in every facet. I love Bitwarden, but they very clearly employ fewer people and have fewer features.

toomuchtodo 4y ago
I might argue these are niche features and best served by more complex password managers compensated to serve a smaller audience. Your average user needs somewhere safe to store a url, username, and password tuple (and perhaps safely share those to others). Business users should be using SSO, role assumption, and a vaulting solution as a last resort.
- ThatGeoGuy 4y ago
  Hmmmm. Are you advocating that Bitwarden was feature-complete and should never build these things out of the product they have? Because things like SSO, role assumption, sharing, etc. are already part of their business offering. What I'm complaining about above is the claim: Bitwarden is a superior replacement in every way. which I'll add, was compared to 1Password 5. Certainly that may be true for the grandparent poster, but I've put various features that exist in 1Password 8 (as a current user) that are missing in Bitwarden. I'm happy to disagree and say that if you want a product that only does vault storage, and neglects all business or non-user/pass combo needs - great, you can have that. But to suggest somehow that Bitwarden is that product and should remain so - well I'm afraid you're not looking at their business model. They already have SSO options (see https://bitwarden.com/products/business/ https://bitwarden.com/products/business/), audit & compliance, etc. I am being very frank about features that are missing from Bitwarden today that actual customers are looking for.
  - toomuchtodo 4y ago
    I’m advocating for not building features if they’re not going to drive meaningful amounts of revenue. Let your competitor waste their resources doing so.
    - usehackernews 4y ago
      I’m confused, so you’re saying BW is superior in every way because they don’t have features that don’t drive meaningful revenue? Your response to the commenter who pointed out ways in which BW is inferior was to ignore the user benefit and say they don’t drive even revenue.
garblegarble 4y ago
I switched to BitWarden for a while when it looked like 1Password was going to be in-browser only as the future on macOS, and one of the major things for me was it making logging in to multiple Google accounts harder than 1Password - it seemed to always be presenting the wrong password as a default, whereas 1Password would just get it right. Google drives me mad with the number of times they'll ask me to reauthenticate in FF. I'm sure that story has improved since then, but it was frustrating enough for me to switch back again.

toomuchtodo 4y ago

I might argue these are niche features and best served by more complex password managers compensated to serve a smaller audience. Your average user needs somewhere safe to store a url, username, and password tuple (and perhaps safely share those to others). Business users should be using SSO, role assumption, and a vaulting solution as a last resort.

ThatGeoGuy 4y ago
Hmmmm. Are you advocating that Bitwarden was feature-complete and should never build these things out of the product they have? Because things like SSO, role assumption, sharing, etc. are already part of their business offering. What I'm complaining about above is the claim: Bitwarden is a superior replacement in every way. which I'll add, was compared to 1Password 5. Certainly that may be true for the grandparent poster, but I've put various features that exist in 1Password 8 (as a current user) that are missing in Bitwarden. I'm happy to disagree and say that if you want a product that only does vault storage, and neglects all business or non-user/pass combo needs - great, you can have that. But to suggest somehow that Bitwarden is that product and should remain so - well I'm afraid you're not looking at their business model. They already have SSO options (see https://bitwarden.com/products/business/ https://bitwarden.com/products/business/), audit & compliance, etc. I am being very frank about features that are missing from Bitwarden today that actual customers are looking for.
- toomuchtodo 4y ago
  I’m advocating for not building features if they’re not going to drive meaningful amounts of revenue. Let your competitor waste their resources doing so.
  - usehackernews 4y ago
    I’m confused, so you’re saying BW is superior in every way because they don’t have features that don’t drive meaningful revenue? Your response to the commenter who pointed out ways in which BW is inferior was to ignore the user benefit and say they don’t drive even revenue.

garblegarble 4y ago

I switched to BitWarden for a while when it looked like 1Password was going to be in-browser only as the future on macOS, and one of the major things for me was it making logging in to multiple Google accounts harder than 1Password - it seemed to always be presenting the wrong password as a default, whereas 1Password would just get it right. Google drives me mad with the number of times they'll ask me to reauthenticate in FF. I'm sure that story has improved since then, but it was frustrating enough for me to switch back again.