Anonymous
My feedback
20 results found
-
141 votes
Thank you for the suggestion. We currently do not have this planned on our roadmap. We will place this in our backlog as we continue evaluating ideas to improve Box Drive.
Please keep the feedback & use cases coming to help us prioritize this in the future!
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
162 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
164 votes
Thanks for the suggestion! We are looking at how to improve content sprawl on Drive. We will be considering Collections as a possible path (among other options), but don’t have a change planned in the near-term.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
234 votes
We currently do not have this planned on our roadmap. Please keep the feedback & use cases coming to help us prioritize this in the future!
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
308 votes
Hi there,
This ability is not currently planned but will be revisited in the future. Thanks for sharing your feedback!
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
344 votes
We are currently not planning to implement this feature and will continue to prevent all Box Drive results from appearing in Explorer/Finder searches.
Box Drive does not download the all of the metadata (File name, folder structure, etc.) of your Box content. Instead, it is downloaded on demand and then evicted when it is no longer relevant. This eviction process is not visible to users and it is not easily predictable. This would cause the search results in Explorer/Finder to be inconsistent for users – sometimes they would find a file and other times they may not if the metadata and file were evicted.
We have chosen not to download all of the metadata (and then keep it up to date with changes) as this can result in a large performance, storage and bandwidth tax which is not scalable – especially in environments where users interface with millions of files/folders.
…
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
103 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
15 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
75 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
24 votes
Hi, I am a Product Manager for Box's File System, I am looking for real world examples from your business needs where the waterfall permissions doesnt work. The more elaborate the example is the better it will be. Would you be willing to share?
An error occurred while saving the comment Anonymous
commented
I completely share your frustration. It's baffling that a company of Box's size and stature would still be relying on such an outdated approach like waterfall permissions. In today's dynamic business landscape, the ability to fine-tune permissions at the subfolder level is not just a luxury but a necessity. It's an industry-standard feature that fosters efficient collaboration and ensures that sensitive information remains secure. Box should definitely take heed of these concerns and prioritize the implementation of more flexible and granular permission controls to better serve their enterprise clients.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
28 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
58 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
41 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
21 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
43 votes
It's working as designed.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
86 votes
Because of the downstream impacts, we will not be solving this problem as requested. We will be looking at a more holistic approach to prevent unintended consequences of file operations.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
58 votes
Box Sign via Text/SMS is not under consideration for the future 2024 roadmap due to other priorities and effort.
Please continue upvoting the request, we will review this request again next year.
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
-
136 votesAnonymous
supported this idea
·
-
134 votes
Thanks for reaching out! We advise that you send this bug message with your logs to the support team. We will be able to triage effectively through this process. To learn more about Box Drive and how we support VDI, check the support article here: https://support.box.com/hc/en-us/articles/360044193693-Using-Box-In-Virtual-Environments
Anonymous
supported this idea
·
I can't believe that a company as big as Box is still using waterfall permissions for their enterprise accounts.
In a business setting, it's absolutely essential to have the option to set specific permissions for subfolders within a large data folder that's accessible to all users. This is such a basic feature that every other cloud file provider we've used offers. I don't understand why Box can't provide this.
For example, it's frustrating that I can't set up a system where a file gets locked automatically when User A opens it, and then switches to read-only mode when User B accesses it. I've seen that Egnyte can do this, so why can't Box? It's a feature that can prevent conflicts and ensure that everyone's on the same page without worrying about overwriting each other's changes.
Box really needs to step up their game and offer these kinds of features, especially if their competitors are already doing it. It's time for them to catch up and provide a more user-friendly and efficient platform for businesses.