I’m a long time 1P user getting upset with their recent change of direction and was readying a jump to Bitwarden. Very many long-time members of the 1P community feel exactly the same.
However, offline support is a must-have. Non-negotiable is the ability to read everything. “Can’t fetch” doesn’t work for me at all. Maybe I need a lock combination - unlike a website, this has a pretty good chance of not needing internet connectivity.
As for editing, many times, I have found the need to make offline updates. While infrequent, they happen often enough to form a real requirement.
Usually, these are additions and not changes, although both can happen. For additions, conflict resolution is trivial. All vault copies get all new entries. Done.
While I know merge conflict resolution of updates is a thorny and complicated topic, I can say that in 15 years of using 1P, I never once had a conflict, much less a complaint about resolving it. Why not? Because the changes aren’t to a shared vault that would have simultaneous updates. I’m changing my own vault item. I’m not somewhere else changing my own vault item at the same time. When I surface and reconnect, I sync (automatically, even) - long before I have the chance to somehow connect and update the vault by some other means.
Let’s add in the sharing case. The odds of a spouse or coworker editing the same item during these infrequent windows is exceedingly small, but admittedly non-zero. That means it needs to be handled, but it doesn’t mean that the user experience needs to be great.
The rareness of the event reduces the need for the solution to be as fancy. Needing to update offline: relatively rare. Then, within that window, having a simultaneous edit, very rare. Then, having that edit be a conflicting update, VERY rare. 99.7% of the users will never encounter it. That’s a conservative number, too. But obviously a much larger number would benefit from seamless operation between offline and online operations.
BW just needs to prevent data loss on sync. As has been suggested many times, detecting that a change has been made to the same item (by timestamp, hash, version, whatever) could just result in the edited item being added as a new item with a title reflecting this fact. We can add ‘nice to haves’, from having a Conflicts folder to nice 3-way merge UIs and intelligent auto-merge logic, but that isn’t required, and all of that is low ROI and very diminishing returns for such an infrequent event.
IMO, there is a golden opportunity for BW to grab a large percentage of 1P customers right now. I would implore BW to consider increasing the priority on offline use, but apply MVP thinking to just get the minimum solution out there. Read access should be 24/7/anywhere, and for editing, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good when it comes to the merge conflict UX over such a rare event.