Talk:Synergy (software)

message: MaxiVista was recently deleted, and Multiplicity is up for deletion, despite third-party coverage. I would suggest improving this article's citations, and perhaps looking for some reviews to add, otherwise this one may be next. GreenReaper 04:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: MaxiVista

message: This project was in a unmaintained state from 2007 to 2009 "No Longer in Development?" thread dated 2007-06-18 21:02. -- Shane Ley 05:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Maintenance

message: What's new & exciting about this software is that it uses "TCP/IP" connections to control the multiple computers, which is meaningless if one is not a computer professional  Also this statement is buried in the article and one has to go looking for the means of how the computers are connected in order to find it.  The article should start with the primary quality about this software that makes it noteworthy, which is that the computers are somehow connected via the internet and require no extra/add on hardware like a KVM switch.  A basic description of the how the computers are physically configured (both have access to the internet, I assume) so that the point is made that the control is via the internet (I assume).  Will they connect via a Router/Switch, or does one need full-blown internet.  Either?Jonny Quick (talk) 04:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add Means of Controlling Multiple Computers in 1st Paragraph 

message: Project is now behind a payway and as such, not FOSS. Can this be removed from the FOSS portal. 86.156.234.245 (talk) 23:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: That github repo describes itself as a "legacy component of Synergy", which doesn't quite sound like the proper full source for the latest version (I haven't looked at it though) David Joffe (talk) 10:38, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: No Longer FOSS

message: There have been reports regarding the security of the encrypton used in versions 1.4.11 to 1.6.3 of synergy. I edited the article.
The version before was clearly NPOV.
One could elaborate on the security problems still present in this free versions  in the article as mentioned in   -- 93.229.22.79 (talk) 02:20, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  security problems 

message: (I understand I'm just "asking for it" here but I honestly don't have time right now to do a proper job, sorry!)
The existing WP article (quite old) definitely reads like a company puff-piece -- more appropriately it's still tagged as WP:Verifiability ("may rely on sources too closely associated w/ the subject") - also Notability - but again it's very old. And it seems the company/product has developed (and the edits to the WP page since then don't look too egregiously self-promoting or NPOV - they seem descriptive (and btw, I'm a former..."industry insider?" :-)). Anyhow: (a) the article needs updating, (b) upon that the WP:V tag might merit removal, and: 
(c) don't know about the Notability tag -- hard to tell what the bar is for a software product? but for me it was that I wanted to know about their product and went to WP, so maybe that's not a bad criterion, here? (Vs. for people, where notability is a little more of a concern - WP doesn't want to fill up with every Johann(a)(x) Dough who wants to publish him/her/xself.). Happy to hear thoughts - and I'll check back when I have time, and do my duty to WP as a Good Editor. :-)
A Doon (talk) 18:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs update?