Hi @adrian2k7
I hope you are doing well today.
We are sorry to hear that you don’t like the new BLC 2.0. We hope you’ll give us an opportunity to address some of your concerns:
The new part of the core is less bloat because it’s run by an engine we’ve developed and runs on the WPMU DEV side. In the end, it won’t take down your server resources, and we are the ones who pay for the resources used on our side. Taking into account some hostings with low resources and having on site many plugins, taking down 1 cron job from the site is a benefit.
Kind Regards,
Kris
@wpmudevsupport13 Thanks for your feedback.
Unfortunately, these “benefits” don’t sell for me. I’m using BLC on about 50+ sites I maintain for years now, and never had any problems with performance or whatever, which would justify the change in any way.
Where is the cron the issue? BLC just runs in the background and does it check sporadically, only covering a couple of links from time to time…
It is just you, trying to sell the same features as “better”.
I understand, that it is hard to earn money, and you have to discover new ways.
BLC not really changed over the years, it has a single quite “simple” use case, which is totally stable and was working nicely. Hard to justify, i.e. another subscription model or whatever.
As I mentioned above, imo the concern is Automattic (and not us) not coming up with a solution for users and developers.
Hi @adrian2k7
We really appreciate your feedback!
Since the plugin looks for broken links as a user visiting the site, it improves these checks getting rendered pages instead of looking at the code in the site. There were some requests for the plugin to be capable to look for links in menus, widgets, shortcodes, etc. By having an API crawling a site, the plugin may get a more accurate report of any broken link.
We’d really like you to give BLC 2.0 a chance in the future as new features get added and our users can get more benefits from the tool.
Kind regards
Luis
