Used to be a great extension Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

Sorry, but I'm uninstalling 2.0 version.
I just don't want to have another syncing service, another account, another privacy concern.
Previous version was working fine and integrated very well with Xmarks. It was the *right* solution to the problem.

If it ain't broken don't fix it!

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Privacy theft. Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

Privacy concern -
1. I had not enabled online storage of Read it later list.
2. I had verified that online storage of my list was disabled.
3. Somewhere after an update it was saving my lists on the web site without my knowledge or consent.
4. Just checked that, removed the data from the account that was created - again without my knowledge - (Read it later creates an account for your computer automatically) - and uninstalled the add on - never going to use it again.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

can't work at Flock 2.55

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 2 sur 5 étoiles

totally agree with the previous comment! i've uninstalled ril because i don't see the point about disposing the bookmarks folder. hell, i'm no conservative, but i like the old ril better...

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Liked it until now Noté 2 sur 5 étoiles

I've taken RIL off one computer, and reverted back to version .9 on others. I had used it a lot, without a hitch. Would have rated it 5 stars. Since the RIL bookmarks were a part of the regular firefox bookmarks, utilizing xmarks for synching worked perfectly. I don't understand, a) why people couldn't figure out that they only needed one tool to sync, and b) why the creator of RIL chose to satisfy those who weren't smart enough to use a simple tool, by making that simple tool overly complicated. A better solution would have been to end the RIL synching option, since it only offers a limited subset of bookmark synching.

I draw the line at having to have two sync programs with two sync logins. It's overkill, so unless the option of storing the RIL marks in Firefox bookmarks is brought back, and as a software engineer, I see no reason why it shouldn't be possible, I'm done with RIL!

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

What a pain! Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

Clunky, hard to delete items. I'd rather maintain my own folder of "Read It Later" items.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

For small software, small and simple is key

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

Simple, useful application was ruined. It's overly complicated and impenetrable. Thanks a lot.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 3 sur 5 étoiles

I hate to say it, but I have to agree. I'm going back to 0.9. I need control inside of my Bookmarks. This would be fine if 2.0 improvements had not deleted access via FF Bookmarks.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 3 sur 5 étoiles

I hate to say it, but I have to agree. I'm going back to 0.9. I need control inside of my Bookmarks. This would be fine if 2.0 improvements had not deleted access via FF Bookmarks.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

Im back to 0.9

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

Thank you thank you thank you (!!!!) for removing RIL items from FF bookmarks! The main reason I started using RIL was to keep separate those sites I knew I wanted to bookmark from those I simply wanted to check out later. Love the update, I've had no problem syncing, and absolutely the best feature is offline reading of RIL pages!! One of my top 5 fave add-on's by far.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

Thank you thank you thank you (!!!!) for removing RIL items from FF bookmarks! The main reason I started using RIL was to keep separate those sites I knew I wanted to bookmark from those I simply wanted to check out later. Love the update, I've had no problem syncing, and absolutely the best feature is offline reading of RIL pages!! One of my top 5 fave add-on's by far.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 2 sur 5 étoiles

I downgraded back to 0.9.... :(

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

love it

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

This Is Goin' Backward Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

Does RIL have beef with X-Marks? I just gotta ask, I can't see why you'd take out a feature that you know most people depend on to work in tandem with your product. I mean, moving RIL away from FF bookmarks was the only solution? RIL never slow down my FF.
Anyway, like a bunch of other people already point out, this version SUCKS big time!!

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

i love it Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

i used ril and i will :) i think the biggest change is very useful, out-bookmarking. my bookmarks were blowed because of my ril contents. but now, ril seperate its content and this is very useful. my bookmarks will be more clean and basic. (i have +1000 ril content)

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

New 2.x version Noté 2 sur 5 étoiles

As far as I can see the latest release is just another case of fixing/improving something that didn't need it! As I see it, for what looks like a major change, from a users point of view, I think that something along the lines of a completely separate extension-name should have been considered so that the end-user could install it... find out if they liked it or not and if not then simply uninstall it...thus all this negative feedback would Not be there. I give it two stars for the development effort but take away three for the bad assumptions made by the designers and development people. For me... I went back to the .99x release and will continue to use it until Firefox can no longer support it...and then I'll just put a RIL folder on my Bookmarks Bar and drag sites into it.... no big deal there.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 5 sur 5 étoiles

I don't understand why people say the 2.0.x version sucks. It is a vast improvement over the 0.9. First off 0.9 had a tendency to simply not work and it had problems syncing. That and I hated the annoying status bar icon thing in 0.9 and I'm glad it's gone in 2.0.

I run RIL on my iPhone and the new 2.0.x version syncs perfectly with it. It makes things very easy to tag them on my iPhone and Read It Later on my PC, which is exactly what this add-on is designed for. This version even remembers where on the page I was when I stopped reading.

The Google Reader integration is a major plus as many web sites are blocked at my workplace. With RIL I can simply tag them and read them when I get home (or on my iPhone).

For those complaining that RIL items are no longer stored in the Places (bookmarks) library, that's a good thing since the Places library stores not only your bookmarks, but browser history as well. Storing RIL items there just slows things down. Syncing with the latest RIL is so fast that sometimes I'm not sure it even did sync until I see it replicated on my iPhone.

The only thing I don't like is the yellow arrow icon. I agree the plus icon from the 2.0 beta was better, but that's a minor complaint.

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3). 

Noté 1 sur 5 étoiles

I've written a longer comment before, but it's lost, never mind. So now let me just tell that my opinion is just the same as chgoguy7's below and it's also goodbye RIL for me if the previous functionality isn't restored.
I guess removing functionality isn't the way to progress, huh?

Cette critique est pour une version précédente du module (2.0.3).