MacUpdate
Join MacUpdate
New Member

New Developer
Explore
MacUpdate Desktop
Hot Apps

Business
Dashboard
Development
Drivers
Education
MacUpdate Promo
Popular Apps

Games
Home & Personal
Internet
Multimedia & Design
Utilities
iPhone
Apps

Login
Member Login

Developer Login
About
Search Mac Apps

Search iPhone Apps

Advanced Search
Clusters
Clusters 1.5.6
Your rating: Now say why...

(13) 3.8846153846153846

Background file compressor (formerly known as Squeeze).   Shareware ($12.95)
Add to my Watch List
Email me when discounted
  • Download Now
    1.8 MB
  • Visit Developer's Site
    LateNiteSoft
Clusters is a background file compressor, which uses the new HFS-compression technology in Snow Leopard to transparently compress the folders you configure it to process. Mac OS will read those files normally, they will just take less disk space.
What's New
Version 1.5.6:
  • Clusters 1.5.6 fixes a preference pane crasher when running on Mac OS 10.6 in 32-bit machines.
Requirements
Intel, Mac OS X 10.6 or later.



MacUpdate - Clusters




  • Xslimmer
    +4
    Shareware $14.95
    Save hard drive space by ...

  • Springy
    +1
    Shareware $19.95
    Finder-like archiving and ...
Clusters User Discussion (Write a Review)
ver. 1.x:
(13)
Your rating: Now say why...
Overall:
(13)

sort: smiles | time
burypromote


fireyouritguys reviewed on 17 Apr 2012
Works, but disappointing how little it actually compresses. I bought it hoping to feee up space on my 128GB Macbook Air SSD. I was using 91GB and it freed up jus over 1GB. That's almost $13 a gigabyte for storage! Hardly worth the trouble and certainly not worth the money. I was hoping for at least 5-7GB in savings. It saved just of 300MB out of 5.2GB in Applications (6%), and just under 800MB in my user profile which had 64GB (1.5%) for an overall performance of around 1%.
[Version 1.5.6]


burypromote
-1

+3

Unmei reviewed on 21 Feb 2012
Pretty good app that basically re-defines how much data something takes. I'm not sure if this is correct, and I can't remember where I found this info, but according to [source] the Mac OS defines data storage larger than it actually is. I believed it was said to be as 1,256kb for 1mb instead of 1,000kb for 1mb. (and so forth.) This person made a terminal command that re-programs that definition, and offered it freely. (If I find that source againI will reply here.)

Now, this app isn't worth it for people who regularly keep 100G+ of free space on their HD. (assuming it is 250G). It is very useful, works on Lion (10.7.3), but is selective in how much data it saves you. (based on the file type.) For a better idea if you really need this, look this up on youtube. you may have to search "squeeze" (which is what it used to be called apparently.)

This app certainly seems like it wasn't easy to make, but overall it should offer better features for the price they charge.

Now, this DOES take plenty of CPU power (about 1-30%). (you can monitor with the free "istat" menu for dashboard.) You can tell it what folders you want it to compress and which ones not to. Or you can add an entire directory ("desktop" for example).

For an idea of how much data you can save, it depends on how much data of certain files you have. The most it will save on is apps, docs, txt, rtf, etc. The Least you will save on is videos and picture files.
[Version 1.5.6]

1 Reply

burypromote

PorkPieHat replied on 17 Mar 2012
As I understand it, the standard size of 1 MB is actually 1,024 KB (and 1KB = 1,024 bytes, 1 GB = 1,024 MB, etc.). You're correct that Apple cheats by instead using the SI (Metric) system that measures everything in increments of 1,000) to make its hard drives seem larger than they actually are. Though it causes all kinds of problems, Apple doesn't seem to care that most other players in the industry use the standard system.
burypromote

+1

Poffuomo reviewed on 06 Dec 2011
It does one thing but it does it great.
[Version 1.5.6]


burypromote
+2

+351
Harristype commented on 03 Dec 2011
I'm a BIG fan of Xslimmer by the same company. Xslimmer has saved a lot of disk space on my drives, but I have continuing problems with Clusters slowing my machine down to a crawl, even after it finishes its compression. I won't give it a star rating since I'm not sure the problem isn't inherent to my machine, but I've had to remove every version shortly after installing it. Hope they can get this fixed.
[Version 1.5.6]

1 Reply

burypromote

+67
Franko replied on 03 Dec 2011
I agree about XSlimmer. Hoping you emailed the guys at LNS regarding the slowdown. Perhaps you included a folder/disk that gets accessed often?
burypromote

+33

Fmaxwell reviewed on 26 Jun 2011
I made the mistake of installing my registered copy of Clusters before I discovered what a shady company LateNiteSoft is.

I submitted a simple question using their tech support web form on June 17, 2011. On June 23, I sent a follow-up e-mail (through the online service they use for tech support tracking) requesting an answer. It is now June 26, 2011. I have received no answer of any kind. The tech support request still shows in their online "tracking" where it will apparently remain unanswered.

LateNiteSoft registered their domain using DomainsByProxy to hide their mailing address, phone number, and e-mail addresses. There are no e-mail addresses published for them on their web site, no phone numbers, and no physical address. Even their press releases only list the town (Torrelodones) in Spain where they are located, but no address, phone number, or e-mail address.

No legitimate company goes to this level of effort to hide from their customers.
[Version 1.3.3]

2 Replies

burypromote
+2

+33
Fmaxwell replied on 03 Jul 2011
It's now July 3rd and still no response from LateNiteSoft. The "case" still shows as open with no activity beyond my having asked the initial question.

This lack of support for a package that does data compression on live files? Inexcusable!
burypromote
+1

+312
cksum replied on 31 Jul 2011
It may be that they hide their information for privacy reasons or to protect themselves from spam. Having a registered website, I always opt to keep as much of my details hidden as possible.

For me, I purchased Clusters when it was released. Never used all that much until I purchased an SSD, where every byte saved matters.

I sent them a message asking if I could update my registration information to reflect my current email. Within a few hours, I had received an email with my new license code.

The email also contains their support email (support@latenitesoft.com).

I didn't have any red flags jump up at all. I think you may be jumping the gun. It might just be a technical issue. Try using the email above and see if that helps.

The devs maintain some quality products (Xslimmer) and have been around for many years...
burypromote

+11
Rsmacupdate commented on 23 May 2011
I am looking at this s/w, but it hasn't had an update for a year. I am a little insecure about purchasing it. Is there an update forthcoming and what is the update policy? Are updates free or do we pay again?
[Version 1.3.3]

3 Replies

burypromote

+11
Rsmacupdate replied on 23 May 2011
My error not a year just about 8-9 months as of this writing. How many users are there and are they really using the product? How satisfied are they? What are the outstanding problems?
burypromote

+152
GeoProf replied on 10 Jun 2011
Rsmacupdate, I'm guessing the only one who could answer such questions is the developer. But this is a lousy place to go for support.

My experience using Clusters has been very good. Once the dev finally settled on a (terrible) name, Clusters worked as advertised and caused me no problems at all. Though it’s meant more for system folders, I run it only on my Applications folders, and the savings realized on my Core2Duo 10.6.7 iMac and MacBook are as follows:

iMac: Applications folder was previously 7.58 GB and now is 3.04 GB (4.54 GB saved, or almost 60%!);

MacBook: Applications folder was previously 11.32 GB, and now is 7.31 GB (4.01 GB saved, or 35%).

At $13, I'd have been satisfied if Clusters only saved me 35%, so a range that gets at least as high as 60% saved is just gravy. That kind of variability is entirely a function of differing filetypes in my respective Apps folders — Clusters can compress some filetypes a lot and others only a little (though I couldn't say which are which). If other folks report similar savings, then all you have to do is determine if that kind of space savings is worth $13 to you. But if you plan to upgrade to Lion anytime soon, you’d best ask the dev directly by email or phone if the current version is Lion-ready, and if not, will he soon upgrade it? If you get any answers, please post them here!
burypromote
+3

+33
Fmaxwell replied on 26 Jun 2011
I'd pass on this one because the developer does not provide support -- at least not in a timely manner. My tech support question submitted over a week and a half ago is still unanswered. When you're dealing with an app related to real-time data compression on your disk, you need a developer who responds (and publishes actual contact information, like e-mail address, phone number, mailing address, etc.).
burypromote
+1

+1

Moclippa reviewed on 03 Nov 2010
Simple and effective. I have only owned this app for two days but the benefits are quite obvious to me. Workingon a Macbook Pro With highly limited space due to an SSD replacing the harddrive saving space is often a time consuming bi-weekly organisation process. Clusters has thus far freed up 9.06% of my hard drive space( 7% of the the space in the entire. volume!)This is made all the better by the fact that the application automatically manages your set folders and runs in the background constantly at work, lowering the amount of input and distraction of having to constantly tell the application to get to work.

No noticable hit on my computer, currently it is utilizing only .01% of the processor, and 20.5 MB of real memory.

Great buy, excellent savings, worth the money.
[Version 1.3.3]

1 Reply

burypromote

+1
Moclippa replied on 03 Nov 2010
Edit- Sorry, that is 9.06GB (7% of the total volume).
burypromote
+1

+138
Thyx commented on 02 Oct 2010
Okay, more serious comments (and assuming that cereals and software don't compete in the same market):

1. just doing what needs be done – trying to apply the new 'external drive' ability to a spare time machine volume. I'll get back with results later.

3. A minor annoyance: by now, I've got three different versions of the same preference file.

3. By the way, if you download Clusters rather than using the inbuilt updater, you'll end up with both preference panes. Starting Clusters a second time got rid of Squeezer.
[Version 1.3.3]


burypromote
+3

+92
Mac007 commented on 27 Sep 2010
They should have said they're changing the name for the second time. First it was Squeeze, then Squeezer, and now it's Clusters. I hope this name sticks. ;-)
[Version 1.3.2]

1 Reply

burypromote

+138
Thyx replied on 02 Oct 2010
I hope they talked to Nestle before using this new name… clusters, the cereal, definitely sticks with all its sugar ;-)
burypromote
+7

+214
B. Jefferson Le Blanc commented on 21 Aug 2010
@MACTECHHEAD: I think you misperceive the purpose and method of Squeeze. It is not a general purpose compression application. There are a number of those already available that create compressed files in various forms and formats. These are useful for storing and archiving files. Squeeze uses a compression scheme built into OS X 10.6.x which saves some space and yet allows files to be accessed and operate as if they were not compressed. This compression is routinely applied to most system files. Squeeze enables you to expand the use of this method to other files of your choice, which you can, in fact, drag and drop onto Squeeze.

I used Squeeze for awhile when some of my hard drives were filling up. Ultimately, though, to relieve my space concerns I replaced those drives with larger ones. Not everyone will have this option available to them, however, and for them Squeeze may extend the usefulness of their computers for some time.
[Version 1.3]


burypromote

+44
Seanbperiod had trouble on 26 Feb 2010
Is it safe to just add the main hard drive as a folder, so everything compresses? What are the downfalls in doing this?
[Version 1.0]

2 Replies

burypromote

Elyk replied on 26 Feb 2010
That's what I did - It saved me 18 gigs over night.  I haven't noticed a single problem yet.

One note:  It says I only saved about 500 MBs in System Preferences however in the Menu Bar it says 18 gigs.  
burypromote
+3

+214
B. Jefferson Le Blanc replied on 01 Mar 2010
I've been cautious using Squeeze so far and have saved over 10 GB on my boot drive. I only compress files I don't use often. It may be safe to do more, but until I'm sure no harm is done I'll continue to be careful.

+172

Gryphonent rated on 26 Nov 2011

[Version 1.5]




Jeff Brown rated on 26 Sep 2011

[Version 1.5]


Downloads:10,999
Version Downloads:855
Type:Utilities : Compression
License:Shareware
Date:03 Dec 2011
Platform:Intel
Price: $12.95
Overall (Version 1.x):
Features:
Ease of Use:
Value:
Stability:
Displaying 1-10 of 33
< 1 2 3 4 >
Displaying 1-1 of 1
Displaying 1-2 of 2
-
-
-
Please login or create a new
MacUpdate Member account
to use this feature
Watch Lists are available to
MacUpdate Desktop Members
Upgrade Now
Download and auto-install
using MacUpdate Desktop. Save
time moving folders and cleaning-up.
Clusters is a background file compressor, which uses the new HFS-compression technology in Snow Leopard to transparently compress the folders you configure it to process. Mac OS will read those files normally, they will just take less disk space.
Add/Update Listing About MacUpdate Desktop Career Opportunities RSS Twitter Facebook Advertise Sitemap
Copyright © 2012 MacUpdate LLC


- -