I've been testing out new versions of CopyWrite as they come out. While certain things are definitely improving, it still is missing two key elements that would make it better than a plain text editor for actually writing.

Despite the developer's belief that creative writing does not require formatting, for this program to be usable for generating manuscripts without having to work through the entire text by hand in another app, it needs to be able to generate boldface and italic/underline text. Without that, you have to finish the text, import it into a different editor (such as a word processor), and go through every segment to add that formatting. This is an added step beyond normal proofreading that a professional writer should not have to take.

The other issue is a display problem. CopyWrite's writing window does nothing whatsoever to visually distinguish paragraphs (such as an indent or space between), so if you want to be able to see your paragraphs when you write, you have to add an extra return after each one to give the visual break. Again, this makes CopyWrite not suitable for professional writing.

If these two issues were addressed, CopyWrite has the potential to become a coveted tool for the professional writer. Ideally, this app would be best suited to become a complete manuscript generation tool, with a no-frills "writing" mode similar to its current operation (with the above issues addressed), and a "manuscript" mode, which would include a spelling checker, a punctuation checker (grammar checkers usually aren't much good for anything beyond that), and the ability to take specific documents from a project and generate a properly formatted manuscript, ready to print or export and submit. Without that, it's just a glorified text editor with a few project-management capabilities.

I'm getting so tired of seeing shareware "solutions" for information management that are nothing more than glorified FileMaker projects. There isn't anything in this database that I can't do myself in FM, and make it fit my needs better. Please, if you want to make a real info management solution that people will be willing to pay for, do something that goes beyond what FM can do!

As for this database specifically, my main complaint is that the display style is just too small. The type is tiny, probably 10 point. And since it's FM-based, there's nothing the user can do to make it look better, unlike with a Cocoa solution that would be able to adjust to the user's needs. And, of course, FM still hasn't the slightest resemblance to Aqua, so it just looks clunky. There's no information about what the little arrow controls next to some fields do, so you just have to guess or slog through the manual (tip: a system like this should be self-explanatory--there's nothing you can do with a FM solution that should need a manual to explain). If I want an overly complicated media database, I'll use Readerware--at least that can do things that FM can't.

Maybe if this were offered as a freebie, I might consider using it. But $25? There are better options available for less.

Excellent sync program. Just one problem: it isn't multi-user aware. I set it up to sync a selection of folders on my user accounts between my iBook and my desktop G4, and it worked beautifully. But when I tried to do the same for my wife's accounts, it refused to run, saying that it needed read/write access to the folders it will be syncing. Investigation showed that it stores its sync data in the Application folder, not in the user's Library, so no matter what user launches the program, it expects to be syncing the same set of folders. Bad mojo. Make it properly multi-user aware, and then I'll register.