SafariScript | Oct 3 2006 |
CPRUITT I'm not sure wat the point is. With the system wide script meu, every App in OS X is given an availale script menu. Just use the AppleScript Utility in your Applications folder to turn it on. Then add any scripts you want by opening the Application's Scripts forlder (e.g. Script Menu > Open Scripts Folder > Open Safari Scripts Folder) This app is a bit redundant.
(Version 1.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
PowerCard | Apr 11 2006 |
CPRUITT Well, to each their own but your assertion assumes you buy into the project management style proposed by those "higher end" applications. There is a relatively large (and growing) segment of the development community that believes those methodologies simply are not effective (and are actually out & out "broken") and are inherently unable to be fixed. Thats where new applications like this will start to come into play. I still think $60 is way too expensive.
(Version 2.0b4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Monolingual | Mar 19 2006 |
CPRUITT "What a joke OSX is..." Compared to what? Windows? Linux? OS 9??? First, dont mistake the Finder with OS X. OS X is really an increadible Unix OS. Its got its strong & weak points, but overall its better than any alternative out there. Second, I've never understood the criticism of Apple's Finder. Granted there are plenty of things I wish it would do better, but its definately not the worst out there. Windows explorer is far more cumbersome & inconveniant than the Finder. I'm not much of a linux user but the GUI file managers I've seen for *nix platforms sure as heck dont impress me much and any of the above are better than a bunch of cd, cp, mkdir, & rm commands in the Terminal. If you really dislike it shell out the cash for something like Path Finder 4 as a replacement.
(Version 1.3.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Yojimbo | Feb 7 2006 |
CPRUITT Yes, I understand the way the license works. Its just my humble opinion that its overpriced. A $39 license should be sufficient for a single machine license. I have no need of using Yojumbo on multiple computers, what I may have a need for is the use of Yojimbo for several people on the same computer, but each under a different OX X username. In that case the license calls for a family pack, which allows you up to five users, thats all well and good unless your "family" is only two people. In that case the family license only saves $10, so really, whats the point? I guess it just cones down to being tired of software developers milking users for every last dime they can get out of you. You'd think they'd understand that most families have something of a limited software budget and try to foster some type of customer relationship sensitive to that need, but very few software companies do. One company that has an excelent license pricing plan is Oranged Software (Studiometry / www.oranged.net). After an initial license is purchased, additional users only need an add-on license which is sold at a significant discount. I had no problem paying the extra $ for multiple users (in this case in a company rather than a family) because they made it realistic & feasible to do so and, in all honesty, their pricing plan made it SEEM like they cared about users buying multiple licenses (family plans just aren't effective enough for small families). They got several hundred dollars in sales to me because of that pricing plan. Unfortunately Bare Bones Software and their pricing plan, by contrast, will be getting $0.
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Yojimbo | Feb 2 2006 |
CPRUITT Bare Bones software continues to annoy me with yet another application. The yojimbo license & fees are rediculous. I'm to pay for every USER on the SAME COMPUTER? You're nuts! That one fact is enough to turn me off of using it. Why should I have to pay extra $ for users of the same machine in the same household? Now if you want to license per machine, I can understand that, but I've had it with Bare Bones milking users for every dime they can. BBEdit has some nice features but no text editor is worth what they charge. Same with Yojimbo.
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ 3 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
Yojimbo | Feb 6 2006 |
RMS2 Pruitt: The whole point of a family license is that you don't have to pay for each user of Yojimbo on your machine - you can have up to five. The single-user license is structured so that you can install it on as many machines as you want - as long as you're the only one using Yojimbo on those machines, since the single user license is licensed to, well, a single user. :-)
(Version 1.0) | |
Yojimbo | Feb 7 2006 |
CPRUITT Yes, I understand the way the license works. Its just my humble opinion that its overpriced. A $39 license should be sufficient for a single machine license. I have no need of using Yojumbo on multiple computers, what I may have a need for is the use of Yojimbo for several people on the same computer, but each under a different OX X username. In that case the license calls for a family pack, which allows you up to five users, thats all well and good unless your "family" is only two people. In that case the family license only saves $10, so really, whats the point? I guess it just cones down to being tired of software developers milking users for every last dime they can get out of you. You'd think they'd understand that most families have something of a limited software budget and try to foster some type of customer relationship sensitive to that need, but very few software companies do. One company that has an excelent license pricing plan is Oranged Software (Studiometry / www.oranged.net). After an initial license is purchased, additional users only need an add-on license which is sold at a significant discount. I had no problem paying the extra $ for multiple users (in this case in a company rather than a family) because they made it realistic & feasible to do so and, in all honesty, their pricing plan made it SEEM like they cared about users buying multiple licenses (family plans just aren't effective enough for small families). They got several hundred dollars in sales to me because of that pricing plan. Unfortunately Bare Bones Software and their pricing plan, by contrast, will be getting $0.
(Version 1.0) | |
Yojimbo | Feb 9 2006 |
EXILIO I wholeheartedly agree with you CPruitt. I understand that devs need to make money, but these pricing schemes are a bit unfriendly and short-sighted.
(Version 1.0) | |
Yojimbo | Feb 2 2006 |
CPRUITT If you want to manage info and keep all the items in sync with the originals, Apple offers an app called "The Finder". I dont think taking notes (i.e. a snapshot of information at the time) requires any kind of a sync feature. Thats the job of a file manager. I have other complaints about Yojimbo though, mainly the license...
(Version 1.0) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
FileFinder | Jan 2 2006 |
CPRUITT A good start for an application but this app has some pros & cons worth writing about. - Application icon is done in very bad form. A developer should NEVER NEVER NEVER EVER base an application icon off of a disk image icon. Icons look a certain way for a reason. You build up memory & train yourself to recognize certain images as certain things. This developers icon goes 100% against what we've all been training ourselves to recognize and I think thats a much bigger problem than many developers might want to believe it is. I have a huge problem with this one. - The trial crashed when trying a quick add but worked fine when dragging new volumes. - The app supports different search ranges like "selected catalog" or "all catalogs". Thats nice, but after every search it reverts to "selected catalog". Since I would be using this to catalog a bunch of offline bacckup disks, it would be far more useful for me if the app remembered the last chosen search range & kept it until it was manually cahnged by the user. Reverting to "selected catalog" is pretty inconveniant. - The app has list view & column view. Both good options however in column view theres no easy way to see what catalog a found item is located in without using the info drawer. (I'm not a huge fan of drawers) - This is a BIG pet peeve of mine. This app places a database file in my ~/Documents/ folder. ATTENTION APPLICATION DEVELOPERS DO NOT EVER, FOR ANY REASON, PUT ANY FILE OR FOLDER INTO MY HOME FOLDER, OR DOCUMENTS FOLDER WITHOUT GIVING ME A PREFERENCE TO RELOCATE IT. File finder does not support multiple database files (at least not via the GUI). Therefore this is not a user document anyway. This is a database that supports the application. The correct location for this file should be: ~/Library/Application Support/FileFinder/FileFinder.ffdb The app has a lot of promise but the issues above still make it seem like an amateur piece of software. The thing about placing the file in my documents folder is enough to make me not want to use this app. Now I do think the app has some pros: - A nice clean user interface (evven if its a little 10.2 ish with the drawer). - It is easy to learn & intuitive. - Advanced search is nice. Hopefully the developer will address some of the above issues in the next update. Saved searches in the form of "Smart Catalogs" would be a GREAT plus for this app & bring it up to speed with Tiger.
(Version 1.2.5) | |
| [ 3 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
FileFinder | Jan 8 2006 |
MCBILL Thanks for your review. Expecting the same job from you with other catalogers.
(Version 1.2.5) | |
FileFinder | Jan 9 2006 |
GUNTIS I agree that application icon isn't the best. It reminds me of BMW badge on the hard drive... AUthor could change it to something better. maybe make contest for the best icon? regarding db placement. While I agree that it could be located in Library/Application Support folder, I also agree that placing it in the Documents folder keeps is safer, as this folder is more likely to be backed up. I agree that it would be good to have multiple data bases. For example, I know that the file I'm looking for is located on DVD, not on a hard drive, so I can open DVD catalog set. Or, perhaps it would be better to list all catalogs in FileFinder's window, and user could check which sets should be used for searching.
(Version 1.2.6) | |
FileFinder | Jan 9 2006 |
MACMAGNA Thanks for your reply Guntis. I've located the catalog database in the "~/Documents" folder for the reason you notice. Most users don't know that applications store important files in the "~/Library/Application Support/" folder and never backup this folder. FileFinder 1.3 (available soon) will introduce a multi-database support with custom default database location and network sharing, so everybody will be satisfied.
(Version 1.2.6) | |
iSquint | Dec 27 2005 |
CPRUITT Hmmm... thats rough Pedro. Honestly I never understoon why other countries use commas though. Do you not use anything to separate large number blocks like thousands & millions? For example its proper in the US to use commas & decimals in numbers like so: If Europe uses commas in place of the decimal it seems like it'd be far more difficult to read.
(Version 0.9o) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
SIMBL | Dec 27 2005 |
CPRUITT OK on my case it turns out there was a second Safari Add-On that I completely forgot was ever installed. it was in my ~/Library/ rather than in my /Library/. Removing that fixed the issue in my case.
(Version 0.8) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
SIMBL | Dec 27 2005 |
CPRUITT Cant be a problem with Pith Helmet's Plist files cause I dont use Pith Helmet. SIMBL is used with other things as well, in my case its Safari Source that requires it.
(Version 0.8) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
Applewood | Oct 6 2004 |
CPRUITT It's kind of like OS X 10.0. It is a cool idea but its not subtle enough. Things are hard to read, icons are hard to recognize, etc... Apple fixed the 10.0 look with updates in 10.1, 10.2 & again in 10.3 (made aqua buttons less '3D', reduced the opacity of backgrounds, etc...). I'd consider doing the same here.
(Version 2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
Main
