
Firefox | Mar 17 2009 |
KPS An improvement over 3.0.6, but not by much. In all honesty, I finally trashed all the 3+ verions and have permanently gone back to the 2.0 version. The "awesome bar" is just unbelievably terrible. By 3.0.6 it no longer produced useful results at all and I had to resort to typing in complete URLs. At least 2.0.X listed sites visited in a useful order. 3.1 doesn't seem to work any better. On top of this, Firefox is becoming so bloated that it is starting to look like good old IE in its kitchen sink approach. Sadly, being a Jack of all trades, but master of none is getting old. 3.1 is somewhat faster than older versions, but the history, bookmarks and URL bar all look ugly and don't work consistently (if at all sometimes). More than once calling up history lists no sites at all! I have a hunch that a lot of this functionality is buried in the preferences and about:config settings, but the more complicated and inconsistent the workings of a web browser get, the less useful the entire app becomes as a web browser. If I had to fine tune my car every day to go to the grocery store I'd consider getting a different car. Until Firefox stops adding bloat and just WORKS, 2.0 is going to be my new car. (Version 3.1b3) | |
| [ Reply ] | |

TuneUp | Dec 11 2008 |
KPS Pretty much a waste of time. Frankly, all of these auto-tagging apps suffer from the same problem -- you need to listen to music that is well known and popular for these things to work. It never works with bootlegs or similarly obscure music and even with classical music it fails more often than it succeeds. Yes, this is a 1.0 release and it shows. The software is clunky and crashed on me several times, but those issues could possibly be improved. Unfortunately, the reliance on Gracenote to tag your music means that all the interface tweaks will be meaningless if it can't recognize your music in the first place. I tried 50 tracks from my own collection and it failed to properly tag even one of them. It couldn't find covers or even identify the songs. If I had paid for this I would be pissed. Obviously, my poor results mean I wouldn't ever consider signing up for the paid service. If you listen to lots of mainstream pop music you might get better results. If you listen to much else the app is a waste of time. (Version 1.0) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:

TuneUp | Dec 30 2008 |
TUNEUP We’re sorry to hear that you feel TuneUp was a disappointment for your music collection. We certainly appreciate the comments though and we are constantly working with Gracenote to fix the problems that we run into with less popular music. Not everyone listens to Lil Wayne and Britney. We know. However, it might be worth noting that both the quality of the bootleg and the original metadata play into the results that you get. We find most music collections, obscure or otherwise, we have a 80 - 85% success rate. With that said, we released 1.02 about a week ago, with the crash bugs you mentioned all sorted out. Thanks for your feedback. (Version 1.02) | |

Firefox | Aug 24 2008 |
KPS Crashes consistently any time I try to print to PDF on an iMac 2.16 ghz, 10.4.11. Am able to repeat the crash by selecting "Print" then choosing "Save as PDF" for any web page. Have also experienced other occasional crashes that are unexplained. Obviously 3.0.1 is unstable. I have reverted to 2.0.0.16 and no crashes. (Version 3.0.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |

Yep | Jul 14 2008 |
KPS All the previous versions of this app that I tried simply crashed every time it tried to import PDFs so the fact that version 1.7.9 hasn't just frozen solid yet is an improvement. Unfortunately, the app is still just as useless because it still will not import my entire collection of PDFs. It used to outright crash during import, now it just stops at roughly 13,000 and will not add any more. Since I now have over 60,000 PDFs it obviously isn't even coming close to cataloging them all. The auto-tagging feature is equally useless and failed to produce a good keyword cloud even from the document titles, let alone the content. I still find it easier to locate the document I need using Spotlight or the lowly "Find" feature in OSX. I've always thought this app had lots of great ideas, but even after many updates I still can't get it to work as advertised. It's like a beautiful sports car that just stops moving after 1 mile -- pretty, but useless. (Version 1.7.9) | |
| [ 3 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:

Yep | Aug 8 2008 |
TOMANDERSEN We developed Yep to track roughly that many PDFs. I have personally tried it with about 30k PDFs. Remember that Yep does not 'import' anything. It just keeps track of the PDF that are on your computer. You might also want to try Leap out. It will track more files than Yep, and you can make it so that it only looks at PDFs, if you want. Please contact support with problems like this. We can supply individual support. ironicsupport@gmail.com (Version 1.8) | |

Yep | Aug 8 2008 |
TOMANDERSEN One more thing - Yep looks for PDFs only in the tracking locations that you set in the prefs - is it possible that your tracking locations are set so that most of your PDFs are not included? --Tom (Version 1.8) | |

Yep | May 16 2009 |
XENOPHILE Are you sure the PDFs or perhaps the file system are not corrupted? 60,000 PDF files must have taken years to accumulate, so it's not unlikely that parts of your collection have been corrupted over the years when changing HDs or upgrading to new systems. I would use something like Disk Warrior that can check both files and file system for corruption. This has fixed similar issues I've had when trying to import file references into an application (not Yep, but something similar). (Version 1.8) | |

MacTheRipper | Jun 29 2008 |
KPS This app is beginning to show its age. There are an increasingly large number of movies it will not copy. Obviously the DVD manufacturers are always trying to improve their copy protection technology and they have begun to leave these older rippers behind. Oh and spare me the "all of mine work fine." Yeah, so do 80% of mine, but the list of movies and shows that fail keeps growing. (Version 2.6.6) | |
| [ 7 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:

MacTheRipper | Jul 13 2008 |
SFENSEN many new movies it will not rip. It seams like devellopment has stopped. So i agree. (Version 2.6.6) | |

MacTheRipper | Jul 24 2008 |
SOLOWILD Agreed. 3 out of 3 new releases would not copy. End of an era???? (Version 2.6.6) | |

MacTheRipper | Jul 24 2008 |
MACLOVIN Once again, try Isohunt or the forum listed under the description. Currently, I have version 3.0r14, so 2.6.6 is waaaaay behind. (Version 2.6.6) | |

MacTheRipper | Jul 24 2008 |
SOLOWILD Sorry I missed your hint. Duh on my part. Will try. Thanks. Scott (Version 2.6.6) | |

Yahoo! Messenger | Sep 7 2007 |
KPS As far as I can tell -- you can't. Nice. Yet another blatantly obvious feature that Windows users have had for years and even in 2007 Mac users still have to wait for. (Version 3.0b2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |

Yahoo! Messenger | Sep 7 2007 |
KPS Yahoo Messenger for the Mac lags so woefully far behind the Windows version that this poor quality update is more insult than improvement. The captcha issue is beyond annoying and the entire program still lacks the vast majority of features Windows users have had for years. While the poor stability issue may be due to it being a beta, the entire effort is such useless crap that the release version can't possibly be worth the effort to download it. Stay FAR away from this dog. Yahoo doesn't give a rat's ass about Macs and this worthless app shows it. (Version 3.0b2) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:

Yahoo! Messenger | Sep 8 2007 |
KARLADAM What exactly is it that the PC Client does that you think you really need in the mac client? The vast majority of things the PC client does are simply not something that you'd want in a mac product. This is not a port, it has no intention of looking, or behaving like the windows client, it is Yahoo Messenger for the Mac. If there is real functionality that enriches your IM experience that we don't provide, do share what that is. If you want to use the Windows client that runs perfectly fine in VMWare or Parallels. (Version 3.0b2) | |

BitTorrent | Jun 30 2007 |
KPS Simply doesn't work. Assuming a download starts at all (fewer than 1 in 5 do) it just dies off and goes to zero. Have tried it on several different networks in different parts of the country and it has NEVER worked long enough to complete a single download. Even torrents that have hundreds of seeds either fail to start at all or crawl along at a useless 2K/sec for a few minutes before coming to a complete stop. Nice idea, but a complete waste of time in implementation. Yeah, I know some people get it to work, but I've tried 3 different versions on several completely different networks and it has NEVER once lived up to its promise. Obviously it could be some sort of configuration issue, but the app gives no useful diagnostics, no real way to change settings that actually help and no way to test what is happening. I've tried it on several different computers as well and it's always the same -- all hype, no function. (Version 4.27.2) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:

BitTorrent | Mar 4 2008 |
SPRINGHEELMAC I had the same problem, until I went into the prefs and adjusted the upload/download speeds. It helps to lower the upload speeds, at least until you get a complete file. Then when I'm done, I increase it while my computer is idle so others can get it quickly. It could also be the particular torrent. The one I tried was obscure and didn't have that many seeds, but I got it! Overall, I find BitTorrent to be my favorite; it does exactly what its supposed to do (upload and download torrents) and none of the other CPU-hoggin' crap! (Version 4.27.2) | |

Yep | Jun 29 2007 |
KPS Does it still crash with collections of more than a few thousand PDFs? Never did get it to index my collection of about 16,000 PDFs even a single time. Every version I tried collected a few thousand then crashed. (Version 1.6.4) | |
| [ Reply ] | |

Yep | Mar 12 2007 |
KPS As of 1.2.4 still crashes with large collections of PDFs. Unusable for anything other than modest numbers of files. Obviously can't even try the various features if it isn't stable. Should still be considered beta software. Now that it is no longer free it is an even worse value. (Version 1.2.4) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:

Yep | Mar 29 2007 |
NICOO I use Yep 1.2.4 with a library of over 10,000 documents totalling over 30,000 pages and I have not experienced any crashes - (Version 1.5) | |

Yep | Jan 6 2007 |
KPS Apparently unable to handle large PDF collections. I have about 6000 PDFs and Yep crashes on all 3 different Macs I have -- Intel iMac, G4 Powerbook and G4 desktop. Tried loading the PDFs from internal drives, external drives and even a DVD and the program always crashes at about 1800 records making it useful only for very modest collections of PDFs. Unfortunately, people with 99 PDF files don't have much need for a storage system for their PDFs! Have tried several versions of Yep and all crash during the scanning process, including the newest version. Conclusion: Nice toy, but useless for real productivity. Does not even work at all for the people who need it most. (Version 1.1.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |

iStudy Flashcards | Jul 21 2006 |
KPS Worthless waste of money. App is amateurish and looks like it was built in 1989 on a Mac Classic. Menus are cryptic and don't follow Mac conventions. Strange "Will not save library" messages crop up and ruin hours of work. Absolutely, positively do not waste your time on this class project from a bunch of third graders. (Version 2.2.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|