ALASTAIR (CORIOLIS SYSTEMS)  I'm sorry to hear that you don't like the demo, but it should be obvious to everyone that we can't give away our product and that the kind of demo restrictions people sometimes suggest (like a 30 day time limit) amount to doing just that in the case of disk utility software.

We think the demo is useful because it still lets you see what the software can do; it just doesn't let you repartition your disk.

I'll also add that I think it's extremely unfair of you to give the product a low rating on the basis of what you've written. But I imagine that most people are intelligent enough to figure out for themselves that you're being unreasonable.  
(Version 3.0.1)

RONIN_1  You intentionally waste a prospective customer's time with a piece of downloaded "software" that does not do anything. You give smartass answers to email inquiries and wonder why people do not like it or you or your product.

People have been "burned" by far too many products that do not work when purchased to put up with the likes of you.

You earned this rating!  
(Version 3.0.1)

ALASTAIR (CORIOLIS SYSTEMS)  Your reply really only reinforces what I said about you being unreasonable.

As for "smartass replies to e-mail enquiries", if you have a specific instance in mind, by all means contact us and we'll take a look at it. It's very unlikely that the e-mail you received was intended to come across that way.  
(Version 3.0.1)

RONIN_1  Each response you make provides further confirmation of my original evaluation.  
(Version 3.0.1)

SSNICKERER  Ronin, in the software world, there are various different types of demos. It would not make sense for iPartition to use the "use for a little bit with full functionality" demo scheme, because then they would not make any money - most people would only use it once, and not need to pay for it at all. Granted, $50 is a lot to pay for a one-time use, which is probably more or less true for most users of partition software, but they are simply trying to make a living from making the software. I don't think that is too much to ask, do you?  
(Version 3.1)

ILGAZ  Apple Disk Utility built in live partitioning user interface is a disaster for a company like Apple. Does less already, less flexible but... The interface. It almost gave me a heart attack because of a misunderstanding.

So, it makes sense for a company to show user interface and things you CAN do with licensed version. 5 MB download, self contained .app , what kind of "wasted user time" are you talking about?

I didn't buy this one since I don't currently need it but I have iDefrag and I have tested this one's INTERFACE, the method of it doing things and it clearly beats decade old Partition Magic in ease of use. I guess the demo is for people like me who just wants to see how application works and no, I just moved it to Trash after testing, no "precious" time wasted.  
(Version 3.1.4)

TERSONO  I really don't understand your complaints about Omniweb's bookmarking system. I have over 2,000 bookmarks in Omniweb and do not have any problems whatsoever keeping them organised or adding to them as required. Certainly I find the bookmarking interface far superior to Firefox, albeit possibly not quite as well thought-out as Safari. (Conversely, Omniweb has a number of GUI advantages over Safari, so it evens out).

For what it's worth I've also been an Omniweb user since the early days (pre OS X), and whilst I abandoned it for Safari for a while, since v5 appeared I've increasingly found it hard to live with anything else...  
(Version 5.7)

DEREKCURRIE  Sorry, but the criticism of the OmniWeb bookmark system is entirely unwarranted. OW was the first, and for a while the only, browser to have a sane bookmarking setup. As soon as I became an OW addict I made it my main bookmark archive and I've never regretted it. All my other browsers import their main bookmarks from my OmniWeb installation.

I've got other bookmarking gizmos including the free and functional AllBookmarks menubar app. But I rarely use them. I just use OW.

If anything, OmniWeb has so many bells and whistles features that it can be intimidating. But I always have found it worth doing the old RTFM routine to figure everything out. It is amazingly configurable compared to everything except FireFox.

For many years I have been an OW beta tester. No way is it perfect. But the folks at OmniGroup are incredibly helpful and friendly. They pay attention to every single bug report and feature request I send them. I do keep Camino or FireFox around because there are limits to Apple's WebKit regarding screwed up HTML such as the proprietary crap HTML and JScript perpetrated by Microsoft. The Mozilla browsers are not nearly as nice as OmniWeb, but they are more Microsoft rubbish savvy.

Well worth the minimal cost many times over. And I don't get paid to say that.  
(Version 5.7)

KWSHOES  SAFT is an INDISPENSABLE tool in my world, despite the difficulties that are created by its nature as an extension to Safari and the need to update it whenever Safari is updated. It's also somewhat difficult to understand and to tailor its use to your own browsing preferences.

Some of its best features, however, are:

1 Save Browser windows.

2 Auto save and restore opened browser windows at quitting and start (especially valuable when Safari ABENDS with multiple windows open).

3 Bookmark a group of tabs.

4 Consolidate browser windows.

5 Rearrange tabs.

I just upgraded to Leopard, downloaded the Leopard version of SAFT, paid the $6 upgrade fee and my MacBook and I are happy again.

Now I'll see if there's a Leopard version of Pith Helmet and Safari will be complete again.  
(Version 10.0.8)

SJK  All those features you mentioned are freely available in Safari 3 or with SafariStand.  
(Version 10.0.9)

MUDFLAPPER  That is not entirely true.

Neither SafariStand nor Safari 3 can automatically save/load browser windows when quitting and restarting Safari. This is an indispensable feature that you don't even realize you need until Safari falls victim to the spinning beachball of death and you lose all 40 tabbed URLs that took you hours to research and find.

I also keep Saft around for the ADD BOOKMARK HERE menu item added to every folder in the Bookmarks Bar. You don't have to hit CMD D and search for a location to save your url. It's so convenient--I love it.

For ad blocking, I've always used PithHelmet. It's still the best.  
(Version 10.0.9)

SJK  > Neither SafariStand nor Safari 3 can automatically save/load browser windows when quitting and restarting Safari.

SafariStand will if "Restore Method At Launch: Automatically Reopen Last Session (Safari)" is set under its General preferences. I prefer using "Show Restore Last Workspace Window (Stand)" to delay automatic reloading until I'm ready, e.g. to quickly browse other pages right after launching.

> I also keep Saft around for the ADD BOOKMARK HERE menu item added to every folder in the Bookmarks Bar.

I'm not saving bookmarks in Safari frequently enough anymore for that to have value. Nowadays most of my newer ones end up in WebnoteHappy, and a bunch of older ones are archived in DEVONthink Pro. Most of the oldest are still in Safari, originally imported from IE, long overdue for archival/deletion.

> For ad blocking, I've always used PithHelmet. It's still the best.

Totally agree; browsing without PH can be a hideous. Unfortunately I've never gotten machete scripts working with Safari 3; do you have that problem? Would also be nice to quell the image animations again; none of the Safari ad blockers I'm aware do it with Safari 3.  
(Version 10.5)

CHRIS WALKEN  It shows your applications folder the same way as in the Finder, it will show your apps and folders that contain apps.

And what data are you talking about? I have Little Snitch and I haven't seen any data collection.  
(Version 4.7.2)

RONIN_1  The company's web site says that it is doing so.

http://www.cocoatech.com/weblog/ "Some interesting stats"

By email response, the company states that the customer may "opt out" via a preference setting (which incorrectly assumes that the customer knows about it in the first place). This is unacceptable. It is still SPYWARE. Only when given an informed opportunity to "opt in" should any such data be collected. You may say that the data is innocuous, but who knows what else it may collect if the developer decides he wants it. He has crossed the line. Technically, this is unauthorized hacking of a computer. It is certainly not the beginning of a good relationship with the customer.

By personal observation I have determined that Path Finder fails to display numerous applications which have been installed in their own folders within the Applications Folder. That makes the application completely and utterly useless as far as I am concerned.

It is supposedly a better Finder. It is most certainly not, in my opinion.

I have uninstalled the application.  
(Version 4.7.2)

MACUPDATE ADMIN  I would certainly like to hear the developer(s) response to your remarks.  
(Version 4.7.2)

8OO8  I'd say that the use of that information culling program DOES open up a whole big can of worms.

First, the developer didn't inform Path Finder's purchasers that such a program is being used by him(although he does go into some detail about the program on his Weblog....his posting of July 29, '07).

Never mind that the program may currently be innocuous in that it(supposedly) gathers only anonymous, non-personal info; it IS after all entering your computer and extracting certain information about it, without the foreknowledge or prior consent of most of us. It would have been the ethical approach to at least let Path Finder's customers know about it up front, I think.

If you go to Path Finder's Preferences/General, at the bottom of the list, there, is the selection "Check for updates", and below that "Send anonymous system info".

Those two selections are already pre-enabled when one downloads Path Finder; you must deselect(uncheck) one or both if you so choose. And who's to say that even if one deselects them, the info is not transferred anyway, hmm? So, the initial decision to activate those selections was made by the developer, not Path Finder's user. That doesn't sit quite right with me.

Another, broader issue is this: since a program such as this can effortlessly enter, intrude, into one's operating system, what's to prevent someone from modifying or building upon it....further developing it, to make it capable of extracting ANY information that the program's user wants? Or of embedding any type of spyware in one's operating system? Think about it, the implications are rather frightening, no?

Let's be honest, though, as long as one has internet access one is unknowingly providing more info than one thinks to a whole host of people out there.

Regarding the original commenter's statement that Path Finder fails to recognize an application within a folder that's put in the Application Folder, I checked carefully and just haven't found it to be so. If an app is in a folder, then that folder is displayed, and its contents are, too, when that folder is opened......just as in the OS X finder. To say that Path Finder is, "completely and utterly useless" is, I think, absurd.  
(Version 4.7.2)

RONIN_1  Doctor Infinity,

I quite agree with your additional remarks regarding the potential problems of the SPYWARE installed in Path Finder.

I reinstalled Pathfinder 4.7.2 after reading your remark just to verify my earlier observation about folders that do not appear within the Applications Folder. If you are able to make yours appear, then I am glad for you, but I am still not able to make applications appear which are contained in a folder which I have created either in the Applications Folder or the Applications > Utilities Folder. I had previously reinstalled Path Finder just to make certain that there was not a problem with the installation prior to making my original post.

Assuming that you must somehow or other gotten things to appear I began poing around. After going into the icon view (which I have not used for a very, very long time) the folders appeared. Changing to the other view modes the folders appeared, but only after the icons for the items not in folders, in other words, two separately alphabetized lists for the most part. There were some things which simply were not alphabetized correctly at all. This is very, very odd. As my remark was "...Path Finder fails to display numerous applications which have been installed in their own folders within the Applications Folder. That makes the application completely and utterly useless as far as I am concerned" I will now amend it to say that the display is not as it is in the Finder and is, in my opinion, awkward to use and not easy to find everything by simply scrolling down to it. My opinion remains that this is a poor product and a continue to recommend not purchasing it because of the SPYWARE.

Regards   
(Version 4.7.2)

8OO8  Path Finder allows the user to choose from a wide selection of sorting methods.

If you want your main Folders to be sorted in total alphabetical order, as in OS X's Finder, do this: in Path Finder's menu bar, open View, then make sure that Sort Ascending is enabled(checked), this allows files and folders to be listed from a-z; then disable(uncheck) Smart Sorting On; then, in Sort By, select(check) name.

You should now have your all your Folders ordered totally alphabetically.

If Smart Sorting On is disabled(unchecked), all Folder views......as Icons, as List and as Columns should be in total alphabetical order. If one of the Folder views is not in total alphabetical order, then Smart Sorting On would have to have been enabled(checked), for some reason. (or Sort By would have to have been changed from "name" to one of the other list criteria)

Regarding "spyware", I'd wager that at least some or possibly many other software companies cull system info from our computers without our knowledge.

I repeat, as long as we have an internet connection and use it, various bits of information from and about our computers and about our computer use is transmitted to others out there. Of that you may be sure.

If one is truly paranoid about this issue, though, one should just stay completely off the internet. Or not use a computer at all.   
(Version 4.7.2)