BURMAYANK  This would probably be perfect for my needs, if only it worked on my MBPro with OSX 10.5.7

What happened:

Even though the "Web Sharing" checkbox was always checked, as directed, I nevertheless always kept getting this error message, '"Web Sharing may not be on... Go to System Preferences and click on the "Sharing" pane. Make sure the checkbox next to "Web Sharing" is checked.'"

I got this message when I unsuccessfully tried to install this app using the Installer. So then I manually copied it as directed into the appropriate iTunes Scripts folder, and found the script appropriately installed into my iTunes Scripts' menu, as expected. But when I then tried to run that script on one of my iTunes mp3 items as directed, I got this same error message.  
(Version 1.0)

BURMAYANK  You asked for feedback about your newly-added capability shorten URLs from the tools menu in Version 2.0.7. Here's mine:

Thank you. But, why didn't you choose "bit.ly" (instead of "is.gd") as your designated URL-shortening application?

According to this excellent review of URL-shortening applications,

"URL Shorteners: Which Shortening Service Should You Use?" (http://searchengineland.com/analysis-which-url-shortening-service-should-you-use-17204), the application you chose, "is.gd", is significantly inferior to (in rank order) to "bit.ly", "tr.im", "cli.gs" and "Snurl/Snipurl", as well as to four others. It is listed as inferior there because it does not include capabilities for "Tracking Stats" for Twitter traffic (beyond what Google Analytics, etc., provides), and for "Custom Naming".

Anyway, whether or not these deficiencies in your chosen URL-shortening application are really significant, it nevertheless seems obvious IMHO that CopyPaste Pro needs to offer the capability of choosing one's preferred URL-shortening application, if it is going to any form of that capability at all. No?

Thanks, again.  
(Version 2.0.7)

BURMAYANK  What is there in FileXaminer 2.6.2 that is as good as or better than FileBuddy 9.0.1   
(Version 2.6.2)

BURMAYANK  After a preliminary test-run, it seems as friendly and powerful as Superduper 2.1.4, but I haven't yet tried booting from my backed-up volume.

It seems more versatile than

Superficially, it seems more versatile/multifunctional than CarbonCopyCloner 2.3 and CopyCat 4.0, but is it as powerful and reliable?

it's probably much easier for non-geeks to use RsyncX_v2.1, but is it as powerful?

It seems more powerful than DejaVu, superficially.  
(Version 6.1.1)