DIGITAL.PARDOE  I will be creating icons for the remaining WD My Passport sites shortly. Keep checking back for an update.  
(Version 0.1)

MACUPDATE ADMIN  From the application's description:

"Hate having to hit two keys to open a file?

US TOO! That's why we made ReturnOpen!"

Your process uses two keys.  
(Version 1.0)

WOODEN BRAIN CONCEPTS  Yes, I am. Note that Growl is framework for displaying information. OmniGrowl is providing content. It's like saying no one should charge for internet services if they are accessed via free web browsers. At any rate, OmniGrowl has involved weeks and weeks of development time, and I think it is perfectly reasonable to want to be compensated. Furthermore, if you took the trouble to look at WBC's web site, you might discover some interesting things about our view of shareware. Thank you.  
(Version 2.2)

JERRODHO  Oh please. Building upon free foundations is the way a lot of software is made. Including Mac OS X itself.  
(Version 2.2)

LEE123  ehm, ya and you pay for osx don't you?  
(Version 2.3)

JERRODHO  ...and that would be my point. OS X is built upon free foundations, and we pay for it. Just like OmniGrowl.  
(Version 2.3)

STORMCHILD  Gonna have to agree with the developer and jerrodho here. $10 is really not that steep; the software does provide a lot of features, and these days, a lot of other companies are charging much higher prices for simple little apps that do a lot less.  
(Version 2.4)

UMAROMC  It's just ten bucks. I can't be the only person that has to pay rent and utilities... I can't cry over someone charging ten bucks. Please have some compassion.

Peace.  
(Version 2.4.3)

MILDM8NNERED  The big difference between Baseline and the other disk scanning apps is that Baseline can tell you what's changed on your disk, not just how big each file or folder is.

This is exactly what you want when cleaning up a disk. "where has my free space gone?" is a much more relevant question than "how much space does each item take up".

Baseline can also show you *only* the items that have changed, which makes cleaning up your disk a whole lot easier.

http://www.mildmanneredindustries.com/blog/?p=92 lists some other Disk Sizing/Scanning apps (together with some speed and memory usage comparisons), some (but not all) of which are free.

The unregistered version of Baseline will provide similar functionality to all of these apps. However, once we ship 1.0, after the demo period has expired, Baseline's unique functionality will only be available to licensed users.  
(Version 0.2.5)

KKNOPP  It's a recent trend for "shareware" developers to make even the most mundane and basic "applications" require payment to use.

Back in the day before people tried to make a living making small shareware applications by over-pricing them and using the "I have to eat too" excuse for doing so.

If you are expecting to live off of shareware fees you are in for a big disappointment.

You can however make decent money on the SIDE (having an actual job to support yourself first) by selling shareware apps (That are actually worth paying for, and are more than a shell script with a GUI front end)

So it's basically just greed and laziness that is starting this trend.

The best way to make it stop? Don't buy these "shareware" products. Esp ones that request you pay for each upgrade. *rolleyes*  
(Version 1.0.2)

LEV  You don't like it, don't buy it. But I don't see that the issue calls for moralizing. Baseline may be a version of whatever-you-said-it-was, but some of us aren't command line magi nor do we have any interest in becoming one.

The argument is false. I pay someone to clean my house. She does nothing I couldn't do myself. But I'd rather pay her to do it. She gets paid, I get relieved of a task I don't like. This is the same sort of of deal. It's not about ethics. It's about convenience and the free market, unless I'm missing something crucial here. Which is, of course, possible...  
(Version 1.0.2)

MILDM8NNERED  If kknopp considers Baseline to be "mundane" and "basic", perhaps he could point to another app that offers the same functionality for free, or even write one himself.

Hell, if its just a shell script underneath, perhaps he can post suitable code (for computing deltas across file system snapshots) in a comment here.

By the way, there is no charge for Baseline upgrades.

Oh, and one more thing, I make quite a reasonable living from shareware apps, Thanks.  
(Version 1.0.2)

KKNOPP  Woah woah woah here fellah's.

My comments about the trend of shareware apps was just about that. The trend.

I wasn't singling out this application.

No need for the knee-jerk defensiveness,   
(Version 1.0.2)

CHUCK HOUPT  Well, I'll grant you there isn't a large point to this app, but it can be mildly useful. Less itself is a good tool - particularly useful for dealing with huge log files. The Less Termlet just provides convenient access to Less from the Finder environment, and allows some simple customization (window size, font, etc).

Of course, the green-bar paper background is purely for fun. For daily use, I'd recommend reseting the background.  
(Version 1.0)

DELIGHT1  i think that this MIGHT be useful, if i could open a file from the command line, change the background and stuffs, and undo it on when exiting the program. XP  
(Version 1.0)

CHUCK HOUPT  The Less Termlet can be launched from the command line with the open command:

% open -a Less apache_log

This will open a new Terminal window for less, which is close to what you describe. Wrapping 'open -a Less' in a shell alias would make it more convenient.  
(Version 1.0)

STUPBI  No I don't think that would trick the tool. Since the unix executable is placed inside /System/Library/LaunchDaemons it would be launched and loaded even in save mode.  
(Version 1.0)

NIGHTSHADE  I imagine though you could still boot into single user mode.

(command + s at boot)

then just rm -f /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.electriceelprod.securitykeycheck.plist

Security_Key bypassed...  
(Version 1.0)

LLSCOTTS  I'm pretty sure this is the exact same software--perhaps a newer version--with a slightly different name. The developer used to give it away for free, but has now started charging a shareware fee for all (or almost all) of his products.  
(Version 1.1)

JPPAGLIARO  With no intention to detract from a comparable program, a noticeable, and major difference between the two is that PictureSwitch displays the image inside the menu, but the alternative program requires you to view the images in a separate window to preview them, i.e. as does the System Preference pane.  
(Version 1.1)

DELIGHT1  Having nothing better to do, i check both devs pages. They are different, and both are still active, with different programs and such. I don't think this is the same coder >_>  
(Version 1.1)

DOCTOR INFINITY  With "PictureSwitch", all one's stored images appear instantly in the drop-down menu, while with "Picture Switcher", all one's stored images take a short while to

appear in the window....the more images one has, the longer it takes for them all to be visible. Yet viewing all one's images in a full screen size window IS quite handy and useful.

And in "Picture Switcher", one has the ability to set one's custom border color...useful when choosing a centered desktop image. "PictureSwitch" doesn't have that capability.

I'd say BOTH apps are quite good; which one is preferable is just a matter of individual taste.

While "Picture Switcher" is free, "PictureSwitch"'s $10 price IS quite fair and reasonable.  
(Version 1.1)

LLSCOTTS  You're right... they're different. I've always found PictureSwitcher so great I guess I never tried PictureSwitch... but I will now, out of curiosity. I had done review of PictureSwitcher alast year when I decided to make it part of my standard desktop config.  
(Version 1.1)

LLSCOTTS  Everyone who said these are different apps is absolutely right... there's no comparison! The only thing PictureSwitch has going for it is its handy display of a picture thumbnail in the top menu. If you have a small collection of desktop pictures, and you don't know the picture by name, I can see why you might want to pay $10 for PictureSwitch.

On the other hand, I couldn't get the program to actually change my desktop picture! I even went and fiddled with the Apple pref pane, and made sure no other desktop-mod programs were running... the desktop picture just wouldn't change! (However, I had no trouble firing up PictureSwitcher and asking it to change my desktop.) To me, this is a big reliability problem. (I'm on 10.4.9, PowerMac G5 Quad) Just to be sure, I went to the PictureSwitch info page and carefully followed the instructions, including its list of do's and dont's.

Beyond the previews, PictureSwitcher has it all over PictureSwitch. Here are its advantages--features you can't get in PictureSwitch:

Almost 'nuff said. The only last advantage--again, a big one to me--is that PictureSwitcher is free. The only negative I've found over more than a year of use is that with a large collection of pictures, it can take PictureSwitcher quite a while to finish initializing itself. Once it does, however, peformance in managing my desktop pictures is very snappy. It helps to organize your large desktop picture collection into smaller subfolders so the preview window draws its large thumbnails more quickly.  
(Version 1.1)

JPPAGLIARO  I have tested PictureSwitch on several machines, PPC and Intel, going back to Mac OS X 10.3.9 and have not witnessed the problem with the desktop picture not changing.

The program has been in use by many other people,none of which seem to have this problem, and it was just reveiwed on Softonic which gave it 4 out of 5 stars. Over at VersionTracker that latest version received a 5/5 star rating.

Technical issues are best handled by personal email, so email us and maybe we can help you resolve this issue.  
(Version 1.1)

LLSCOTTS  Right. Mentioning the technical problem wasn't the point of the review, actually. I was explaining why in my opinion PictureSwitcher is a better product and a better value. Most likely, Picture Switch is having a conflict with one of the InputManagers I use, or perhaps with Application Enhancer. However, even if it were working flawlessly, I wouldn't be tempted to pay $10 for it when PictureSwitcher does so much more and is free.

Regards, Leland

P.S. You do have several other excellent products that I use. :-) And I highly recommend your excellent Icon2Image, which I use daily myself.  
(Version 1.1)

JPPAGLIARO  Thanks for recommending Icon2Image, another update is coming shortly.

As for the continuing debate regarding Picture Switcher and PictureSwitch... (the similarity of names is peculiar. But if you look at the version history on VersionTracker you'll see PictureSwitch came out first.)

First, I am not going to knock the other product because I don't believe in downgrading the hard work of people, especially to promote my stuff. But, they aren't the same. Personally I think he/she should charge money for the product. And, I think the whole debate here boils down to the idea of free software, which I rarely believe in.

PictureSwitch hasn't been updated for a while because I am not the one who wrote it and the author has been busy at school. But the author of it has resumed development of the product and with my help and suggestions I suspect that the product will reveal some tempting features in the future. And as I said upgrades are always free, so anyone who likes the current features better, such as the display of the image in the menu, will receive them without needing to dole out more money.

Finally, the product is bundled with some other software. Interested users just need to visit the PictureSwtich home page to see what they are.   
(Version 1.1)