User "gary30" Profile
|
About gary30
|
Posts:38
|
Last Login:26 May 2008 20:05
|
|
User Reviews
 |
Type: Review
Date: 10 May 2008 17:33
|
| Features: |  |
| Ease of Use: |  |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
Downloaded and installed on May 9 over previous version running under 10.5.2 on a MBP. Virtual machine was XP-SP2. You must reinstall Parallels Tools after the update. I do this as a matter of course, but some probably don't and not doing so would definitely cause problems. Once my XP-SP2 installation was confirmed good, I installed Microsoft's new service pack, SP3. Other than taking almost two hours it went fine and the machine is stable. It looks like Parallels made significant strides in reducing Parallels CPU usage with this version and that is welcome. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 22 Mar 2008 17:33
|
|
Another thanks. Works here, too. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 6 Mar 2008 15:47
|
|
There does not appear to be any substantive change in functionality over the previous free version although the main window is a bit nicer. Moreover, the developer seems to have chosen to handicap himself by grossly limiting the funcitonality of the paid application until registration; is not the constant nagging thought to be enough? Just my 2 cents worth, but if I were trying to sell an app that were only marginally different from a previous free version, I might be a little more generous. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 24 Feb 2008 21:06
|
|
Maybe it IS at someone's house. It's free, works great. How large of an investment do you think the developer should make in order to get your *freeware* to you at warp speed? |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 23 Feb 2008 22:45
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
Nice little app that offers a function useful to those of us who have adopted zip and put sit behind us. Not too complicated, not to simple. Just right. Thanks! While developer recommends putting the app in the Applications folder, it also seems to work when put in the Utilities folder on my machine. Okay, call me compulsive. |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 23 Feb 2008 22:40
|
|
Hey there sport, None of your complaints amounts to a hill of beans. It's a little app that does what it says it will do and helps you get going. How about you write and post a FREE Cocoa app and then see how you feel as you read ridiculous complaints from the clueless. |
 |
Type: Hint/Tip
Date: 23 Feb 2008 14:29
|
|
There is a little freeware app. called FontNuke that finds and stomps out font caches that none of the general purpose maintenance utilities (Cocktail, MainMenu, OnyX, etc.) seem to find. Cocktail is a great utility, but for your specific need, you might want to check out FontNuke. It found and cleaned out a couple of font caches that survivied several OS X and machine migrations since 2002! Pretty amazing. And, yes, it seems to find the Office 2008 stuff. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 23 Feb 2008 13:15
|
|
Plus, Labels X, even though I very much like the people and the effort at Unsanity, will probably never work on Leopard because the APE situation looks untenable. Also, from what i can see, this app isn't a hack and finally, OS X's native label colors suck. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 22 Feb 2008 17:27
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I normally think I keep a tidy system. I use OnxX, MainMenu, etc. to keep the system clean and manage fonts with FontExplorer. However, FontNuke found and nuked font caches that had managed to avoid detection and extermination since 2002. Very impressive! I am still using Tiger 10.4.11 but am very close to upgrading to Leopard via a clean install with fresh install of all applications. With FontExplorer's continuing problems with its own cache cleaning utility and the confusing and mysterious font locations/caches introduced on any system by Adobe and MS Office applications, FontNuke is a "must" for anyone who messes with fonts. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 13 Feb 2008 22:04
|
|
I wonder if all you MacHeist crybabies here are going to be honkin' into your hankies when Ambrosia releases its new SnapZ Pro version. Ambrosia, which was very upfront about using MacHeist to entice new users prior to its major upgrade, is about to do the same thing. C'mon folks. You paid under 50 bucks for MacHeist. You got these apps for under $5 each. So if you decide to upgrade (nobody has a gun to your head), you can just as easily claim to have acquired Speed Download 5 for a net $20, a discount of $5 off the price of a new license. On balance you got a hella deal. Untwist your knickers and go outside and play, or see if you can get an advance on your allowance so you can call someone who cares. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 10 Feb 2008 00:02
|
|
I must be missing something: I am not trying to start a controversy here in asking why SuperDuper seems to get so many more "warm fuzzies" than does Carbon Copy Cloner. As near as I can tell, they both have the same features, just implemented a little differently. For me, the procedure for setting up file exclusions seems much simpler on CCC. Neither of these apps perform incremental backups (which is fine--that is not what they are intended for). I think they are both fairly priced (I donated to Bombich so long ago I can't remember, but I think it was 20 or 30 bucks). Both developers are wonderful. Maybe its just publicity. I started with CCC way back when so I am going to stick, but if I had started with SuperDuper I imagine I would stick with it. Or maybe there is a preference or option in SuperDuper I am missing that would make me say, "Aha!" |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 30 Jan 2008 23:31
|
|
I think maybe we finally have the glass slipper (iPhone password support!!!!!) |
 |
Type: Hint/Tip
Date: 23 Jan 2008 16:25
|
|
I used to use SpamSieve and it is a great product worth 5 stars. I have a public email address on my website and various other email boxes that go back to 1994. So SpamSieve has been essential. However, recently I had to go out of town for an extended period of time and wanted to be able to access all my email from a single service with a web interface if needed. I selected gmail and arranged to forward all my email accounts (except for a free yahoo account) to the gmail account. Result: Zero spam and complete transparency as far as the senders are aware. I could have literally not told anyone I was gone and could have received and replied to all email using the original "Sent To" addresses for my replies. Not that there is anything wrong with SpamSieve, but one less program to run is one less to deal with and upgrade. So far, gmail has a perfect spam rejection/wanted email acceptance record. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 27 Dec 2007 14:36
|
| Features: |  |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I wrote an earlier review after crashing problems with this app and decided to revisit it after deleting all InputManagers, APE and gobs of old preferences in anticipation of a Leopard upgrade. Well, the crashiness is gone and that is great. However, over time it appears that this app is nothing more than a scorer for an application usage popularity contest. Kind of neat, but I have already made the top ten or so frequently needed apps close at hand via the dock, etc. So this app doesn't really buy me anything in terms of productivity. For someone like my wife who uses only a few apps this would be fun. I had a notion that Sapiens' delightful UI could be adapted to replace the functionality of something like DragThing for "power users.". The idea is that you might have Sapiens circles for various apps and utilities that you classify and each circle might contain essentially the most used apps in that class. I suppose the user would need to assign the apps to a particular classification. Maybe too complicated. Oh well. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 4 Dec 2007 15:58
|
| Features: |  |
| Ease of Use: |  |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I see excessive system overhead with this version (and with all of 'em). For those who justify this by observing that this a beta and that the user agrees to the terms and conditions yada yada yada, well, if you go to Adobe's main site just like any naive user you will be presented with this exact release as though it is the "official" release. I disable Flash whenever I can. It is just awful and for once I am glad Microsoft is promoting an alternative. It can't be any worse than this garbage. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 4 Dec 2007 15:53
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I really like the new UI for Little Snitch. It shows information in a way i can understand better and makes it easy to edit rules and evaluate existing ones. Very small system overhead from what I can see. I wouldn't boot my Mac without it. MacBook Pro OS X 10.4.11 |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 4 Dec 2007 15:50
|
|
Just a followup comment: I haven't been able to find anyone else who seems very concerned about this. So I think there must be an error in my thinking. The new Little Snitch 2 intercepts a lot of what I think are root programs asking for access, so that is very good. Apologies to anyone who might be concerned. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 1 Dec 2007 14:04
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
Switched from this to "Pester" because of bugs. However, "Pester" ends up in the dock with a tiny digital countdown clock icon. TinyAlarm ends up in the menu bar, out of the way, with little analog clock icon that I find easier to read. Now, with the bug fixes, "snooze" and user sounds it is again my favorite. Its is nice little app for short term alarms and is much preferable to clogging up Entourage or iCal with this stuff. Excellent. MacBook Pro w/10.4.11 |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 24 Nov 2007 00:30
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I just paid for my upgrade to 6.0.2 from 5.9.5 and have noticed a much quicker launch speed and all of the features I use seem rock solid. I like the modest changes to the interface. I think the inclusioin of the various language users manuals in the package and the Universal Binary has resulted in its being larger than previous versions. This program continues to be among the very best values in the Mac software universe. I especially like the lossless jpeg cropping and constantly improving support for cameras as well. Also, they keep up with bug fixes, etc. Don't think this is a good release? Buy something like Adobe Elements and then we'll talk. |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 14 Nov 2007 17:23
|
|
I recently installed Leopard and the new version of Little Snitch (2.0). In trying to grok the new firewall situaiton I visited the Objective Development forums and to my shock I discovered that Little Snitch does not and has not in the past monitored/blocked all outgoing connections from third party apps. I am floored. I had trusted this application for years. If there are third party application developers that have figured out how to get around Little Snitch, then how long will it be until spyware developers can do the same thing. I am very concerned about this. |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 11 Oct 2007 16:53
|
|
Yes, you are correct. 272 downloads (as of this writing) does suggest that all possible permutations of OS X versions, software installations, and machine configurations are fully covered and there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for my having the temerity to make such a ridiculous observation. In fact, it is possible that I was hallucinating as I had taken an apririn a couple of hours before I tried the product. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 10 Oct 2007 23:44
|
|
Every so often (not very often) you get a sitx file. Those can't be opened by The Unarchiver. That's the only reason I can imagine (of course, you could just reject the sitx file, but people who send you sitx files are so clueless that they won't know how to use another format). |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 10 Oct 2007 19:00
|
|
I don't think I identified any "fault," merely a correlation. As for your confidence, there are thousands of posts on thousands of forums suggesting that particular programs can cause problems with other programs including the Finder. Happens all the time. To say this isn't the case is a bit optimistic in my view. |
| |
Type: Troubleshooting
Date: 7 Oct 2007 17:18
|
|
I really like this application! Unfortunately, shortly after I installed it I got application freezes with Entourage, Safari, and the Finder itself which led to having to reboot via the Power buttion. Having removed it, my system is stable once more. Unfortunately, I ran both Disk Utility and Onyx which deleted my crash logs. I need this system for my business but may still try messing with Sapiens but not without a couple of backups and some time. MacBook Pro Core Duo 15" 2.16, 2G ram |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 2 Oct 2007 22:37
|
|
I took a look at this one. I definitely see the benefit of defragging--especially if you are slinging huge files around. My solution ended up being Carbon Copy Cloner. I clone my drive, check to be sure the clone is bootable, than clone it back using the file by file methiod. This causes the system files to be written to the inner disk and so on, the general way they should be. Speed benefit is great and you get a full backup out of the deal every time. It is also much faster then iDefrag or others. For what it does, iDefrag is fine. But at least for me there is a way that meets my needs better. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 4 Sep 2007 01:16
|
|
I really wanted to like this program. It has a nice interface and is one the few backup programs that can do true incremental backups (i.e., with multiple restore points or "snapshots"). However, it is quite limited when it comes to file exclusion. You need to click on each and every file or directory to exclude, although you can use rudimentary general expressions. The real showstopper for me was the restore option. Yes, that's right--"option" is singular. If you need to restore a file or a couple of files as is often the case, you need to restore the entire backup archive to a folder of your choice or to the original file locations. If you restore to a folder, then you can copy the files you want to a specific location. My backups are usually several gigabytes, so this is a royal pain and is the reason I reluctantly deleted the program. Close but no cigar. |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 2 Aug 2007 16:57
|
|
I am also running the 2.x version of Parallels as I have seen no compelling reason to upgrade. I have a MacBook Pro with 2GB of ram. Parallels claims that it will manage its memory use automatically. What it actually seems to do is grab as much as it possibly can and then hang onto it like a Gila Monster. I set up the preferences to use only 840MB and set up the Virtual Machine to use the same. Why you need to set bot of these I do not know. I also set it up to Manually "manage" the memory. Net result is that Parallels is now on a shorter leash and seems to work better than when I let it go hog wild on memory. Notably, Parallels is also a processor hog, even when it is hidden, paused, etc. If and when they make real changes to the program to address these kinds of issues rather than just eye candy like 3D I may purchase an upgrade. Meanwhile there are other developers that are catching up and maybe surpassing Parallels. |
 |
Type: Comments
Date: 17 Jul 2007 17:14
|
|
When I open Word 2005 with FontExplorer v1.2.1, I get a tedious series of modal dialog boxes from FontExplorer for unusual fonts asking if I would like to ignore, etc... Reverting back to 1.1.2 and the modal dialog boxes go away. Have tried emptying caches, fixing permissions, etc. all to no effect. |
 |
Type: Troubleshooting
Date: 23 Jun 2007 22:02
|
|
I had a slow system after an earlier Tiger update. I can't remember which one. I solved it by deleting (especially) the system/kernel caches and font caches along with any other caches. You can use the latest version of Onyx (free) to do these things. Also, make sure you repaired your permissions and verified your disk using Disk Utility after the upgrade. If you have any system haxies, you might try disabling them one by one to see if one of them might be implicated. Finally, running Activity Monitor isn't a bad idea. You may not have Front Row, but it could be some other process |
| |
Type: Review
Date: 1 Mar 2007 22:01
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I am thrilled with this release. It seems much faster than the previous (3170) release on my system and whereas the suspend function was a bit dicey before, it has worked perfectly through a dozen suspensions now with various programs and windows open. I need XP for mainly for some job routing software and for Quickbooks payroll, and am looking forward to getting rid of my Toshiba "craptop" entirely. I think Parallels may be getting stable enough so that I can do this in the next month or so. MacBook Pro 2.16/15", 2Gram, 100Ghdd, OSX10.4.8 |
| |
Type: Comments
Date: 28 Feb 2007 00:00
|
|
What passes for an "OEM version" is sometimes just a restore disk. Those won't ever work. However, if the OEM disk is a Windows XP INSTALL disk with a holographic sticker and a serial number then I would bet it would work. I am sure there are exceptions but I have yet to see an "OEM" install disk license that is tied to a particular box--you just can't use it on more than one box (natch). Often you will need to delete an OEM trashware folder, but again, I have yet to see an OEM disk that has not worked perfectly on a third party box or in this case, a VM. |
 |
Type: Review
Date: 10 Dec 2006 17:26
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
I don't know a lot about video encoding formats. I do know that this is the player that usually works for me when none of the others do. Only small comment is that the unassuming UI does not even hint at the power of this amazing program. It often plays partial and broken video files--useful when you see a post with dozens of RAR parts and no preview. Just DL the first few RAR's, process with Machacha and play with VLC. |
 |
Type: Troubleshooting
Date: 14 Mar 2006 17:25
|
|
Version 2.6.6 requires Quicktime 7. It crashes immediately upon loading with earlier versions. I still like it, but I am stuck with 2.6.5 for now. |
| |
Type: Review
Date: 14 Jan 2006 17:59
|
| Features: | |
| Ease of Use: | |
| Value: | |
| Stability: | |
|
Excellent interface. Faster and easier to use than Extensis Suitcase 11 in both working with sets and in supporting font calls from applications. I am so pleased that we now have a decent font manager for OS X. Goodbye Suitcase!! Gary |
The opinions expressed in the reviews are not necessarily those of MacUpdate.
MacUpdate waives any legal binding related to the comments and opinions expressed in the reviews.
Please contact MacUpdate politely if you wish for a comment to be reviewed by MacUpdate for removal.
Main
