MACUPDATE ADMIN  From the openoffice.org developer site, today: "In order to run the OpenOffice.org you need to have X11 installed."

NeoOffice does not have the X11 dependency.  
(Version 2.1 Patch 6)

D9  I would imagine jonlink was referring to the Aqua port which does not require X11.  
(Version 2.1 Patch 6)

MACUPDATE ADMIN  Link?  
(Version 2.1 Patch 6)

MGRIMES  It's currently a developer preview.

http://porting.openoffice.org/mac/download/aqua.html  
(Version 2.1 Patch 6)

MACUPDATE ADMIN  Fair enough, and thanks... but unlike this aqua port of OpenOffice, NeoOffice 2.1 Patch 6 is not a developer preview.  
(Version 2.1 Patch 6)

GEORGE THE FLEA  Haven't used Celtx, but one thing that springs immediately to mind is that Avenir is intended primarily for fiction; Celtx is billed as screenplay writing software. I suspect that if you try the two pieces of software you'll find they are suited for very different kinds of writing.

Definitely give the 30 day trial of Avenir a whirl; it should give you a very good idea if the program works for you.  
(Version 2.3.3)

CORPSECORPS  _

This is NOT a "plain old" anything.

The 3D graphics (odd looking or not) and the large number of variations make this quite different.  
(Version 2.6.6)

JONLINK  Actually I find it pretty plain, even with the variations, BUT that wasn't my point.

The point of my comment was to point out:

A) similar games that I like better, which are (conveniently) cheaper

B) I don't really think this is very tetris like and, not even all that fun, certainly not innovative enough to captivate me.  
(Version 2.7)

MJDTH  The reviews here show Studiometry as 4/5 stars, even with people who don't use the program nor own it putting up 1 star reviews because they didn't need Studiometry.

The invoices being "terrible" seems like an irrational argument, being that you can completely modify any aspect of the templates. The visual templates give you the ability to edit with the built in WYSIWYG editor, giving anyone the ability to come up with the exact look they desire.

We just released an update today fixing a few small bugs, so we're obviously still developing and supporting Studiometry.

Our user base is made up of Professionals who spend their time working and need Studiometry to track their vital business information, not people who spend more time posting bad reviews on MacUpdate than actually trying out the program.  
(Version 4.1.1)

JONLINK  I played with modifying the templates and it was easily one of the most annoying times I've had working with a template system ever, and I've used a lot. I write xhtml, css, php and a handful of other stuff so if I can't do it easily I doubt anyone could do it easily.

I tested Studiometry for a while— the whole demo period. Are you are saying that the demo period isn't enough time for a person to know if the application works well? And if so who's fault is that? I didn't set the length of the demo period. You did.

I tried using your application, and I researched other user's experiences, honestly. I gave it a bad review because that is what it deserves. I'm just thankful I bought Billings instead (right after I read your reply). I need an application that does all the things Studiometry does, but I need it to be reliable and I need to know that the developer(s) are going to be there if the application goes south AND it's nice to know that they aren't just spending their time attacking people on MacUpdate for sharing an honest experience.

The funny part is I rarely write reviews, but you seem to imply that I spend time bad-mouthing folks. Meanwhile a look at the reviews for Studiometry seems to show that you spend quite a bit of time on here being rude to people.  
(Version 4.1.1)

MJDTH  There is no code involved in making an invoice template in Studiometry. Here is a screenshot of the template editor:

http://www.oranged.net/studiometry/screenshots2/visualinvoiceeditor.jpg

It's a what you see is what you get editor, and it doesn't get much simpler than that.

Studiometry also has hundreds of features that billings does not have (including completely customizable invoices), hence the price difference.

If Studiometry is not for you, we completely understand. Billings is a good program, some people need less, some need more. But there's no reason to go around bad mouthing a program that you haven't used enough to try the features you're complaining about.  
(Version 4.1.1)

TIM27  jonlink is pretty much dead on about the invoicing. I wrote in an earlier post that I had an easier time creating an entire database in FileMaker Pro to do my invoicing than I did trying to edit the so-called WYSIWYG templates. If you want to customize them at all you need to know xml. And even then, they DO NOT turn out just like you want them to.

I played around with the demo enough to know that I don't want to spend hours and hours learning xml and editing templates in a program that is "supposed" to increase my productivity.  
(Version 4.1.1)

MJDTH  There is no XML or code involved in the visual templates. Just look at the screenshot I posted earlier.

http://www.oranged.net/studiometry/screenshots2/visualinvoiceeditor.jpg

Studiometry has another way of creating templates, which can produce code (such as XML or HTML) but you in no way need to use this advanced section of the program.

Check out the screenshot here:

http://www.oranged.net/studiometry/screenshots2/visualinvoiceeditor.jpg

You do not need to know any code to drag items around and select properties and their values. You put what you want where you want it.  
(Version 4.1.1)

SAOSINNED  I'm not exactly sure what in the world is wrong with Tim27 and Jonlink, but I'm going to have to side with the developer on this one. There is no knowledge of code required to make an invoice or an invoice template. I know no HTML, no XML, or any of the other codes you've mentioned, but I made an invoice template that I use every week in about 20 minutes. You drag the elements of the invoice with the mouse and specify with the mouse what information you want in what location.

Most likely, the users screaming and yelling here simply work for the makers of Billings or whatever program they spend countless posts speaking about. Studiometry is a great program that I use every day, and it's truly sad that people waste their time (and the developers' time) posting idiotic and incorrect comments on download websites.  
(Version 4.1.1)

JONLINK  "Studiometry also has hundreds of features that billings does not have (including completely customizable invoices), hence the price difference."

That is just a lie.

Billings does have a wonderful way to create a custom invoice, much better than Studiometry's. That is one of the things I like most about it. You can modify one of their beautiful existing invoices or make one from scratch. The interface for this is easy to use, unlike Studiometry's which is clunky and difficult. It's pure speculation on my part, but I am guessing you couldn't even name one hundred, muchless hundreds, of features that Billings doesn't have. Especially considering you don't seem to know anything about what Billings does have for features.

If anyone is serious about making a good looking invoice they would be very frustrated by Studiometry's "WYSIWYG" version. Before making claims about competitors you should be sure you are correct, especially when saying their application can't do something, when it actually does it a lot better. My opinion is that getting anything half decent out of Studiometry (as far as invoices are concerned) requires you to hand code, and that is a total nightmare.

This is the last I am dealing with this. It isn't my battle, but I couldn't let that amazing lie stand. Also, to the person who speculates I work for Billings. Shame on you. I mentioned Billings because I appreciate a reasonable alternative being offered when I read reviews that tell me a product isn't worth buying. So I offered one to folks that might read my review. And characterizing my posts as "countless" and "screaming" is just wrong, since there is now (counting this one) a total of three— three is not really countless at all. I don't know where "screaming comes from, but I can only tell you that I am not screaming. Honest. And I only mention Billings again and again because it was my original point of comparison and what I see as the most reasonable alternative. I've tried things like iRatchet and iBiz and I didn't like them as much, so why would I tell people to try those?

My hope is that people check out a few applications, read a bunch of reviews for all the applications they are considering (maybe in this case focus on people's experience with support), and decide for themselves which works best for them.

This has been interesting, but I can't waste anymore time debating on MacUpdate.  
(Version 4.1.1)

TIM27  Have you people argueing for Studiometry even tried PRINTING an invoice??

It will only print low-res graphics of a logo. I've tried 300dpi tif and png files and it always prints a low-res 72dpi verion of it. That is not something I want to give to a client. Especially being a graphic designer.

The only way to get a good print out is using the xml tags in another program like Illustrator or InDesign. A complete waste of time. Because I could do that without buying Studiometry.  
(Version 4.1.1)

OLIPOWER  The developer stated:

"Studiometry also has hundreds of features that billings does not have (including completely customizable invoices), hence the price difference."

Indeed that is both untrue, and... paradoxically... what makes Studiometry slow, buggy, clumpy.

Featuritis. Studiometry can do so much, it just does not do it WELL at all! The invoice feature... The "Planning" feature... the later being a GANTT chart - but an utterly useless implementation of a GANTT chart.

And the developer should have spend more time replying to support-issues and valid user-feedback, than to badmouth reviewers here.

But Tom, the developer, does have a clear tendency to hear what he want to hear, and somehow deliberately "misunderstand" user gripes. Like above where he assumes he has valid answers, yet just plain does not answer the real issue.

And that's coming from a long-time Studiometry user (v1.1 - v3.9) who recently swithed to... Tadahhh: Billings 2;-) And yes, it is indeed better!  
(Version 4.1.1)

THIRSTYROBOT  Add me the list of the disappointed. I tried to like this application. Given the price tag, I expected a much higher level of refinement and reliability than what it offered. It comes down to finding the right balance of price and features. For me, Billings can't be beat because it concentrates on mastering a shorter list of features for a fraction of the price. The deal-breaker for me is having complete flexibility to design my invoice template to my liking. And while the report editor in Billings has a learning curve to it, it's the one that delivers.   
(Version 4.1.2)

JOSHUAR  I had to create a MacUpdate to respond to the remarks made by the apparent developer of Studiometry. I will do my best not to swear. I'll address his comment point by point for clarity - I apologize in advance for the repetition of his drivel:

"The reviews here show Studiometry as 4/5 stars, even with people who don't use the program nor own it putting up 1 star reviews because they didn't need Studiometry."

What an arrogant statement. Has it ever occurred to you that your app might not actually be perfect?! Way to take negative feedback dude. Instead of being graceful and improving your product you decide to insult those who offer their legitimate opinions? Really?

"The invoices being "terrible" seems like an irrational argument, being that you can completely modify any aspect of the templates."

We've tried, and yes, it sucks! It is possible to push stuff around, but it is like trying to do brain surgery with a shovel.

"The visual templates give you the ability to edit with the built in WYSIWYG editor, giving anyone the ability to come up with the exact look they desire."

Prove it! You cant! The templates on the site suck, and you feel like suck trying to use your template designer. Think about it - we are a user base of people who criticize Adobe for their insufficiencies! You're template designer doesn't cut it dude, and defending it makes you look ignorant, or unscrupulous..

"We just released an update today fixing a few small bugs, so we're obviously still developing and supporting Studiometry."

But I havent seen an actual improvement since I tried it last time a couple years ago.

"Our user base is made up of Professionals who spend their time working and need Studiometry to track their vital business information, not people who spend more time posting bad reviews on MacUpdate than actually trying out the program."

Well that's just icing, aint it? That is the kind of attitude that will keep my money a very far way from your pocket, forever. Hello Billings (http://www.billings2.com/), here I come!   
(Version 4.1.3)

OLIPOWER  I used Studiometry since version 1.11 up til the latest version 3.x.x where I got quite saddened by the 4.x.x update. No improvements, only new bloat.

Anyway, yes the developers attitude is stubborn to put it mildly.

And yes, in my years with Studiometry, I never made an invoice myself. Too impossible. Same goes for the "wysiwyg" tool given in SM4.

Now, Billings' invoice tool is something that works. It's not InDesign, but it works beautifully.

And, in the new version of Billings, it integrates with Merlin the super project management app. Together those two apps costs only a tad more than Studiometry. But then you get two Cocoa apps, that both rock in their domains!

Not to push competing products, but Tom the developer of Studiometry has not been the most problemsolving dude in my years of having trouble with Studiometry, with no support, miscalculations, currency-trouble, stability, sync-issues, you name it.  
(Version 4.1.3)

SONJAY  All of you Studiometery users who were disappointed when Oranged.net pulled down their user-to-user support forums, feel free to visit http://www.studiometryforum.com

We can replace the helpful user environment that the Studiometry people took away from us some time ago.  
(Version 5.0.5)

ESCOLES  My agency used Studiometry (or tried to) for a couple of years. It was hell.

When used on OS X 10.4 Macs in a group setting, Studiometry tended to accumulate multiple gigabytes of backup files on each workstation, which had to be synchronized across our 10/100 LAN at each startup. Consequently, startups would often take up to 20 minutes.

Since some configuration changes and database updates wouldn't "take" unless you forced a synchronization by shutting down and restarting, people would put off restarting as long as possible. Once consequence was that it was difficult to get accurate reports.

With at least one version update, the locally stored Studiometry database was rendered incompatible with the version we had on the network. Took me about an hour and a half to recover from that experiment.

The performance was so poor and the user interaction design on the other features was sufficiently arcane that we never considered trying to use it for anything but time tracking.

All the while, I'd continue to see glowing reviews from people who never actually used it, like magazine writers or software reviewers. They'd install it, unlimber a list of tests and perform them, run through a checklist, and Studiometry would do just fine. It's in the actual using of it that you'd notice the warts, though. The multi-gigabyte backup caches, for example, and the 20-minute startup times, would only be visible after months of use.

All in all, a pretty dismal failure.   
(Version 5.1.2)

IGAUCHO  Maybe so. But at least the icon looks cool in my Dock giving Word a flying kick!  
(Version 1.4.2)