Richard Hallas
Downloads: 3
Posts: 65
Smile Score: +45
About Me
I am a Free member
Gender: Male
Freelance writer and editor

Visit Stats
Last Visit: 97 days ago
Member Since: 11 Jul 2009
Profile Views: 927

Richard Hallas's Posts
Average Rating from Richard:
(10)

sort: smiles | time

Richard-Hallas rated on 28 Mar 2013
[Version 8.0.18480]



burypromote
Richard-Hallas commented on 10 Nov 2011
Good news for Lion users!

I've just discovered, in OS X 10.7.2, that the ability to follow aliases in Dock menus is back again, having been absent since Tiger! Three cheers for Apple for doing the right thing, albeit very belatedly. Since the loss of this feature in Leopard was the primary reason for HierarchicalDock being written, it doesn't really matter if it doesn't work any more under Lion. The native OS feature now appears to operate as it should. Hooray.
[Version 1.2]



burypromote
Richard-Hallas commented on 31 Oct 2011
The link from MacUpdate no longer works. I've found that this excellent widget has a new home, here:

http://www.gingerbeardman.com/ceefaxviewer/

The latest version works fine for me post-digital switchover, and now represents my only way of seeing original Teletext. And the original service is so much better than the pathetic new version provided with digital channels, which is lightweight and useless.
[Version 1.3]




Richard-Hallas rated on 29 Apr 2011
[Version 3.5.2]



burypromote
+2
Richard-Hallas commented on 26 Sep 2010
I've already hidden the Ping sidebar (via the control at the bottom of the window) and hidden the Ping drop-down menu (via a config command in the Terminal).

The one thing I still want to do is hide the Ping link in the Store area in the library sidebar at the left of the window. Is that actually possible? (Does this utility do it?)
[Version 1.0]


1 Reply

burypromote

+45
Richard-Hallas replied on 26 Sep 2010
That's what I suspected. I've already found that it's possible to disable the Ping entry under the Store heading if you disable the entire store through iTunes' Parental Controls. However, that's no good because I still want access to the store itself. I just don't want Ping.

Very irritating that Apple insists that we must have the stupid Ping entry here, wasting space and getting in the way. It's possible to enable and disable every other entry in this area via the iTunes preferences; so why not Ping, when it's of no interest to people like me?

Hopefully the ability to disable it might come once the novelty's worn off for Apple.
burypromote
+10
Richard-Hallas commented on 02 Sep 2010
Aside from really hating the new icon, which (unlike virtually all other important Apple icons I can think of) is just plain ugly, I have to say I'm disappointed with what Apple has released in iTunes 10.

I'm not complaining about any specific features as such. Ping is not for me (I like classical music and I'm not into social networking, so that doesn't leave much to interest me with Ping), but I can see that a lot of people will think it's great, so I'm happy enough to see it.

What disappoints me about iTunes 10 is that it just continues to try to do far too much.

With the proliferation of iOS devices, it's *long* past time Apple came up with a better way of handling them than iTunes. Managing apps, synching your docs between devices, copying your photos etc. etc. should be the work of a dedicated iMobile application, not an overburdened and consequently bloated music player.

Maybe it'll come eventually with iOS 5 or something. But I'd hoped that iTunes 10 would mark the point when iTunes finally shed its device-management features and they got put into another app, or integrated with Mac OS X in some other more elegant way.
[Version 10.0]



burypromote
+10
Richard-Hallas commented on 20 Jul 2010
Why the heck is this being listed under Mac applications?

I suddenly got all excited about the idea that Apple had released a version of iBooks for the Mac. Of course, it hasn't; this is the iPhone/iPad app.

So I don't see why it's being listed here with Mac applications. That's just plain confusing and unhelpful. I come to MacUpdate for Mac software updates, and look elsewhere for iPad/iPhone apps. If MacUpdates wants to cater for apps as well as Mac applications, fine... but put them in a separate category, not with Mac software!
[Version 1.1.1]


2 Replies

burypromote
+2

+45
Richard-Hallas replied on 21 Jul 2010
Just to be clear about semantics: saying that something is confusing isn't to say that one was confused by it. I wasn't "confused" by the presence of iBooks in the Mac software listing as such, but I do maintain that mixing things up in this way is indeed confusing. Very much so, in fact.

That's particularly true if, as in this case, the app is highlighted as being 'important software', in a colour that stands out from other items in the listing.

Yes, I acknowledge that system requirements are stated, so one can see that it's not a Mac app. HOWEVER, this is NOT true within the main listing, where the thing grabs your attention in the first place. You have to go to the product page and then read the small print in order to see that it's not a Mac application after all.

My initial reaction when I saw iBooks listed was to think, "Wow! Hey, Apple's released a version of iBooks for the Mac! Cool!" So I came to this page in great excitement, only to be disappointed (if not surprised). So if you want a recipe for upsetting and disappointing Mac users the world over, you've found it! ;-)

Besides, it's actually not inconceivable that Apple *MAY* at some point release a Mac version of iBooks. (I rather doubt it, but you never know.) If that happens, there'll be further confusion because the product's already been listed in the wrong category.

The questions that should be considered when listing software for one platform in another platform's listing are:

1. Is this a helpful thing to do?
2. Is this information that the target audience wants to see?
3. What positive benefits are being achieved by this action?

The answers, to my mind, would be:

1. No. Software for largely unrelated platforms, and different audiences, is being mixed together in a single place, which is inherently unhelpful. Worse, it's impossible to distinguish between the different types of item without going to the individual product pages and looking for some small-print. That's as unhelpful as it could be, because looking at the list of recent software updates should be all about seeing things at a glance, not having to hunt for needles in haystacks.

2. No, it is not. People come to Mac software listings to look at listings of Mac software. You can't make assumptions about what other devices they might possibly own. You also should not assume that including such cross-posted items is useful information for them even if they do own such a device, as it's not what they came to your site to see. It seems fairly reasonable to expect that a Mac software listing will include only Mac software. By your argument, you should be listing Windows software too, on the grounds that most Mac users these days have installed some means of running Windows software on their Mac (be it Boot Camp, Parallels or whatever). That may well be true, but it doesn't make it right to list Windows software here. So it isn't right to list iOS software here either.

3. Good question, though I ask it myself. I can't come up with a good answer, however. I really can't see any useful benefits of doing this. (And I speak as an iPad owner who's very interested in using iBooks on that device.) If I want to know what iOS apps have been updated recently, that information is only one click away on MacUpdate, under the iPhone listing. Why on earth should I want to see some of that information mixed up in Mac listings when I'm asking to see information about Mac software?

Bottom line: please don't mix things up in this way. It's hugely unhelpful; there are lots of arguments against it and, apparently, very few in favour of it. MacUpdate offers a really useful and high-quality service, but this kind of cross-prosting actually detracts from its usefulness by reducing the focus of the Mac service and making its results unreliable. I.e. you can no longer rely on all entries in Mac listings referring to Mac software, which is the whole point of the service.
burypromote

+45
Richard-Hallas replied on 21 Jul 2010
It appears that action has been taken in response to my comments, and iBooks is no longer cross-posted in the Mac software listing.

Thanks very much for listening and acting.
burypromote
+1
Richard-Hallas commented on 11 Nov 2009
HOORAY! Snow Leopard compatibility at last! Thank you! This is once again my default saver.
[Version 2.3.1]



burypromote
+2

Richard-Hallas reviewed on 01 Jul 2009
This review is partly to counter the previous 1-star review, whose rating appears to be based purely on the fact that the saver's graphics aren't to the reviewer's taste.

There's an easy answer to this: if you don't like the graphics, don't buy the saver.

Personally, I do like the graphics. They're whimsical and attractive, and there's a decent amount of variety in the four scenes provided (though more scenes would be nice).

As for the saver, it's got lots of options to tweak and play with, plenty of visual variety, and generally does all the things that a screensaver should do. Whether it's worth paying for is a matter for the user (there are tons of good screensavers available for nothing), but Paper Pilots is unusual, distinctive, attractive and just generally pleasing.
[Version 1.011]



burypromote

Richard-Hallas reviewed on 28 Apr 2009
All the comments about LotsaWater are all very well, and I agree that that's a great screensaver that's free.

However, Desktop Puddle is better, and it's pretty cheap. I certainly don't regret paying the shareware fee for my copy; it's my favourite watery screensaver.

Some people are saying that LotsaWater is more realistic than this. I disagree; I've just compared the two and find that (a) they're very similar and (b) for me, Desktop Puddle has the edge. Horses for courses, but I wouldn't call it a valid major criticism of either saver; they both look very good, and are very similar. I think that Desktop Puddle's 3D highlighting option for its waves (which LotsaWater doesn't have) helps and make it look a little more realistic.

LotsaWater has a few more options for controlling the detail of the splashes and dimming the screen, but Desktop Puddle has a couple of worthwhile features that LotsaWater doesn't:

(a) the curved screen depth option, which I personally really like;
(b) better image placement choices (current screen, current wallpaper image or random image from specified folder).

Overall I have to say that this is one of my favourite savers, and I like several other of the UselessCreations ones too. Yes, they're shareware, and generally speaking I don't like paying for screensavers, but I've found several of these to be good enough to be worth the modest fee.
[Version 1.2]



burypromote
Richard-Hallas had trouble on 17 Nov 2007
Warning: Deja Vu 'downgrade'

This latest Leopard-compatible Toast 8 upgrade includes version 3.2.3 of Deja Vu, which is not the latest Leopard-compatible version. The latest Deja Vu is 3.3 for Tiger and 3.4 for Leopard. If you turn on the checkbox in the Toast installer to install Deja Vu, it installs version 3.2.3 even if you have a newer version installed already (I had 3.4). So beware of that. You can of course download and use Deja Vu 3.4 as a free upgrade from its developer's site, but it's a pity that this Toast upgrade doesn't include the latest Leopard-compatible version. It's also a pity that it'll silently downgrade a newer version; that's pretty unfriendly.
[Version 8.0.3]



burypromote
Richard-Hallas had trouble on 29 Jul 2003
Further to my previous comment...

Although there's no mention of a Finder fix (or indeed problem!) in the FruitMenu 3.1.1 update, it's worth noting that, after installing this latest version, my previous problem with FruitMenu crashing the Finder has now gone away.

So, three cheers. I'm happy again!
[Version 3.1.1]



burypromote
Richard-Hallas had trouble on 29 Jul 2003
This 3.1 update causes a big problem on my PowerBook G4 (OS 10.2.6): now that I have it installed, pop-up/contextual menus no longer work in the Finder. The menu bar across the top of the screen works OK, but contextual menus, path menus from the drop-down Path button in Finder toolbars, and pop-up path menus (Command-click) from Finder window title bars, all cause the Finder to die. It just quits and then reloads a few seconds later, with no error message. Anyone else see this?

It's probably a conflict between FruitMenu and something else I've got installed, but as yet I don't know what it is. Problem reported to Unsanity but no response so far. This started when I installed FruitMenu 3.1, and the previous version (3.0.1) was fine. Very annoying...
[Version 3.1]



Displaying 1-10 of 25
1 2 3 >
Displaying 1-3 of 3
Please login or create a new
MacUpdate Member account
to use this feature


- -