topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Thursday March 28, 2024, 8:08 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Sentinel [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 2 [3] 4 5next
51
Living Room / Re: Curiouser and curiouser ...
« on: September 11, 2005, 06:52 AM »
This is another of those 'known' software bugs that Microsoft seem unable or unwilling to fix.  I get this sometimes, especially if my system has been running for some days/weeks.  As Veign mentioned, dragging the taskbar elsewhere and then back tends to fix it, otherwise the more extreme terminating and restarting explorer fixes it (which works rather nicely as a scheduled task but may mess up your taskbar icons in some cases).

52
Convergence is the bane of the software and hardware world at the moment.  Why specialise and do a task really well when you can do a dozen things in one package really badly?  Sadly market trends seem to be dictating this misguided notion and companies are so scared of specialising into an evolutionary dead end they blindly follow.  Thinking about it though, if anything should be an evolutionary dead end it should be Anti-Virus software and evidence is suggesting that this may be the case within a matter a few short of years.

I've used both Outpost and NOD32 for some time because they both do what they do really well without all of the extra 'value added' baggage like some of the competitors.  If that changes then I'll have no alternative then to change to a competing product.  If I can find one that hasn't followed suit that is....

As for Outpost discounts, I'm led to believe Agnitum's store used to allow you to initially purchase an 'upgrade' license (50% cheaper than a normal purchase) without having previously been a customer, which would then act as a full license within Outpost.  I wouldn't recommend this though as Agnitum has probably figured this out and blocked it by now AND it is probably dishonest, or something.  ;)

53
Screenshot Captor / Re: Screenshot Captor - License file
« on: September 09, 2005, 01:09 PM »
Mouser, perhaps your software should be called 'donateware' to help clarify matters.  Free to use if you want to jump through a few *minor* hoops or you can donate a trivial amount and never be hassled again.  At least then people cannot negatively misinterpret DC's position.

Uwe, I'm afraid my attitude is always somewhat harsher than mouser's.  Judging by your original post, you may be angry with the situation but perhaps you should ask yourself a couple of questions: -

Can I find a better alternative without having to do anything at all but download and use it?

Is my use of the software worth more to me than the effort taken to freely register at a site and download a key every six months?

If you are still not satisfied with your responses to the above then walk away.  You have gained nothing, but you have also lost nothing.

In the end, the choice is yours.  Use the software under the specified terms or go and find an alternative.

The unfortunately fact of life is that sites like this are not 'free' to run, developers cannot live on fresh air alone and why should you unquestionably get the benefit of several hundred man hours of development just because you have a need to use a certain type of software?

If someone doesn't want to donate and isn't prepared to significantly contribute to the community (and I'm not saying that you are either), then they have to put a little more effort into ensuring they can use the software available on this site.  Where is the problem with that?  It is 'free' in that there are no limitations, but you will have to occasionally do something to remind you that the people making the software and running this site should be recompensed, if not rewarded.  If you were to calculate an hourly rate for some of the software on this site I'm certain it would be classed as slave labour.
 
Sure, there may be reasons why you cannot donate cash, but mouser is an easy going guy, in my opinion too easy going.  If you contribute significantly to this site he will give you an unlimited key, if you donate a dollar he will give you an unlimited key, if you convince him that you've had a hard life and you are a good person I'm sure he would also give you an unlimited key.

Frankly I believe mouser's current approach is fair, balanced, correct and beneficial for everyone in the community, even if he still isn't convinced.  ;)

54
Best Archive Tool / Re: New Review (09/05/05) - Best Archive Tool
« on: September 07, 2005, 04:55 AM »
Just a quick note on using UPX as a precompressor -- it is not a reversible operation, and as such would not be lossless compression.

UPX in theory should be reversable (giving exactly the same pre-compression binary after using -d to decompress it) as it is one of the few exe compressors which stores a copy of the exe's original relocation table etc.  Of course, although files can often be decompressed back into the same exe, if they are left compressed after unzipping the archive (I'm not entirely sure of how ZipGenius works having never used it) there is a chance the will not work when run in a compressed form.

Here is an example of UPX decompressing properly: -

D:\TEST>copy buildwiz.exe before.exe
D:\TEST\buildwiz.exe => D:\TEST\before.exe
     1 file copied                                                             

D:\TEST>upx --best buildwiz.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002               
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
    462848 ->    126976   27.43%    win32/pe     buildwiz.exe

Packed 1 file.

D:\TEST>upx -d buildwiz.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
    462848 <-    126976   27.43%    win32/pe     buildwiz.exe

Unpacked 1 file.

D:\TEST>md5sum *.exe
b385e22beec3e37250b8ccf7d86e916c *before.exe
b385e22beec3e37250b8ccf7d86e916c *buildwiz.exe


That being said, there is no guarentee that the file will decompress accurately back to the original as UPX works on processing information within the exe (Jibz could tell us a lot more on this) rather than an archiver which will just treat the exe as a raw data file.  From experience it seems that generally only older/simpler exe files decompress back correctly as UPX does seem to mangle, or at least misunderstand, the headers of many newer exes.  This is probably due to it not having been updated in many years (except some dodgy Alphas) so has problems with some of the tweaked formats generated by newer compilers such as Visual Studio 2003 onwards and may even refuse to compress them in some cases unless you force it to.  Here is an example of UPX mangling a newer exe: -

D:\TEST>copy Tsizepro.exe before.exe
D:\TEST\Tsizepro.exe => D:\TEST\before.exe
     1 file copied                                                             

D:\TEST>upx --best Tsizepro.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002               
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
   2338816 ->    841216   35.96%    win32/pe     Tsizepro.exe

Packed 1 file.

D:\TEST>upx -d Tsizepro.exe
                     Ultimate Packer for eXecutables
         Copyright (C) 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002
UPX 1.24w        Markus F.X.J. Oberhumer & Laszlo Molnar         Nov 7th 2002

        File size         Ratio      Format      Name
   --------------------   ------   -----------   -----------
   2338816 <-    841216   35.96%    win32/pe     Tsizepro.exe

Unpacked 1 file.

D:\TEST>md5sum *.exe
fdb6a21d4bf28ac48386e39b231ae6d9 *before.exe
e416ee063fd5f278a1b9391fae658b40 *Tsizepro.exe


I wouldn't risk using this ZipGenius compression option personally, it seems to be a poor kludge to work around compression limitations in the Zip format, and I doubt it gives much real world compression gain as well as potentially mangling some of your executables.  If you are going to make a non-standard format archive (Matteo said they were non-portable) the programmer might as well use a better compression algorithm such as LZMA and not mess around with risking user's executables.

55
Best Archive Tool / Re: New Review (09/05/05) - Best Archive Tool
« on: September 07, 2005, 04:33 AM »
I use rar.exe extensively and can second that RAR has excellent command-line support and even has a few features that the GUI version doesn't.  For example, the rather useful 'L' command for creating listings of archives.


56
Living Room / Re: The Michael Larsen Incident - SO COOL!
« on: September 06, 2005, 01:16 AM »
A very interesting read.  I love the fact that he spent so much time learning a strategy and devising this act but then completely forgot to plan an exit strategy.  Doh!

It's also interesting to note how greed ensured he came unstuck in the end.  Several times in fact.  :-[

57
Best Archive Tool / Re: New Review (09/05/05) - Best Archive Tool
« on: September 06, 2005, 01:11 AM »
Zaine, your review was absolutely stunning.  I feel safe in saying that it is the highest quality and most comprehensive comparative review I have ever read on the Internet (and nearly all of the other good examples are here on DC).

I don't think I have anything to add or disagree with on the review itself as the testing methods, background info, range of products tested and conclusions were all spot on IMHO.

Thanks for the considerable hard work and my thanks also to mouser and Jibz for their input into this monster.

58
General Software Discussion / Interfaces we love
« on: September 04, 2005, 02:51 PM »
To follow on from Zaine's thread here: -

https://www.donation...ndex.php?topic=820.0

I think it would be a good idea to consider what we think is a good interface and a model for software interface design.

I think anything based on the standard Windows GUI API's are perfectly acceptable, but as mentioned in the thread above I also think WinAmp is both beautifully crafted and functional.  Everything is where it should be and it is simple for a first time novice user whilst being powerful for the weathered power user.

I personally think the key to interface design is having something which looks and feels simple on the surface that also meets the most demanding complexities of any given software.

To me, one of the most perfect interfaces I have ever used was 3D Studio 4 in DOS (and I still occassionally use it to this day).  If I can sort out a DOS boot to capture some screen images I'll post them here.  Unfortunately I feel they lost the plot somewhat with the complex and confusing interface with later Windows versions.

59
General Software Discussion / Re: Worst. Interface. Ever.
« on: September 04, 2005, 02:43 PM »
Can I buck the trend and say I really LOVE WinAmp's interface?  I've never been a big fan of skinning, but the default WinAmp 5 skin is attractive, intuitive, functional and a model for other applications to strive for.  In my opinion at least.

Perhaps we should also have an 'Interfaces we love' thread.  ;)

In fact, here it is: https://www.donation...ndex.php?topic=830.0

As for terrible interfaces, as Zaine mentioned earlier, I also hate DivX 6 with a vengeance.  Dr DivX had a functional and understandable interface (though I would far from call it a good one), but 6.0 of any of the DivX products makes me feel like I've been lobotomised.  How do I do anything?

I also hate Microsoft Media Player (it seems media players and creators are often the worst culprits for this).  Frankly the interface it so bad it galls me to actually launch it.  Where am I going?  What am I meant to do?  Why, when I am in full screen does it take forever to get rid of the extra bits of interface clogging up my screen and why does the smallest interaction make it all pop back into view?  Grrrr.  I'm glad I switched to BSPlayer.

60
Living Room / Re: Anyone ever get Lasik eye surgery
« on: September 04, 2005, 02:23 PM »
I'm afraid I've never had it done personally, but talking to a friend who went through the procedure nearly 15 years ago he claims it is the best thing he ever did.  His night vision is fine and has had no ill effects since it was done.  He couldn't see an elephant a metre from his face before that point.  If that isn't a glowing endorsement then I don't know what is.  He did say there was a rather nasty burning smell from the laser singeing his eyeball.

Frankly I'd be pretty freaked out if anyone went near my eyes, let alone with a rather powerful laser.

61
General Software Discussion / Re: Worst. Interface. Ever.
« on: September 03, 2005, 01:51 AM »
I always found Apple QuickTime appallingly bad, especially considering that Apple are meant to be the masters of 'form & function' UI design.  A flat, grey, confusing and ugly mess.

An Apple representative recently tried to give me QuickTime 7 Pro for free and I declined simply because of the interface.  ;D

62
Bonsai and ShadowPlan (my personal choice on Palm) are both outliners, so may well only give you a subset of what you are looking for - Certainly no calendar syncing or the like, and often just the outlines created in the app with just links to the appropriate entries on the handheld, rather than the entries themselves.

If this still meets your needs then the most popular one on PPC tends to be ListPro.  I've used ListPro and it is not bad, though not as good as some of the Palm equivalents.  Never used the PC desktop component for it though so I have no idea how well it may work. 

http://www.iliumsoft.com

63
Outlook.  ;)

Outside of that you will need 3rd party software to sync such as Intellisync or Cadenza (never cheap) and even then they will typically only sync to the bigger Enterprise apps such as Lotus Notes, Groupwise, Act and so forth.  Frankly being forced to use Outlook at home for PPC syncing was one of the reasons I've gone back to using my Palm.

There is a definite missed marketing opportunity here somewhere for some of the smaller organiser developers to integrate their products with ActiveSync...

64
General Software Discussion / Re: Would you pay for WinZip?
« on: August 31, 2005, 12:31 AM »
As far as I'm aware nearly all of the people I've ever met use WinZip because: -

1. It was recommended by somebody else or trial version was bundled with the PC and the user doesn't even know there are alternatives.

2. Because they think it is free (just click away any little popup on entry as though it was never there).  In fact we chose to buy a rather large number of units just to legally cover us against users we know are using WinZip illegally within our Enterprise.

$29 dollars is probably fair if you love the product, and $7 *may* be fair if there are frequent updates and it is just upgrade protection, not software leasing (the ultimate evil!).  I'd rather pay per major upgrade for software like this though.

It is quite likely that this will push a number of users onto other products, but then again most people will stick to the version they have now (I know of people happily using versions back to 3.0 still) and never know about the change in policy, just because that's how the WinZip user base typically are.

I doubt that Vector Capital will lose out though as the system WinZip has been using up to now has given them massive market share but probably not the level of income one might expect.

Oh, and personally I wouldn't use it, even for free.  There is something undefinable about the interface I just don't like, and the Zip format is old and tired - large file support is hardly a cutting edge update.

65
Living Room / Re: ad-free version of Opera,one day only!
« on: August 31, 2005, 12:10 AM »
Yes $39 is a lot when the competition is free.  I'd be pretty annoyed if I'd purchased it over the weekend.  Somebody must have.  :o

66
Living Room / Re: ad-free version of Opera,one day only!
« on: August 30, 2005, 10:20 AM »
For anyone that now has Opera installed, there is some really interesting chat on IRC (which you can do via Opera on /server irc.opera.com Channel: #OperaParty) going on from the CEO and CTO of the company.  You'll need to hurry though as it may be over soon....


67
Living Room / Re: ad-free version of Opera,one day only!
« on: August 30, 2005, 09:20 AM »
Stefan, I feel you have the right approach as I still have no reply back from my mails.

I do however have a nice new shiny licence key from the Opera Party key generator that went online at about 3:20 CET.  Although, I wont comment on some of the 'interesting' side effects that were present during the first couple of minutes.  ;)

Thanks Opera!  Despite a few short-comings with your browser in the past, I'm poised to resume my relationship with your product.

For anyone who has never tried or even heard of Opera, now would be an ideal time to experience one of the most mature and well respected browsers on the market.  The only reason why Opera has never been as hyped as Firefox is down to price, and if you act quickly today, that will no longer be an issue.

68
General Software Discussion / Re: Favorite ZIP/RAR application?
« on: August 30, 2005, 01:33 AM »
The only 7z issues I have heard is that it is relatively slow and memory intensive compared to other formats,  though arguably these are more LZMA features rather than container issues.

I guess the fact that the 7-Zip app (and therefore the format) is still in beta and is relatively immature compared to the competition, with quite a few bugs still being fixed may also play a part.


69
I've been looking for the ideal note taking app since forever (I need sleek and simple but I'm picky about how simple), so I think I'll check this out.

One of the big downsides I tend to have with these combined todo manager/calendar/note databases is that they never seem to integrate very well with anything else.  I can either not use the calendar/todo stuff at all which seems a waste of my money and RAM, or not integrate it with my Palm or PPC which means I'll start missing stuff one way or another.

As for names I think I'd call my organiser 'Virtual Nagging Wife' or WTF? (What's in The Future?).  I don't think there is another type of software with such stupid naming potential.

Oh Mouser, I'm sure there is still plenty of time to change DC's name to something of such universally high quality comedic value.  ;)

70
Living Room / Re: ad-free version of Opera,one day only!
« on: August 30, 2005, 12:40 AM »
Wow, an amazing find!  Thanks tinyvillager.

Just have to wait another 20 minutes for 12:00am PDT and I'm firing a message off....  ;)

Edit: OK, the message was sent and by the look of it, it isn't an automated system so may take a while to get any key through.  I'd hate to be the person on the receiving end of all of those mails.

71
Living Room / Re: A thank you page for our donators.. Link Inside
« on: August 27, 2005, 02:58 PM »
We never got a yearbook in my country, so it is a privilege to finally be allowed my limited creativity.  ;)

I'm definitely looking forward to many more quotes.

72
Best Firewall / Re: Sygate - Very Strong Firewall
« on: August 26, 2005, 01:02 PM »
Carol, I agree with you completely.  In fact, I intended to write a short response to this thread which somehow ended up being several pages in length with my frustrations towards Symantec as an end user.  Thinking it through, it made an ideal Column piece to vent my frustrations though - So that is exactly what I intend to do in place of my planned piece.

For better or worse, here is the link to the relevant article: -

https://www.donation...e_symantec.html#more

Good luck and best wishes Sygate Firewall users.  It was an excellent product and I hope it remains that way.

73
Living Room / Re: A thank you page for our donators.. Link Inside
« on: August 26, 2005, 11:26 AM »
Hey, pretty nifty stuff mouser!  Now time to think of a good quote...

74
Best Firewall / Re: Sygate - Very Strong Firewall
« on: August 25, 2005, 05:12 PM »
With the recent buyout of Sygate by Symantec, I doubt the future for Sygate Personal Firewall Pro is very certain.  Or at least not in its current form.  Symantec will most likely be after Sygate's Enterprise solutions and anything that doesn't fit with this model is likely to either be discontinued or dumbed down and included in some kind of consumer targetted 'Security Suite'.

Only time will tell if I'm right or not...

75
General Software Discussion / Re: Favorite ZIP/RAR application?
« on: August 25, 2005, 04:21 PM »
I've been using RAR since forever, but 7-Zip has been getting so good since version 4.X I'm pretty certain that as soon as they add Reed-Solomon archive recovery and split archives I'm likely to switch completely.

As for the competition, ease of use is all well and good, but give me high compression any day of the week.  ;)

Pages: prev1 2 [3] 4 5next