avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • October 23, 2019, 04:06 PM
  • Proudly celebrating 13 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 - doublewitt [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 2 3 [4]
InstantBoss: there's no better boss in town...! :Thmbsup:
Thank you so much for this wonderful app.

Hi doublewitt,

You might find do-Organizer not suitable to be classified as "Bloatware" or "Fatware" due to its application nature or your personal feel, however, that is not an appropriate reason to deny the fact that some "Bloatware" or "Fatware" do exist in the market.

Widen the scope or adding features/functions of an application from its initial objective does brings side effects, generally speaking it:
1) Cuts down performance or raises hardware requirements
2) Makes documenting more difficult - harder for newcomers to master
3) Lifts the price of the application - those who need only few features will feel not worth it.

In fact, from a software developer point of view, increase in #features or raise in hardware requirements is something inevitable along the evolution of an application, however, blindly/simply adds whatever requested by users is not always a SMART idea.

As a user, if A and B are 2 software which offer the same set of functions at the same price and both do well in what they have to offer except that A does everything more slowly than B, which one do you prefer? This is corresponding to 1) above
If A offers just the set of functions which you need at a lower price than B which has more to offer (which you don't need), which one do you choose? See 3)

IMHO, whether a software is "BLOAT" or a fatty, it all depends... it is more personal feel than an objective issue.

I understand your point of view and yet, I'm not basing my claim uniquely on do-Organizer. Personally, I've found that when I load and run programs that seem to have too much - as per critics, I actually don't really see a difference in "performance" in my system. I don't see where the concern is with the systems we have today... If the added features are not all running at the same time, why should it affect performance...?

Perhaps a software will satisfy you today with it's underpriveleged feature set, but what about tomorrow...? Maybe your needs will change in one year or 2 - what then? buy a new program or harass the developer for new features to accomodate your evolved needs?

In one or two years down the road, I will be happy to see they "already" included features that NOW I need. Why purchase a "limited" feature set today and have to continually make changes? Why not have a little bit of foresight...? Why not anticipate changes? Personally, my computing needs are always CHANGING...

Haven't you noticed that computer users are evolving too...? Does everything have to be so ridiculously easy...?
Kids are riding on computers like pros in elementary school - since our world and schooling today is so computer-oriented. It's odd somehow that so much emphasis is on ease of use. Where is the element of challenge in learning? It seems (to me) that people are a little bit lazy...

You might think I'm strange, but what does "price" have to do with it...? If I'm satisfied with a program that produces a complete set of features, and it meets all my requirements, I don't mind to pay $10 - $20 - $30 - or more for the added conveniance... Difference in prices is really not a major issue (for me). If you are saving a few hundred dollars then that would be different... In general, we are talking about a very normal "price range". Ofcourse, you have those little "penny pinchers" who'll jump from a bridge just to save $5.00 People seldom realize as they purchase blindly that their needs change and you don't necessarily have a guarantee from the software producer that they will yield updates often enough. And you don't have a guarantee that they will include your suggestion. Now what? Move on and find another application...? More money...? There is a big problem nowadays getting updates once a year. How many years will you have to wait for your needs to be met...? Good luck...
The problem is we are buying according to today's needs only (an immediate issue) and we close our eyes and understanding about tomorrow... that's a blind purchase.

If you want to run 10 - 15 or 20 applications at the same time, where are you at with performance and hardware requirements...?

Fortunately, the computer age is always evolving... Software developers deserve the tiny little "raised" price. Afterall, they work hard enough for it - can't you see?

Ofcourse, that's just my point of view, nobody has to agree with me. But that's the way I see the affair - and yes, I wasted lots of money running after needed features...
No more will I do that...!


With today's computer systems, is "bloatware" really anything to be concerned about...?
It seems to me that the term should be erased from our thoughts...
What's the point...?
Are we trying to set up "LIMITS" in the software development industry...?
There are no "LIMITS" in hardware developments and so why should there be any in the software world...?
With today's system resources and memory capabilities, why state the case...?
Personally, I encourage development - the more the better.
Classing do-Organizer v2.3 as bloatware is just nonsense to me.
You will rarely find a program with an elegant and appealing interface like do-Organizer.
Actually, do-Organizer is alone in it's class - and very unique and includes loads of customization options. Can't you see...? You can add loads more and I'll never consider it as bloatware - and that for any other program.
Have you ever thoroughly researched the meaning of "bloatware"...?
It's a thing of the past. It is no longer "relevant" with today's development standards or trends.

I'm a little bit "weary" of people pushing this attitude about bloatware.
Yeah, I'm sort of "ANTI-BLOATWARE" ...
I think we are seriously "hindering" healthy developments in the software industry.

You have to always keep in mind that there are perhaps millions using a software with hundreds of different usages and needs - and so what would be perhaps useless to one can be important to another as our needs vary... and so because many say "I don't need that" in the discussed software, then I'm faced with a serious problem - because the discussed software developer will not "include" an option I desparately need for fear of being criticized as promoting bloatware. In reality, we are hindering one another with our multiple opinions and criticisms.

Why "bloat" your computer with 300 programs eating and chewing resources and memory... when 1 or 2 or 3 can do the job well enough...? Why confront 300 forums + 300 updates + 300 X 300 software issues and reports when you can limit that adventure to something more normal...? A bookmark manager for 300 websites + 300 passwords + 300 notes for each and so on... are we nearing insanity...!? With all that running in your system - you're worried about 1 program that can do it all. And you have to include a launcher for 300+ programs. Where are we at...? The task has become so tedious and ridiculous. Not to mention 300+ searches on the www for all of these and including all the headaches to gather all that information. Are we bloating our minds...? Out of 300 software developments, you have to "harass" the developer for upgrades and help X 300 times and how many times a year and 250 of them rarely make the updates available and - do you realize what you have gotten yourself into now...?
Is that a solution...?

Don't forget about the 300 X 300 downloads including updates and fixes. We are tackling all of this when our systems today can handle the 1 program that nearly does everything for you (ofcourse, that's for the average user). And you invested 300 X 300 hours of your precious time for all that and you overlooked the simple solution...! You haven't sweated enough yet...!?

How about the fabulous software producer that initially takes his program and splits it up to 10 different softwares...? (NO BLOATWARE PLEASE) You have to download 10 times more and run 10 programs instead of 1 - where is the logic to that...? What about business strategies involved there...? Do you think that the software splitter wants you to buy just 1 of his creations...? Ofcourse not, so now what happens...? He cleverly splits or spreads the features in all 10 and guess what...? You have to buy at least 6 of them to get the features you need - isn't that cute...? 6 different prices instead of one.. What a joke...! Isn't the process of multiplication handy now...!? Ofcourse he justifies the price which is high enough and aggressive by claiming exclusive software performance with nearly to none features (isn't that popular?). Each lovely little feature priced the same as an entire application... fancy business...! Are you so blind that you don't see the business strategy here...?!!!? Oh my, 10 different software creations maximizing "exposure" and "traffic" to his website...? (Multiplication) 1 + 1 = 2; 5 X 5 = 25...  If it's not a business strategy - it's just for fun (hee, hee). There's more to tell, ofcourse, don't close your eyes now!

Why not CONSOLIDATE everything in one place - that promotes simplicity and peace of mind.
1 forum - 1 developer - 1 website - and choose amongst the competitors...

1 software for all the "different" forms of notes ranging from text notes, to contact notes,  and including password notes, journal notes, calendar notes, bookmark notes, task notes, email notes, and every other form of "NOTES" we generally see today. Have we abandoned the concept of consolidating...? If so, then we are bound by unlimited complications. You consolidate or you complicate - that's the general rule. It's simple enough...
Let's get back to the basics - enough with the wild goose chase...

Of all the people I know, there isn't one that searches for a "simple" notes arranger as stated in this thread. And so I really don't understand the underlying purpose here. What's the point...? Are you trying to promote "SIMPLEWARE" with today's technology standards? - it makes no sense. The focus is more on PIMS (Organizers) since they, usually, manage almost all the common forms of notes confronted by the "general" user today. If you want to go the SIMPLEWARE way, then there is thousands of them waiting for you with websites, forums, downloads, updates and everything else to drive you crazy! Are you trying to spread or dissect "your information" into 20 different applications...? How can you be organized and where is your focus - especially when you are dealing with a big volume of information?! Are you going to stop and start all of these every 2 minutes or RUN them all at the same time...? Why put up with SIMPLEWARE when we have technology...? Why use a wheelchair when you can walk...?

How is it you don't understand the IMPORTANCE of CONSOLIDATING all your information in one place...?!!!
Can't you see that maximizes EFFICIENCY...?!!! If you are trying to convince me to start/stop 20 or more programs to do what only one can do or should do - you're wasting your time... Why complicate and run 20 when you can SIMPLY run 1...? - isn't that more logical? Isn't that a more SIMPLE solution...? I leave do-Organizer ON all day as it meets ALL my needs. And I'm looking forward to more developments in compliance with current technology issues.

And you wonder why I'm against the BLOATWARE affair...!?

The bloatware issue developed way, way back in the early years where the computer age first began.
Stop riding on a tyranasaurus rex! Re-fresh your mind.

To me, "bloatware" doesn't exist anymore - it's just a fantasy (obsession) in your mind.
The idea of having "too many features" is literal stupidity (with today's technology).
Please forgive me if I sound offensive there - sincerely, it's not my intention.

Afterall, if you disagree, well, there's nothing I can do about that.
That's your point of view,
but this is mine...

do-Organize it! :Thmbsup:

One of many articles I've found:

Pages: prev1 2 3 [4]