Messages - michaelkenward [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: prev1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9next
26
General Software Discussion / Re: What's your preferred File Manager
« on: February 01, 2014, 09:50 AM »
It's one of the most powerful programs you will ever use, but it can also be one of the most complicated you'll ever use as well. Those who master its secrets will never fear a file management task ever again, but the journey can be a difficult one.

This seems to go with the territory. Powerful software equals complicated.

When I moved from Power Desk, when it became abandonware, I switched to Directory Opus, the most used file manager here, after Explorer. Some years on, the more I use it the less I know.

I suspect that the best guide to these packages is the support that you can get, and the manuals they offer. Directory Opus comes with a manual written by the experts for the experts. So it is not newcomer friendly. But it does have a reactive support forum that does not poor scorn on dumb questions.

Were I seeking a file manager, I would look at support, and the price of course, including frequency and cost of updates, rather than the power under the hood. My guess is that they all steal from one another on the front. If one does something neat, the others will follow.




27
ClipMate is unarguably an amazing program -- only reason I even look at other things is the size and importability of CM.  It goes so far beyond the call of duty for a clipboard extender, it would probably be better referred to as a data management solution with Clip Board monitoring support ;)

ClipMate also seems to be on its last legs. No updates in quite some time. The Forum is dead – probably to fend off complaints about its lack of development. The developer has gone to earth.

Which is why I am looking for an alternative.  If Clipboard Help+Spell can handle the bits that I use, then I am on board.

But how do I transfer all those bits and pieces from ClipMate? Could take time.

28
Another UK user here, with mostly the same complaints. Crap database, especially for classical music, and not even a user friendly interface.

But my biggest beef is the way in which they introduced the new model. I paid for an upgrade a couple of months back, I am supposed to have access to the new model for six months. But apart from the fact that they didn't warn me that within months of one new version they would they would move the goalposts a few miles, they have hidden the access to this new versions so well that I can't find it, even after I was told where to look. A simple screen grab with an arrow to the button I am supposed to see would help.

There was also this puzzling invitation – almost an order – to sign up for some on-line service thingy. There was no clue as to what this was about, certainly no explanation that it was a prelude to imposing a new business model on the world. Maybe there is a confusion with my access because, not knowing what the heck was going on, I used a different email address from the one I use to make purchases.

Worse than this is the contempt with which they seem to hold customers. It really isn't a good idea to insult people who have paid for your product and then come along and ask simple questions. (Not me, other people.)

If a customer doesn't understand something, don't blame them, ask yourself if you might just have got things wrong and explained stuff poorly.

I am now looking for an alternative, but I need one that can import my large database of recordings, not something that has ever been easy with Collectorz software.

29
I'm now using Agent Ransack and it does indeed find text buried deep within documents - and it does it rather fast, too.
Agent Ransack is another non-indexed search tool.

software that has to create an index, robbing a computer of resources by having a service running in the background that often at inconvenient times start to do its indexing.

That was much more valid as a criticism in the days of slow PCs with limited memory and small hard drives. But that world is long gone for most of us.

The thought of running individual searches when I want to find something in the 174,071 PDF files on my PC is just too horrible to contemplate. I barely notice any effect of my indexing software (X1) on this 64-bit PC with 8GB of memory and a 256-GB solid state drive. (The data is on a regular HDD.)

Of course, using on-the-fly searching means that when you do want to find something, all that disk thrashing and chasing all over the place will drain the PC's resources, far more so than the limited disk activity that is involved in indexed searches.

With resources no longer a real issue for anyone with a half decent PC, the choice between indexed and non-indexed searching depends on what you want to do. For example, non-indexed searchers can't work with most email software, especially something like Outlook. So you either have to go for indexed or use the software itself. Going for indexed means that the same software can look at email and files at the same time. I can even tell X1 to look for things in in email and files at the same time.






30
The title of this now very old poll may be misleading, but if you look at the options you will see that it is about desktop "index and search software". In other words software that maintains a database of your data and uses that when you want to find something.

Ultra FileSearch "does not use background Indexing". It finds things "on the fly". It is not, therefore, comparable with the programs in the poll. It is a different beast.

Anyone whose task is to "find documents based on specific text contained in them and by selecting the drive and specifying the text" will almost certainly find that index and search software, any index and search software, will be quicker and more efficient than on-the-fly search and find software.

Pages: prev1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9next
Go to full version