General Opus 9 news
- The Opus 9 manual in PDF format is available to download now to let people read it ahead of Friday's release:
- Greg @ GPSoft mentioned that there will be more features added in free updates after 9.0, for things that required large changes that there wasn't time for in the end (given that people need a Vista-compatible update yesterday already):
I dont know if this is already answered somewehere else but this is the official dopus 9 topic so:
Is the copy queue implemented in the new version ?
No. We had this on the list but it involves a very deep fundamental design change so it did not make this version.
We have to draw the line somewhere with new versions and the Vista changes et al caused several delays.
But it and several other advanced features are planned for the next update in a few months (which currently is planned to be a maintenance 'update' not an upgrade and hence free of charge.)
- There's a new German translation of my Opus 9 intro (translated by Haage & Partner, GPSoft's distributors in Germany):
Shout if I've missed something that needs a reply!
Q: is the licence bundled with hardware related properties
like drive number of the file system or like this?
Or enables this USB-licence just the possibility to store the settings into the xml file?
I'm still under NDA about Opus 9 and I'm not sure how much GPSoft would want me to say about how the licencing/copy protection stuff works but what I can say is that GPSoft have erred on the side of "not making life hell for paying customers" rather than "doing everything possible to thwart pirates". There's nothing to worry about in this area.
: If DOpus is Godzilla then XYplorer is T. Rex — it always depends what suits you best for your current task.
As we've seen, though, the memory usage of the two programs is very similar and nobody so far has mentioned a way in which Opus is slower than XY.
If it's significant that Opus uses a few meg more of HDD space then I must be living in a different era of computing to everyone else.
Otherwise, I don't get the analogy. Which isn't to say that the two programs don't have their own unique strengths and weaknesses, I just don't see how Opus have a heavier footprint, beyond a few meg of disk space that nobody cares about in 2007.
but if I want something to stay in an archive an extended amount of time on my hard drive then I use the far more robust RAR format
The problem with RAR is that RARLabs do not licence the format, or a library, or the ability the call into WinRAR (if it's installed) via any kind of API. The only API they give anyone is unrar.dll which is what Opus already uses for read-only RAR support.
I believe TC creates RAR archives by calling WinRAR on the command-line and I'm thinking about writing an Opus plugin which works in the same way. Seems a giant pain in the arse, though, and I wish RARLabs would be more sensible about licensing their format/algorithm/API for use in other tools instead of the idea that anyone who wants to create a RAR should be forced to use WinRAR or FAR. :-( (WinRAR is fine by itself but the idea that you shouldn't be able to create a RAR in anything else is just silly.)
If there was a proper RAR API available to licence then Opus would already have read/write RAR support. I'm not really looking forward to the fun of generating command-lines and parsing the text output of another program, plus the potential issues with Unicode filenames etc., but if nobody else is going to write the plugin then I guess I'll have to. :-(
7zip etc. are still so rarely used that it doesn't seem a big deal to me that you can't browse them in Opus but, as I've said, I'll look at writing a 7zip plugin myself during my sabbatical from my day-job if nobody has written one by then. (A couple of people started writing plugins but haven't finished them yet.) Since 7zip provide a proper library it will be easy to make a read-write plugin.