avatar image

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

Login with username, password and session length
  • Wednesday October 4, 2023, 5:25 am
  • 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 - Armando [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 109next
it has the potential to defeat one of my earlier objectives, which was that the tags needed to be simple/easy for the users to understand and use.

Yes, it's somewhat abstruse. It was the goal though : I wanted something for me, not for "others"; and as I think I said elsewhere: for tags to not be mixed up with other terms, you need to codify them; otherwise, using a search engine will return all the other stuff you never tagged.

By the way, it's probably not surprising that the reasons you described in that old thread, for using filenames, are almost the same as those that I gave. If it's a common problem in a common OS, with common constraints to a solution, then - given the nature of filenames - the solutions are probably going to be few in number and closely similar.

Probably, but analysis I've seen are often not that systematic... :)

Hi IainB,
I generously described the method I use there .
IMO, delimiters are fundamental if you want to have tags in file names and some flexibility -- e.g. modifying tags in batch -- or any part of the file name -- without ruining your file names.
I actually use several types of delimiters and use regex and software like Renamer to batch modify file names. Geeky, but works well.
(BTW, the reasons I described back then -- numbered and all... -- for using filenames are almost the same as yours!  ;D )

Interesting you ask! I have abandoned my quest a long time ago, but I just googled tag2find, etc. and found this

It's open source -- a great thing for that type of software...

The funny thing is that it implements the same solution I implemented myself 8-9 years ago. Basically, to avoid compatibility problems, writing the tags directly in the file names, using specific tag delimiters, etc. I described my method somewhere on DC. (Wonder if someone in their team read my description of if they just reached the same conclusions after an analysis of the situation.)

After at least 8-9 years tagging my files this way, I'm still finding it convenient. Using it every single day. People laugh when they see my file names, but I smile... they don't realize that I can group files on "any" subject (or combinations of subjects) in just a few seconds... in any OS or file system.

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: August 13, 2016, 11:02 AM »
Cool! Thanks  :)

Interesting open source project led by the University of Warwick. Its aim is to help users keep track of where information about them is stored online so that they can actually -- personally -- benefit from it. An important issue; whether this is a viable solution or not is another one...   :)

[...] a marketing professor at the University of Warwick who led RUMPEL's development, said: "It's time for people to claim their data from the internet."

"The aim of RUMPEL is to empower users and enable them to be served by the ocean of data about them that's stored in all kinds of places online, so that it benefits them and not just the businesses and organisations that harvest it," she added.

"The strapline 'Your Data, Your Way' reflects our determination to let people lead smarter lives by bringing their digital lives back under their own control."

TechRadar article : New web browser lets you take back control of your personal data

And the GitHub RUMPEL project.

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: July 29, 2016, 02:24 PM »
The only "issue" I have seen is that running it from the command line it seems to want you to put the http:// stuff in.  Most browsers these days if you just type it brings it up.

Good point. This could certainly be mentioned too.  :)

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: July 28, 2016, 10:28 PM »
But did you run across a key bypass?

I didn't think about that, good idea.
I'm sure you could bring it up as a suggestions in the issues. The developer is pretty responsive.

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: July 26, 2016, 02:42 PM »
A screenshot with "FireFox". Makes me sad. It's "Firefox".

I'll Gimp it in my spare time.  :)

Mini-Reviews by Members / Re: BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: July 26, 2016, 02:41 PM »
Interesting! Thanks Tom.

Mini-Reviews by Members / BrowserSelect - mini mini review.
« on: July 25, 2016, 12:47 PM »
Since I haven't been around a lot lately, I'll use the reviewing form mostly for fun...  The app is so simple, I could just point you towards the snapfiles review and the GitHub link! :)

Basic Info

App NameBrowserSelect
App Version Reviewedv1.3.1
Test System SpecsWindows 8.1
Supported OSeswindows 7, windows 8.1 and windows 10
Support Methodsmessages through
Pricing SchemeFree and open-source (GPL v2)

Relationship btwn. Reviewer and Product No relationship whatsoever


Was just looking for a way to be able to quickly choose the most appropriate browser to open specific links, depending on the need, without having to : 1-run it/them first, 2-copy and paste the link in it/them, etc. Could be for programming/test purposes, split connections  (some VPNs offers the possibility to split your connection and you might then want to use different browsers for different connections), job vs home usage, etc.

BrowserSelect is the only app I found simply fitting the bill (and a bit more). It basically becomes your "default browser", intercepts and redirects the calls to the best browser for the task at hand.

Screenshot - 2016-07-25 , 13_50_52.png

Screenshot - 2016-07-25 , 13_34_52.png

Who is this app designed for:

Anybody who works with several browsers and who wants to be able to choose in which one different links should open.

The coder's explanations are straightforward:

"Browser Select is a utility to dynamically select the browser you want instead of just having one default for all links. similar to the prompt in android to choose a browser when a link in a non-browser app is clicked/touched. it may not be useful for everyone but it really helps when you use multiple browsers for different things (e.g. one with proxy and one without) and open many links from other applications (e.g. Messengers).

instead of having to copy the link , open desired (non-default) browser than pasting , all you need to do is to click on the link and this prompt will open allowing you to choose the browser you want. it automatically detects installed browsers , and has no need for administrative rights it can be installed and works in a restricted user.

you may click on the desired browser or press one of the shortcuts (its index or first letter of its name) , for example for chrome you can press 2 , g or c. you may also press Esc (or click the X) to not open the url."

The programmer doesn't describe that the newer versions allow the user to easily create rules to automatically open specific links in specific browsers. You can either create them on the fly by clicking on the "Always" button when the interface shows up (see screenshot), or you can create/type them yourself, using domain names and more sophisticated wildcard pattern matching (see 2nd screenshot).

The Good

Works as advertised. Easy to select what browser to use to open a link (... after clicking on such a link or after typing one in Find and Run Robot, for example, etc.) : use your mouse, or use keyboard shortcuts.

I also like the fact that it allows you to create rules to open specific links in specific browsers.

The needs improvement section

Everything's fine. It does what I need, and more.

*If using URLs files, users might have 1- to remove other browsers associations with URLs in "default programs" (control panel) 2-and right click on a URL to be able to enter the properties dialog and select "Opens with" (BrowserSelect, of course).

Why I think you should use this product

Because, like me, you don't rely on just one browser and you want to have the freedom to super easily open links in the one you prefer, depending on the task. Useful if you're testing web pages, using a proxy, a VPN, etc.

How does it compare to similar apps and Conclusion

Tried another similar app and it didn't work well at all. Tried BrowserSelect and it worked almost** instantly.

** Had a small issue with URLs stubbornly opening in one browser, but the fix was easy. See above.

Links to other reviews of this application


Thanks for the info! Looks interesting.

I don't use Archivarius, but it is most likely more than enough just for finding text in a large number of files.

dtSearch is probably more flexible, with advanced indexing and search options and an index manager that lets you define multiple indexes according to how your data is stored, combine multiple indexes into libraries and search across them.  In addition to boolean searches, it allows for word stemming, phonics and fuzzy searches, and can use a thesaurus to include synonyms in searches.  It also displays pdf files using a reader plug-in and can even highlight found words inside pdfs if you use the Adobe Reader plug-in.

Archivarius allows multiple indexes too, with various configurations, etc.


If your file type is supported, dtSearch is generally better for detailed or complex search as it supports regex.

That said, Archivarius has its strengths too (e.g. more supported file types, treatment of hyphens etc. is more intuitive or elegant, etc.) and I use it to double check certain things when I'm not sure dtSearch is getting everything it should.

Comparing the features list is a must.

Find And Run Robot / Re: Black tray menu
« on: October 20, 2015, 10:37 PM »
That was it, mouser. It had to do with the skin option.

Actually, the "use fancy skinned display" option was checked, but somewhere along the way, the skin in the drop down got unselected (it was empty).

When I reselected a skin (slenderFarr), the tray menu appeared normally again.  :up:

Find And Run Robot / Re: Black tray menu
« on: October 15, 2015, 11:47 AM »
FARR is the only application with a problematic tray menu.

If it's only FARR with this problem, maybe the skin you have set for farr or custom colors?
check the "Advanced Visuals" option in far and uncheck any custom stuff.

Thanks, I'll try that and report.

especially concerning the Ctrl+Shift+arrows (left-right) for selecting. Thanks!

Find And Run Robot / Black tray menu
« on: October 14, 2015, 11:59 AM »
Hi mouser,

The tray menu here has been black for a long time. Years, probably. It seems like I'm the only one (?), but I wonder why. Driver issues, maybe, but on my computer, FARR is the only application with a problematic tray menu.

Screenshot - 2015-10-14 , 12_53_37.png

When I hover over the menu, the various entries appear/disappear.
The menu is still usable.

Seems good to me.
For "Morphology" I have English and French.
For the encoding, it's similar to your screenshots, bit with event less checked options.
All inheritance settings are checked.

I really wonder why accented letters are causing problems in your case.

I have made the test explained here :

And it is a complete failure for Archivarius. Here is the updated spreadsheet with Archivarius results:

My conclusion: it seems that Archivarius is not suitable for people who use accented characters
Or perhaps I have missed something ?

Don't know what to say except that I mostly speak French and hence use accented characters. Archivarius has always performed quick and found almost everything I need.

Maybe you haven't set up the encoding or morphology properly in the program settings?

My own Stats

Files : 494 870
Words : 11 395 416
Size of files : 192.54 GB
Size of text : 21.79 GB
Size of index : 8.55 GB

DT Search:
Files : 68 226
Words:  8 554 465
Data size (size of text) : 3.8 GB
Size of Index: 2.6 GB

Both have big indexes, but Archivarius doesn't seem outrageously huge here. It's actually smaller than DTSearch, proportionally speaking. I can't compare with X1 as it's long gone because of severe problems described earlier. I can't use a "desktop search " software that imposes strange limits on the document length it will index. I don't know if those limits still exist, but they've been there for quite a while.

[Edit : you'll notice that here the Archivarius index is about 22.5 times smaller than the file size, but only 2.55 times smaller than the actual text size. If the numbers you gave are only an estimate, the estimate might be off the mark, unless the text size is about the same as the file size (4110 GB) you gave.]

I found that for most day to day code work, it's pretty straight forward (committing stuff, creating branches, merging branches, rebasing, stashing, squashing, blaming, etc.). Especially with a nice gui. But then, I didn't use the more advanced functions that much.

I don't think I'd change my versioning system if I was already using Mercurial, unless I was going to work with people using Git (which means: a lot of programmers). If I was free to choose though, I'd probably choose Git again.  :)  I like it and SmartGit/Hg makes it a breeze to use. But that's not answering your question.

Since I haven't been looking for comparisons in the last couple years, I googled a bit and the trend is definitely gitty. Probably because of GitHub, but there are also other technical (and historical) reasons that are probably not that meaningful anymore these days, from a usability perspective (i.e. reasons that don't translate into real technical advantages -- Mercurial and Git constantly improve and play "catch up"). If anything, Git seems here to stay, and Mercurial doesn't seem to be gaining much popularity, despite its facebook adoption.

Anyway, I could post many links, but I didn't find any long, interesting, in depth, technical or "sociological" comparison. I'm Curious if anyone will find anything great from late 2014 or 2015.

I guess the question is now mostly "what do you need for that specific job". Are you dissatisfied with Mercurial?

[...] on the clipboard tab you can also increase the frequency of automatic clipboard chain re-establishment.

I've set the frequency to 1 min. Anything I should worry about? It doesn't seem to have any adverse effect (CPU is at 0%, memory is stable... clipboard works well.)

In any case : haven't lost one clip today!  8)

Good luck gt13013! I found that I need to combine a few engines to get the best results. Repeating myself, but using a combination of Archivarius, DTSearch and Everything (when only file names are involved.) AFAICT, Archivarius and DTSearch don't miss any files -- unless their format isn't supported. Plus, they can index bigger files than X1 can.

Thanks mouser. Downloaded and installed : seems to work well and I find that the new options are well and clearly implemented. Will keep you posted.
(CHS is a really complete clipboard management/enhancer!)

Thanks Tomos. Yes, windows 8.1.  I must say I've always found the clipboard chain with any clipboard manager and any windows version to be kind of fragile... But it could be linked to Windows 8.1 underlying clipboard system. No idea.
That said, I can't really go back to anything else and it wouldn't be worth it just... for the clipboard.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 109next