Other Software > Announce Your Software/Service/Product

Remove duplicate files, folders and archives - DupeTrasher 2009

<< < (7/8) > >>

AsmDev:
Hi clmcveigh,

Yes I noticed a 30% order and I could link your name to your nick here. Thanks!

As for default search locations, you are right there are only hard drives set for search by default, but that is not a problem to update with other locations for the next version. I just didn't have any complains so far about it as users usually search only the hard drives. On the other hand it is also really easy to add any other location just by "drag and drop" (in the custom search mode).

Anyway, I am putting this on the TODO list so let me ask you a question regarding this: would you suggest that all available drives should be checked for the search by default?
This question applies for the "One click search" feature too, do you think all drives should be included or just leave it as it is now (only fixed drives)?
Note that network drives could make the whole process much much slower so this might annoy new user on the first impression.

It sure did find the dups on my hard-drive in no time flat. Will have to spend time learning how best to use all this program's functionality.

--- End quote ---

Well, I was trying to implement "don't make me think" approach for the users as much as possible, so hopefully you wont have to spend much time on learning but rather just "use it". :) I personally hate to learn how to use any "small" software. Once installed, I'd just like to do "less thinking and more doing" in order to get my job done.

Thanks

AsmDev:
When I first read about DupeTrasher, I swore not to try it! The reason is very simple and can be illustrated with a little screenshot from my True_Launchbar:
 (see attachment in previous post)
- and, yes, they are all fully licensed $hareware programs - edit except for the 'Nuker.

But why do I keep on purchasing this kind of programs? In fact, I didn't quite know the answer myself until I read patteo's post (Reply #18). What I am missing is speed (and ease) in the USE of the program (ANY program)! I acknowledge that DupeTrasher is a very fast scanner, but the examples given by patteo goes to show how to make the final result come out even faster yet.

Personally I have no idea how to write "genuine" command-line parameters, so I am bound to also ask for pre-written examples. As an example, if AsmDev is reading this and maybe even will try out the free Quizo QTTabbar with Vista's Explorer, then Vista+Quizo makes me able to add simple arguments like %f% and such (see next screenshot) to a shortcut to any program. I am however not convinced that these arguments are universal accepted.(?) At least, I think I have seen others use quite different arguments.
 (see attachment in previous post)

-Curt (September 27, 2009, 05:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

Hi Curt,

I will definitely try that software you suggested in order to gain more insight into problems you have. I think I will be able to develop some solution that will enable guys like patteo and you to automate common tasks and get the complex job done in a 2-3 clicks.

It would be helpful if you could tell me how common scenarios that you want to automate look like. For example, do you have a folder with master duplicates that you regularly compare against some other folders and want to remove files from them which are found in master folder?
Or when you plug in your USB flash would you like to have it compared against files you already have on your hard drive?

These two are just from the top of my head of what common scenarios people have when they want to get rid of dupes quickly.

mwb1100:
As for default search locations, you are right there are only hard drives set for search by default, but that is not a problem to update with other locations for the next version. I just didn't have any complains so far about it as users usually search only the hard drives. On the other hand it is also really easy to add any other location just by "drag and drop" (in the custom search mode).

Anyway, I am putting this on the TODO list so let me ask you a question regarding this: would you suggest that all available drives should be checked for the search by default?
This question applies for the "One click search" feature too, do you think all drives should be included or just leave it as it is now (only fixed drives)?
-AsmDev (September 28, 2009, 01:09 PM)
--- End quote ---

My own vote on this is to make mapped drives available in any interface that lets you select drives, but they shouldn't be slected by default (though they should probably remember any previous selection).

I haven't tried yet, but the tool should also accept UNC paths ("\\server\share\etc") if the user types them in or navigates to them in a folder selection dialog (by way of  something like Network Neighborhood or drag-n-drop).

clmcveigh:
My own vote on this is to make mapped drives available in any interface that lets you select drives, but they shouldn't be slected by default (though they should probably remember any previous selection).
-mwb1100 (September 28, 2009, 01:40 PM)
--- End quote ---

I concur. Just would like them available on the list to checkmark or not, as desired. I have three systems and 7 hard drives mapped.  I'd like to choose, as needed.  I would never run a compare against all drives, I don't have enough years left in my life to await that report :-)

clmcveigh:
Well, I was trying to implement "don't make me think" approach for the users as much as possible, so hopefully you wont have to spend much time on learning but rather just "use it". :) I personally hate to learn how to use any "small" software. Once installed, I'd just like to do "less thinking and more doing" in order to get my job done.
--- End quote ---

I just love a programmer who thinks like you do!  It's not only the "small" software package writers that drive me crazy with their lack of intuitiveness, or standards.  WinFaxPro has a terrible, terrible interface, and it's taken me the better part of a day to send one fax.  Blak.

What I really, really love about your app is that I can see it clearly now  (hummmm) on my 1600x1200 res monitor.  No bug-eye glasses, or magnifying glasses needed.  I wish everyone who writes programs knew what you know about how to make screens/menus work on all resolutions.

Good job, AsmDev.... in case that didn't come across earlier.

Thanks,
Cheryl

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page