Author Topic: Best Text Expander software for Windows (Read 75,482 times)

Mattphoes · « **on:** March 13, 2011, 01:18 AM »

I am looking for a decent text expander solution. So far, I tried Direct Access and Breevy but both appear to be too buggy/slow and limited to be really useful.

Do you have any suggestion?

My requirements are:

+ Storing boilerplate templates and call them either by text shortcuts or hotkeys

+ Templates may include formatted text

+ Should work with Firefox and Open Office

lanux128 · « **Reply #1 on:** March 13, 2011, 02:17 AM »

you may want to take a look at Auspex.

barney · « **Reply #2 on:** March 13, 2011, 02:38 AM »

I've been using ShortKeys for several years. The free version is limited to, I think, fifteen (15) replacement sets, but the paid version accommodates many more.

The replacement text is limited to 3,000 characters, so that may not work for you. I've never had need to try truly formatted text, so cannot speak to that. It's a Windows TSR, so it works in almost any application.

You might give it a try.

You might also take a look at timns' Auspex. I don't know the limits, just started playing with it, but since timns is an active DC local, he'd prolly accommodate reasonable enhancement suggestions if Auspex doesn't currently perform to your needs.

Edit: I see lanux128 got in while I was typing

.

lanux128 · « **Reply #3 on:** March 13, 2011, 02:52 AM »

Quote from: barney on March 13, 2011, 02:38 AM

You might also take a look at timns' Auspex. I don't know the limits, just started playing with it, but since timns is an active DC local, he'd prolly accommodate reasonable enhancement suggestions if Auspex doesn't currently perform to your needs.

yes, that's one of the main reason i suggested Auspex as [user]timns[/user] is quite active and responsive to user suggestions.

rjbull · « **Reply #4 on:** March 13, 2011, 04:31 PM »

There has been much discussion of text expanders on DC already. I listed some of the other expanders, and links to DC thread that mention them, here: Re: Auspex

List is not exhaustive!

timns · « **Reply #5 on:** March 13, 2011, 04:35 PM »

I think you should have a look at Auspex

and rjbull's thread named about a half dozen more (much to my surprise at the time, but that was me jumping in with both feet before researching what else was out there)

Yes, Auspex is still in development, and yes I would love to have more suggestions for what to add, and of course how to make it better at what it does already.

And to the folks in the thread above, I say thank you for the recommendation.

Mattphoes · « **Reply #6 on:** March 13, 2011, 11:40 PM »

I gave Auspex a quick try but it seems to be way too buggy and early to be really useful at the present stage, compared to all the well established programs that already exist for years.

I appreciate your enthusiam to hunt bugs as an entertaining hobby but right now I have things to do and no time for fiddling.

I am now evaluating Phrase Express and it seems to be an awesome program. It seems to be very well designed, established and I just scratched its surface.

It's free for home use. You might want to check it out.

40hz · « **Reply #7 on:** March 14, 2011, 01:50 AM »

Quote from: Mattphoes on March 13, 2011, 11:40 PM

I appreciate your enthusiam to hunt bugs as an entertaining hobby but right now I have things to do and no time for fiddling.

?????

cranioscopical · « **Reply #8 on:** March 14, 2011, 02:48 AM »

Quote from: Mattphoes on March 13, 2011, 11:40 PM

I appreciate your enthusiam to hunt bugs as an entertaining hobby but right now I have things to do and no time for fiddling.

It's always interesting to hear a new voice, one can learn a lot. I like to think that you'll find something that is appropriate.

cmpm · « **Reply #9 on:** March 14, 2011, 02:52 AM »

Pretty short search for a simple program and settle for Phrase Express, which is one of many awesome programs that can be found just from simply searching and viewing the first couple of pages of hits.

Auspex is in development and awaiting input from users to make it better, as this site is so good at.

Phrase Express is below the level of Auspex in light user specific input for features, as well as user custom settings.
And I found Phrase Express to be more intrusive and overkill then helpful.

Mattphoes · « **Reply #10 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:36 AM »

Is there anything particular where Auspex outperforms the others? Phrase Express and Auto-Hotkey seem to deliver everything I could imagine. ...So far I can see.

I don't understand the comment about "intrusiveness". A text replacement util does what you feed what it should do.

cmpm · « **Reply #11 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:12 AM »

You must use the commercial version. I'm guessing.
The personal version prompts to upgrade to commercial when used for personal use.

http://www.autotext-software.com/

Is a free, no pop-up or prompts to upgrade to commercial, fine program.

Quote

Phrase Express and Auto-Hotkey seem to deliver everything I could imagine.

That is part of the problem with Phrase Express imo, phrases for everything.
Just let me type and I know when I get phrase insertion prompts, because I put them there.
I don't need a large database of phrases to scroll through.

rjbull · « **Reply #12 on:** March 14, 2011, 11:45 AM »

Quote from: cmpm on March 14, 2011, 08:12 AM

The personal version prompts to upgrade to commercial when used for personal use.

I think they include an algorithm that tries to decide whether you're using it for personal or commercial purposes. I can see why, but it must be very hard to make an accurate decision. E.g., if I were, as a private person, writing a letter to a utility company, how would an algorithm decide.

Quote

http://www.autotext-software.com/

Is a free, no pop-up or prompts to upgrade to commercial, fine program.

A freeware by the Phrase Express people, when Phrase Express is already free for personal use? Getting very complicated!

I currently use Typing Assistant, and like it, but you have to press the number of the phrase that you want in the pop-up list. I asked them to remove that and allow "instant" text input, but they said no, as then users might be more likely to type the wrong thing by accident. I see where they're coming from, but I disagree. Having to use an explicit trigger spoils the flow. And after all, what's typed is the user's responsibility. I would prefer to go back to Instant Text which doesn't enforce that, but would have to pay $99 to go from version V to the version VII that works properly on Vista Home Premium with UAC On (full new price is $189). At present I'm resisting!

Mattphoes · « **Reply #13 on:** March 14, 2011, 01:56 PM »

I use the personal free PhraseExpress Edition and never got such notification. It seem to has all features as the commercial version.

Typing Assistant, however, is not free for any use.

cmpm · « **Reply #14 on:** March 14, 2011, 02:35 PM »

If it's an important document I would proof read it anyway.
With or without spell and phrase help.
I use tinySpell and it is very good for spell checking.

Most anything I type in has it's own spell checker anyway.

I've seen good and bad reports on Phrase Express reviews.
From errors and too much resources used, to a great program.
My experience with it was rejected and uninstalled.
If yours is better, good for you.

Are you working for Phrase Express or it's parent company Mattphoes?

rjbull · « **Reply #15 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:19 PM »

Quote from: Mattphoes on March 14, 2011, 01:56 PM

Typing Assistant, however, is not free for any use.

That's true, but neither, as far as I am aware, are Breevy or Direct Access that you mentioned in your OP.

rjbull · « **Reply #16 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:24 PM »

Quote from: cmpm on March 14, 2011, 02:35 PM

If it's an important document I would proof read it anyway.
With or without spell and phrase help.

I have problems proof reading something I've written myself because I read what I think should be there, rather that what's really there. I use text expanders more to shorten typing by using expansion on long words and phrases, rather than to ensure correct spelling. I generally check everything above trivial size with the spelling checker built into whatever editor or word processor.

I've wondered, though, about something I read years ago. On Linux, you tend to have one spell checker that's called by every program that needs it. On Windows, every program has its own. How many spell checkers do you need on one PC? How much space are their dictionaries wasting?

timns · « **Reply #17 on:** March 14, 2011, 03:49 PM »

I'd sure like to hear more about the Auspex bugs so I can fix them for people who do use it...

Please feel free to comment here so they don't clutter up this thread.

40hz · « **Reply #18 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:03 PM »

^@timns- that would be for your "entertaining hobby" you have so much "enthusiasm" for and which deserves to be applauded? $:-\$

kip · « **Reply #19 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:17 PM »

One I recommend quite often is Yadabyte Subtext, quick, easy, free and portable if required

Yadabyte Subtext

rjbull · « **Reply #20 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:22 PM »

If you want formatted text:

Quote

-----------PCMag.com Utility Library Update ------------

NEW RELEASE: RoboType 4
RoboType accelerates your typing by providing a means to
associate boilerplate text, form letters, signatures, and
other reusable text, html, and images with short abbreviations.

Released: February 17, 2011
Version: 4.0

Learn more and download
http://enews.pcmag.com/u.d?kYGkeLaNnsSrT78NN1yk=440

RoboType 4: Type in Shorthand
By Tim Smith

only $7.97
No additional charge for Utility Library subscribers
Subscribe now just $19.97
Version: 4.1.8
Updated: March 9, 2011

Supported Platforms: Microsoft Windows XP, Vista, & 7 (32 & 64-bit)

Are you a tech support specialist who has to type the same responses to questions over and over? Or perhaps you're a lawyer or business professional typing the same name throughout a document? You can always copy and paste, but that's clumsy and slow. RoboType solved this problem when it was first released in 1997 by providing a means to associate boilerplate text, form letters, signatures, and other reusable text with short abbreviations. When you typed the abbreviations, RoboType replaced them with the expanded text.

Robotype 4 continues to build on the original's strong foundation but adds many new features including:
• Support for rich text, html, and images as replacement snippets
• The ability to replace date phrases with dates in multiple formats. For example, if you type "now," Robotype will offer to replace the text with the current date
• A new popup menu for the user to select replacement data if the same abbreviation has been assigned to multiple snippets
• A Random password generator. Type "password" and a dialog box for generating a password will appear
• The ability to launch programs based on an abbreviation. For example, if you're typing in notepad and want to add two numbers just type "calc" and Windows calculator will launch
• A new user interface featuring a tree and groups of abbreviations
• Compatible with Windows XP, Vista, and 7

Other than formatted text, the features aren't particularly exciting <shrug>. Not free, but very cheap.

timns · « **Reply #21 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:22 PM »

Quote from: 40hz on March 14, 2011, 04:03 PM

^@timns- that would be for your "entertaining hobby" you have so much "enthusiasm" for and which deserves to be applauded? $:-\$

Hooray, someone noticed

rjbull · « **Reply #22 on:** March 14, 2011, 04:25 PM »

Quote from: kip on March 14, 2011, 04:17 PM

One I recommend quite often is Yadabyte Subtext

But very basic, and I once had it deleted from my USB stick as a false positive by an overenthusiastic college AV system.

wraith808 · « **Reply #23 on:** March 14, 2011, 06:42 PM »

Quote from: cmpm on March 14, 2011, 02:35 PM

Are you working for Phrase Express or it's parent company Mattphoes?

This. And take a look at the posts of the OP.

Yeah... though not conclusive by any means, it does seem a bit suspicious...

Mattphoes · « **Reply #24 on:** March 14, 2011, 08:00 PM »

No I am not. Would I've asked then? ;-)

I will Robotype a try but it looks pretty basic.