Special User Sections > General Review Discussion

Review suggestions

<< < (16/17) > >>

app103:
How about an in depth review of desktop search applications?

There are quite a few out there, not just Google's. I'd like to see how they stack up.

I'd do it myself, but I am not an experienced desktop search user and my idea of good would be anything better than the standard built-in Windows files & folders search.  :-[

I am also obsessivly organized and don't often have to search for things on my pc, because I already have them where they would make perfect sense.

But the few times I do need to search for something, it's a brutal hell for me.

It would be nice to know that I could install something rated the best by a totally disorganized but experienced user of desktop search tools.  ;D

Anybody up for the challenge?

mooncat:
There's a free disk imaging program called Partition Logic http://partitionlogic.org.uk/index.html From their homepage:   "Partition Logic is free software, based on the Visopsys operating system.  It boots from a CD or floppy disk and runs as a standalone system, independent of your regular operating system.  It is intended to become a free alternative to such commercial programs as  Partition Magic, Drive Image, and Norton Ghost..." Sounds good. How about running it through its paces?

egbert:
I truly appreciate your software reviews, they're really second to none!
But please, please start to include version numbers of the software you review, along with the publication date of the review!
Otherwise, the reviews themselves and especially the additional efforts to add amendments like this one to the PSPad review become almost useless (what/when is 'now'?):

[ED NOTE: we originally commented that pspad could not be considered suitable as a general purpose text editor until they fixed their notoriously broked wordwrap code. we are happy to say that they have in fact fixed their wordwrap code and PsPad is now one of the best text editors available - and it's free!].
--- End quote ---

mouser:
yes it's so true that we need to do a much better job specifying version numbers clearly in our reviews, i agree and we will be doing that in all future reviews.

lanux128:
the mini-review template has a section for the reviewed program's version (see pic) and as for the dates, imo it's not included because all posts have their own time-stamp with additional time-stamps for any further edits but i do think it's a good idea.. :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page