[PL] 2004 VOTE DISCUSSION: FILE UTILITIES

[Onno]

Another clear winner. Dump the others.

Although I don't like the 7-zip interface, I do agree with you.

 

[omega]

Ok, I changed my mind. Wipe 'em all out. No zips for you! ;-)

Ouwwwch! Maybe you can take away my merlots, and take away my Ben & Jerry's,
but now that's getting to the level of most fundamental need, like saying
to survive without any coffee. 8-o

In all seriousness, I wouldn't keep more than 2 programs per
category. That's just me. Unfortunately, some categories, such as
"utilities" can be a bit broad, so keeping up to 4 for that one seems
fine to me.

The one exception, for many programs in a category, that would be the web
browsers.... For most all other categories, such as those in File
Utilities, I see the point. We don't need five backup programs and four
file managers, as PL. Folks who need to find out about a whole group of
good contenders can learn in ACF, or browse the nominations pages.

 

[Tiger]

Although I don't like the 7-zip interface, I do agree with you.

Well, I'm not suggesting we keep only the ones I like. I *prefer*
several of the programs I suggested dumping...including IZarc and
Powerarchiver. I just think we need to reflect the votes...and
there's a clear favorite here.

 

[Max Quordlepleen]

I just think we need to reflect the votes...and
there's a clear favorite here.

While I disagree in this particular instance, since the margin was a
mere 7 votes. Compared with the margins in some other categories, 7 is
very narrow, undeserving, imho, of being called a" clear favourite"

 

[Tiger]

While I disagree in this particular instance, since the margin was
a mere 7 votes. Compared with the margins in some other
categories, 7 is very narrow, undeserving, imho, of being called
a" clear favourite"

Given the number of votes cast for each app, I think 7 is a
significant margin. 35% more than the second place app.

 

[Max Quordlepleen]

Given the number of votes cast for each app, I think 7 is a
significant margin. 35% more than the second place app.

Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and that
ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you to do is
admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree with me ever
again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.

 

[omega]

Given the number of votes cast for each app, I think 7 is a
significant margin. 35% more than the second place app.

27:20 => 4:3

Repeating my vote to keep two of them. An unzip util is so important, and
these two have some non-overlapping functions. (The superior compression
of .7z format, and the superior GUI features of PowerArch.)

 

[Tiger]

Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and
that ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you
to do is admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree
with me ever again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.

What the hell was I thinking? ;-P

 

[Portia]

The ability to browse linux ext2fs and ext3fs partitions from within
windows is a rather unique attribute to the other file managers
mentioned. Keep it.

I agree.

 

[omega]

When you're talking about something as essential and personal as a file
manager, I'd think you'd want more than one choice.

About PowerDesk, I am both against it, and for it. I am against it because,
strictly speaking, it is both nagware, and adware.

Nagware. The screen comes up both upon open and upon close. The opening
screen tells you to buy the pro version, and tells you how many times you
have "taken a free ride." Most shareware I used, in the old days before
trial time-outs, where guilt was the method, even they didn't apply as much
pressure as PowerDesk.

Adware. The ad is built right into the main screen, taking up valuable real
estate. In a file manager, that makes it even worse, for that's the time you
need your screen space the most. Yet there you have it, this program only
allows you a reduced portion as your application window, and the other part
is the advertisement.

PowerDesk is just on the fuzzy edge of adware, not an extreme case. Its nags
and ads are too much for me, but not enough that I would have felt strongly
enough about the matter to bring it into PL remove discussions.

Now what I like about it. I do not use at all the file manager component
(though others do). But PowerDesk, it's not a file manager you get alone,
but actually a whole suite of file utilities.

pdexplo.exe The file manager

pdfind.exe A find applet, that sits in the same menu locations as the
windows Find, and works very much the same, but with some
added choices (including "append" and "refine", for
successive rounds of searching)

pdesk.exe A toolbar, menu launcher

sizemgr.exe A very good program for this type: directory space usages.
Has all the explorer context-menu functions. A very enhanced
Find panel. Tag results in the file hierarchy display. This
has become a most interesting little toy in v5.

pdync.exe Synch two folders. Like everything in the list, it runs as
a standalone. Independent from the pdexplo.exe file manager.

pddlghlp.exe Open/Save As dialog enhancer. Resizes. Tracks recent folders
and files. Preview function in the Open dialog, if quickview
component installed.

So this makes PowerDesk a file utilities suite, not merely a file manager,
as is 2x explorer. All of the file utilities in that list, they can run
independently from the file manager.

My vote? Well, I dislike the file manager due to it arguably crossing the
line into adware. It'd be cleaner for PL to have this thing off its list.
And the fact that it didn't make top vote, then that could happen without
a lot of noise.

At the same time, I much ike the suite of utilities. (None of which are
adware or nagware). And to lose them all from PL, in one stroke, for having
a single file manager on the list, that feels like a loss.

So for my choice, I'll do like those folks did with the acceptable/
unacceptable threads. Place contradictory votes, in both locations.

 

[omega]

I agree.

I'd say that unique, alone, it is not an adequate criterion. The function
should be unique + widely-used. (Whether the latter criterion is met here,
re browsing that type of file system, I'm not attempting to guess.)

 

[john p.]

...We don't need five backup programs and four
file managers, as PL. Folks who need to find out about a whole group of
good contenders can learn in ACF, or browse the nominations pages.

One of the contributing factors to the closeness of the voting on some
apps is the lack of discrimination used by some voters on their
ballots. There were a few responses that looked to me to be little
more than a repost of the entire nominations list. If those folks had
used some discretion and narrowed down their choices, instead of
voting for *every* newsreader, *every* email client, etc, there would
be a more clear cut differential in the voting totals in each
category.

 

[REMbranded]

john p. wrote:

One of the contributing factors to the closeness of the voting on some
apps is the lack of discrimination used by some voters on their
ballots. There were a few responses that looked to me to be little
more than a repost of the entire nominations list. If those folks had
used some discretion and narrowed down their choices, instead of
voting for *every* newsreader, *every* email client, etc, there would
be a more clear cut differential in the voting totals in each
category.

Agreed. I had the same exact thoughts in reading some of the votes. It
seems the entire list was voted on by some and others passed voting on
applications they were not familar with. It is possible some of the
freeware fanatics were indeed familar with the entire list <G>. I
don't doubt that possibility at all.

Anyway, this should be considered when looking at the numbers of
votes. I'm of the opinion there can be multiple programs denoted as
pricelessware, rather than "there can be only one." (Highlander)

 

[Spacey Spade]

Agreed. I had the same exact thoughts in reading some of the votes. It
seems the entire list was voted on by some and others passed voting on
applications they were not familar with. It is possible some of the
freeware fanatics were indeed familar with the entire list <G>. I
don't doubt that possibility at all.

Spacey: "Jeez, some people sure are using a Wal-Mart 18 wheeler truck
load of freeware!"

Anyway, this should be considered when looking at the numbers of
votes. I'm of the opinion there can be multiple programs denoted as
pricelessware, rather than "there can be only one." (Highlander)

Well, I voted for Pimmy and nPOP because I think they are adorable. I
give them to newbies to use.

 

[Spacey Spade]

27:20 => 4:3

Repeating my vote to keep two of them. An unzip util is so important, and
these two have some non-overlapping functions. (The superior compression
of .7z format, and the superior GUI features of PowerArch.)

Um... do any of these have the treeview pane that Winimp has? Winimp
now has the v3.0 rar capability.

Here is the home page:
http://www.technelysium.com.au/winimp.html

Here is a screenshot:
http://www.softpedia.com/public/scripts/photohero/2-10/
may be referrer blocked

Here is a mucked up Tucows page incorrectly stating it is shareware, and
incorrectly linking it to some other shareware app:
http://tucows.mundofree.com/winme/preview/137519.html
small screenshot here too

Spacey

 

[Susan Bugher]

Max Quordlepleen wrote:

Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and that
ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you to do is
admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree with me ever
again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.

I believe this demand is known as the Twinkie *offense*.

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html

 

[Jim Scott]

|Max Quordlepleen wrote:
|
|
|> Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and that
|> ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you to do is
|> admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree with me ever
|> again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.
|
|I believe this demand is known as the Twinkie *offense*.
|
|Susan
|
Er, what's a Twinkie?
--
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tyneside - Top right of England
To email me directly:
miss out the X from my reply address
Visit http://freespace.virgin.net/mr.jimscott
---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[omega]

(e-mail address removed) says...
|Max Quordlepleen wrote:
|
|> Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and that
|> ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you to do is
|> admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree with me ever
|> again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.
|
|I believe this demand is known as the Twinkie *offense*.
|
Er, what's a Twinkie?

A U.S. sucrose-based edible, which has been causally connected with
committing crimes.

 

[jason]

About PowerDesk, I am both against it, and for it. I am against it
because, strictly speaking, it is both nagware, and adware.

Nagware. The screen comes up both upon open and upon close.

Agreed. The nag is there, but a file manager is the type of program you
keep open all the time, so little opportunity to see the nag.

Adware. The ad is built right into the main screen, taking up valuable
real estate.

Disagree on this. The ad is just a tiny strip that takes up no room at
all. In fact I hadn't even noticed it till you pointed it out.

 

[My Name]

A new sub-category "The Best of the Rest".

Say, that's not bad!