Evaluation of Karen's Replicator 3.5.1
in [Freeware]
|
Prev: DVD-RAM freeware?
Next: 1st Page 2000 free edition
From: John Corliss on 18 Aug 2007 09:26 dadiOH wrote: > John Corliss wrote: >> dadiOH wrote: >>> John Corliss wrote: >>> >>>> I have a special folder named "Tips, notes and manuals" on my >>>> drive >>> >>> I have similar. In addition, I keep a change log...anytime I >>> add/delete a program or make some sort of change to the system it >>> is documented in the log with the date and brief description in a >>> LIFO manner. >> >> I depend on Total Uninstall 2.35's logs for installations. > > I use TU too, wouldn't be without it. I still like *my* log better > though. For one thing, when I have TU do an UNinstall, I also have it > dump the TUN so my TU has no record of uninstalls. My log does. When I use TUN to do an uninstall, it never deletes the install record. Click on "Options..." Click on the "Uninstaller" tab Uncheck "Automatically delete the monitored changes file if successful uninstall" I always keep the logs. They're small files and provide good info if you're considering a reinstall of a program. >> As for changes to the system, I'm not sure what you're referring to. > > Oh, various...maybe a different desktop configuration...maybe stuff > like putting a couple of older dll files back in IE so Win Explorer > doesn't choke on massive deletions...updated drivers... I've noticed this choking on massive deletions on occasion myself, but I alway just beat the system into submission with my baseball bat. 80)> -- John Corliss BS206. I try not to reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Bear Bottoms, Hummingbird or proteanthread. Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to block all Google Groups posts from being displayed in my news reader. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
From: JP Loken on 19 Aug 2007 14:40 P� Sun, 19 Aug 2007 03:27:06 +0200, skrev John Corliss <jcorliss(a)fake.invalid>: <snip> >> Complaining about dotnet for bloat is *precisely* the same folly as >> winme/98 users complaining about the "bloat" of NTOS. >> Bloat is a problem for two kinds of consumer. Those with: >> 1) aging systems who will not upgrade, > > Let them eat cake, eh? There are many people who still run W98 on older > computers. Should they be snubbed because they're poor and can't afford > newer computers? <snip> Important point, John. I'm collecting, setting up and donating old computers to less fortunate people. Very often I'm left with an old OS as the only option. (The users balk at Linux, unfortunately, and I'm not very good at it.) I'm grateful on behalf of my receivers every time an updated freeware program is still made available for NT4 and W9x/ME. -- JP Loken Opera e-mail: http://www.opera.com/mail/
From: John Corliss on 19 Aug 2007 16:15 JP Loken wrote: > P� Sun, 19 Aug 2007 03:27:06 +0200, skrev John Corliss > <jcorliss(a)fake.invalid>: > <snip> >>> Complaining about dotnet for bloat is *precisely* the same folly as >>> winme/98 users complaining about the "bloat" of NTOS. >>> Bloat is a problem for two kinds of consumer. Those with: >>> 1) aging systems who will not upgrade, >> >> Let them eat cake, eh? There are many people who still run W98 on >> older computers. Should they be snubbed because they're poor and can't >> afford newer computers? > <snip> > Important point, John. > I'm collecting, setting up and donating old computers to less fortunate > people. > Very often I'm left with an old OS as the only option. (The users balk > at Linux, unfortunately, and I'm not very good at it.) > > I'm grateful on behalf of my receivers every time an updated freeware > program is still made available for NT4 and W9x/ME. A lot of my friends and relative simply aren't into computers as much as I am. They also have older computers and in their opinion, "if it ain't broke, don't replace it." 80)> -- John Corliss BS206. I try not to reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Hummingbird or proteanthread. Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to block all Google Groups posts from being displayed in my news reader. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares or warez for me, please.
From: Craig on 20 Aug 2007 02:45 John Corliss wrote: > Craig wrote: > >> (dotnet is) a brilliant way to lower the bar in development, >> deployment and maintenance costs. > > Craig, just out of curiousity, would you care to elaborate on that > portion of your reply? > Well, I'll try. Bear w/me. Let's say that you've 10 proggies written by ten different authors using whatever dev tools they choose. Compare that with my 10 different proggies developed by ten different authors all using a platform such as dotnet (or mono or gtk). Let's assume that they're all conscientious. <insert emoticon-smiley here> My programmers no longer have to deal with pointer, counters and memory addressing. Yours should. Our development costs (time) are reduced because complexity is reduced. Your IT dept has to vet low level code on each app to determine whether it might cause stability issues. Mine has one set to vet. Aka deployment costs (time) are reduced. Neither of the above has to be repeated for subsequent iterations (versions) of the apps written to dotnet (or mono or gtk). Aka, maintenance. Hope that made sense... -Craig
From: John Corliss on 20 Aug 2007 07:54
Craig wrote: > John Corliss wrote: >> Craig wrote: >> >>> (dotnet is) a brilliant way to lower the bar in development, >>> deployment and maintenance costs. >> >> Craig, just out of curiousity, would you care to elaborate on that >> portion of your reply? >> > > Well, I'll try. Bear w/me. > > Let's say that you've 10 proggies written by ten different authors using > whatever dev tools they choose. Compare that with my 10 different > proggies developed by ten different authors all using a platform such as > dotnet (or mono or gtk). Let's assume that they're all conscientious. > <insert emoticon-smiley here> > > My programmers no longer have to deal with pointer, counters and memory > addressing. Yours should. Our development costs (time) are reduced > because complexity is reduced. > > Your IT dept has to vet low level code on each app to determine whether > it might cause stability issues. Mine has one set to vet. Aka > deployment costs (time) are reduced. > > Neither of the above has to be repeated for subsequent iterations > (versions) of the apps written to dotnet (or mono or gtk). Aka, > maintenance. > > Hope that made sense... It did. However, IIRC, some apps written for dotnet 1 aren't compatible with dotnet 2 and vice versa. Looks like business as usual to me. -- John Corliss BS206. I try not to reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett, Hummingbird or proteanthread. Due to all the spam coming from that service, I use NFilter to block all Google Groups posts from being displayed in my news reader. No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, NAGWARE, share, spy, time-limited, trial or web wares or warez for me, please. |