Program Information Pages
Susan Bugher
I have *almost* finished adding programs that I have information about
to this group of pages (about 2600 programs are listed).
ISTM the pages could be an ongoing effort by the group - subcategories
could be reviewed/ revised and new subcategories/ programs/ information
added when there is interest in doing so. (For example a thread about
file managers could include a review and update of the programs included
in the Program Information pages.)
Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
format etc. etc.?
Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
don't bruise easily. ;)
Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
alt.comp.freeware FAQ: http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/proposal-CD.htm
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
Steven Burn
news:1047cd3...@corp.supernews.com...
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
><snip>
>
> Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
> Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
> format etc. etc.?
Looking great ;o)
--
Regards
Steven Burn
Ur I.T. Mate Group
www.it-mate.co.uk
Keeping it FREE!
Disclaimer:
I know I'm probably wrong, I just like taking part ;o)
Sharon Page
"Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote
> --
> Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
> alt.comp.freeware FAQ: http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/proposal-CD.htm
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
One recommendation. I save pages as bookmarks as does many.
Daily, I am asked if I know of such and such that could be used
to do such and such.
The automatic title that goes with the bookmark
i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> Category Index</TITLE>
would be more useful to me if it contained a reference to your homepage.
i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> Category Index -- pricelessware.org </TITLE>
i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> pricelessware.org -- Category Index </TITLE>
in doing so it would allow me to know quickly (by name) that it is your
'maintained' site.
Looks really good to me!
SLP
******
http://www.best-page.us
GeorgeD
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> I have *almost* finished adding programs that I have information about
> to this group of pages (about 2600 programs are listed).
>
> ISTM the pages could be an ongoing effort by the group - subcategories
> could be reviewed/ revised and new subcategories/ programs/ information
> added when there is interest in doing so. (For example a thread about
> file managers could include a review and update of the programs included
> in the Program Information pages.)
>
> Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
> Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
> format etc. etc.?
>
> Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
> don't bruise easily. ;)
>
> Susan
Looks wonderful.
While we are complicating your life, how about doing something similar
for linux? There seems to be increasing interest. Actually I don’t
mean ‘you’ personally, but ‘us’ somehow.
You have put in tremendous effort and I appreciate your work. Thank
you for everything.
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote in message
> news:1047cd3...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
>>Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
>>format etc. etc.?
>
> </snip>
>
> Looking great ;o)
That's always nice to hear. :)
Steven Burn
<snip>
>
> That's always nice to hear. :)
>
hehe, I just like to be concise and to the point ;o)
Susan Bugher
Good idea - added to the todo list - may take a little while. . .
> Looks really good to me!
Thanks. :)
Susan
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher wrote:
>
>> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> Looks wonderful.
>
> While we are complicating your life, how about doing something similar
> for linux? There seems to be increasing interest. Actually I don’t
> mean ‘you’ personally, but ‘us’ somehow.
IMO it would be good to include some Linux info - don't know how much. I
believe there are *already* some fairly comprehensive pages on the web.
Perhaps add a limited number of programs and maybe some URLs (*if* the
consensus is in favor of having Program Information Pages).
*Somehow* could be: anyone who was interested could start a thread and
compile a list of the suggested Linux apps and URLs - which I could then
add to the web pages.
> You have put in tremendous effort and I appreciate your work. Thank
> you for everything.
Thanks. :) The only *extra* work was minor - creating the web pages -
the rest I was going to do anyway - now I'm quite curious to see if the
group wants to keep the web pages up. . .
Bebop & Rocksteady
> Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
> don't bruise easily. ;)
>
> Susan
Lookin good...
can't think of any thing yet... but am sure I will later unless some one else
beats me to it.. which usually happens so I keep my trap shut :-)
--
----------------------------------------
Quantum Illusions: http://quantum.2ya.com
FORT Freeware: http://freeware.quantum.2ya.com
Pegasus Mail Support Site: http://pegasus.quantum.2ya.com
DATA Solutions: http://datasolutions.quantum.2ya.com
If you truly want to contact me click the link
http://quantum.2ya.com/email.htm
REM
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote:
>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>I have *almost* finished adding programs that I have information about
>to this group of pages (about 2600 programs are listed).
Man, you're incredible!
I see the Categories and Subcategories. The programs I can't find.
The "sub-cat" doesn't sort. Maybe it's the hyphen?
>ISTM the pages could be an ongoing effort by the group - subcategories
>could be reviewed/ revised and new subcategories/ programs/ information
>added when there is interest in doing so. (For example a thread about
>file managers could include a review and update of the programs included
>in the Program Information pages.)
Sure. If everyone will write a review or two it would be nice to see
what people think of the various programs.
>Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
>Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
>format etc. etc.?
Sure.
>Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
>don't bruise easily. ;)
Wham! Pow! Blonk! Great job Susan.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Susan Bugher
>>Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> I see the Categories and Subcategories. The programs I can't find.
Use the page links at the top: Business-Hobby, Desktop etc. to navigate.
> The "sub-cat" doesn't sort. Maybe it's the hyphen?
Good catch. It *is* sorting - *but* - on the *real* subcategory name
which includes a hidden number at the beginning (View page source to see
what I mean). . . revisions to follow. . .
>
>>ISTM the pages could be an ongoing effort by the group - subcategories
>>could be reviewed/ revised and new subcategories/ programs/ information
>>added when there is interest in doing so. (For example a thread about
>>file managers could include a review and update of the programs included
>>in the Program Information pages.)
>
> Sure. If everyone will write a review or two it would be nice to see
> what people think of the various programs.
If the group wants to add review info each program name can easily be
hyperlinked to a separate web page (added as needed).
>>Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
>>Pricelessware site? If so what suggestions do you have about content,
>>format etc. etc.?
>
> Sure.
>
>>Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
>>don't bruise easily. ;)
>
>
> Wham! Pow! Blonk! Great job Susan.
ouch! ouch! ouch! thanks! ;)
Susan Bugher
> Sharon Page wrote:
>
>> "Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote
>>> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>>
> > One recommendation. I save pages as bookmarks as does many.
>
>> Daily, I am asked if I know of such and such that could be used
>> to do such and such.
>>
>> The automatic title that goes with the bookmark
>>
>> i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> Category Index</TITLE>
>>
>> would be more useful to me if it contained a reference to your homepage.
>>
>> i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> Category Index -- pricelessware.org </TITLE>
>> i.e. ><HEAD> <TITLE> pricelessware.org -- Category Index </TITLE>
>>
>> in doing so it would allow me to know quickly (by name) that it is your
>> 'maintained' site.
>
> Good idea - added to the todo list - may take a little while. . .
Done.
Susan Bugher
> REM wrote:
>> The "sub-cat" doesn't sort. Maybe it's the hyphen?
>
> Good catch. It *is* sorting - *but* - on the *real* subcategory name
> which includes a hidden number at the beginning (View page source to see
> what I mean). . . revisions to follow. . .
Done. On the Category Index page the *category* column now now sorts by
the category *and* alpha-numeric subcategory (the order shown on the
other web pages). The *subcategory* column sorts by the alphabetical
name of the subcategory.
I haven't changed the other web pages (they have the same problem) The
numbers are used to group program subcategories . . . I think I'll just
*show* the alpha-numeric name of each subcategory. . .
The pages (loosely) follow the PL2004 category/ subcategory organization
- they would be a good place to work out improvements for PL2005 -
suggestions are welcome . . .
Sharon Page
"Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote
to my request to include web addy on title header for bookmark
purposes at :
> >>> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> > Good idea - added to the todo list - may take a little while. . .
>
> Done.
Nice going. You moved faster than I expected.
Now a couple of things to put on a list when you
really are wanting to just play....:-)
Two things... maybe a hot jump link to back to the top of the
page(s) located at certain intervals on page(s). Which would
get a person back to the top category sub topics without scrolling.
You jump us down...but not back up. First page... give us
one at the bottom of the page so we can get to the top menu?
Next...Waiting for the hot links on the text on the opening page
for anything in caps within a paragraph....It would make it really
nice to navigate to what you were talking about. (I know the
links are at the top on the menu...but what can I say... I get soooo
very lazy when it comes to checking something out. Sometimes
I don't want to have to hunt for the referenced links locations.
Just thinking of those I refer to the site.
You really are doing a good job maintaining it.
:-)
SLP
*****
http://www.best-page.us
Susan Bugher
> Now a couple of things to put on a list when you
> really are wanting to just play....:-)
>
> Two things... maybe a hot jump link to back to the top of the
> page(s) located at certain intervals on page(s). Which would
> get a person back to the top category sub topics without scrolling.
> You jump us down...but not back up. First page... give us
> one at the bottom of the page so we can get to the top menu?
Adding a link at the bottom of a page to take you to the top is
straightforward - adding links in the middle of most pages is not . . .
Are you discussing the PL2004 pages? Those are the only ones with
subcategory links at the top - or is it a difference in terminology? I
think of Graphics, Desktop etc. as categories - IOW each *category* has
its own page - the further subdivisions within a page are the
*subcategories*.
I'll add *TOP* links at the bottom of the various web pages when I have
the strength - it's a good idea. . . IMO though that's *not* play -
it's just grunt work :(
> Next...Waiting for the hot links on the text on the opening page
> for anything in caps within a paragraph....It would make it really
> nice to navigate to what you were talking about. (I know the
> links are at the top on the menu...but what can I say... I get soooo
> very lazy when it comes to checking something out. Sometimes
> I don't want to have to hunt for the referenced links locations.
> Just thinking of those I refer to the site.
I haven't hyperlinked on the Program Info Category Index page because
that would add another layer of complexity to the process - and another
way to go wrong. . . *after* the subcategories are in good shape . . .
omega
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> I have *almost* finished adding programs that I have information about
> to this group of pages (about 2600 programs are listed).
>
> ISTM the pages could be an ongoing effort by the group - subcategories
> could be reviewed/ revised and new subcategories/ programs/ information
> added when there is interest in doing so. (For example a thread about
> file managers could include a review and update of the programs included
> in the Program Information pages.)
>
> Do you think these pages would be a *useful* permanent addition to the
> Pricelessware site?
Yes. (It addresses what some people were clamoring for not long ago.) Thank
you for the tremendous amount the work.
> If so what suggestions do you have about content, format etc. etc.?
>
> Let's have a *full* and *frank* discussion - please don't hold back - I
> don't bruise easily. ;)
Well, I'm not going to post merely to compliment, that's no thrill
for me. Instead, well, there is one thing here, that I think might
be good to solve...
It's this sitation. When I am browsing those pages, I have no strong
visual indicator where I am: that is, whether I am looking at the
PL2004 programs, or at the other section, the generalized programs
list.
The title "Program Information" does not convey to me which of the two
sections I am in. (The URL is along the same path, too, as the
PL2004 program listings. This more trivial of course, as I assume
it's the web page content/titles where most people look for such cues.)
Do you know what I mean? And of course I don't mean me, specifically;
I've read the PL2004 content thoroughly enough to recognize. But am
thinking about the perspective of a casual visitor to the site. If you
know what I mean, and might agree with it...then the next part...
What to use as good visual cue to have the visitor conscious where they
are. Distinguishing between the two sections: the PL2004 winners progam
information section v the lots-of-programs information section. For a
suggestion on what might work, I don't have any suggestion in mind. But
I figure that if I could get you to take my perspective, then you'd from
there be able to come up with a fitting title design
...?
--
Karen S.
omega
> Sharon Page wrote:
>
> > Two things... maybe a hot jump link to back to the top of the
> > page(s) located at certain intervals on page(s). Which would
> > get a person back to the top category sub topics without scrolling.
> > You jump us down...but not back up. First page... give us
> > one at the bottom of the page so we can get to the top menu?
>
> Are you discussing the PL2004 pages? Those are the only ones with
> subcategory links at the top - or is it a difference in terminology? I
> think of Graphics, Desktop etc. as categories - IOW each *category* has
> its own page - the further subdivisions within a page are the
> *subcategories*.
That's what I read here too, that she must be referring to the PL2004
pages. For viewing those pages, I find that the master Category page
provides excellent navigational convenience. Click on its subcategory
headings. Open New Window command. Else use FWD<>BACK.
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004CategoryIndex.htm
--
Karen S.
omega
> I'll add *TOP* links at the bottom of the various web pages when I have
> the strength - it's a good idea. . . IMO though that's *not* play -
> it's just grunt work :(
Speaking of the W word.
(What was the saying? "I love work, can stare at it for hours.")
Something that might well take a lot of labor, but still to possibly put
up for consideration eventually. It's an additional Sort-By category in
the Program Information pages. Both for PL listings, and this one.
A Sort-By category for supported OS.
Mainly, it would give Linux users a way quickly locate those programs that
run on their OS.
. . .
(It would also help serve in a possible future scenario. One of these years,
it might become that some material number of the programs that make it to PL
do not run on 9x Windows, and just the later versions.)
--
Karen S.
omega
> Adding a link at the bottom of a page to take you to the top is
> straightforward - adding links in the middle of most pages is not . . .
> I'll add *TOP* links at the bottom of the various web pages when I have
> the strength - it's a good idea. . .
This is a tiny issue, but FWIW, I'd like to put in a vote against placing
"TOP" links. In my eyes, it inflicts clutter.
I have used a lot of browsers, and cannot think of a single one that
does not natively support going "Back to Top" already on such pages.
click one:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004BUSINESS-HOME.htm
click two:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004BUSINESS-HOME.htm#Spreadsheet
BACK command, provided by browser:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/PL2004BUSINESS-HOME.htm
Even if for case where one landed from another link, where "click one" had
been to mid-page <http://...htm#Spreadsheet>, it seems unnatural to me that
one would divert one's attention looking for presence or absence of "Back
to Top" links. That need is addressed in our instinctive, automatic motion
with the scrollbar. The scrollbar is universal to almost all of our windows.
Always at hand. Why hunt for a special link to go to the top of a window?
--
Karen S.
Cousin Stanley
| I'd like to put in a vote against placing "TOP" links.
| In my eyes, it inflicts clutter.
The TOP links are handy when ....
the cheese drips off the pizza
and clogs up the HOME key ....
the surfer refuses to relinquish
their death-grip on the mouse
to reach all the way over to the keyboard
for the HOME key ....
--
Cousin Stanley
Human Being
Phoenix, Arizona
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>>
> It's this sitation. When I am browsing those pages, I have no strong
> visual indicator where I am: that is, whether I am looking at the
> PL2004 programs, or at the other section, the generalized programs
> list.
>
> The title "Program Information" does not convey to me which of the two
> sections I am in. (The URL is along the same path, too, as the
> PL2004 program listings. This more trivial of course, as I assume
> it's the web page content/titles where most people look for such cues.)
>
> Do you know what I mean? And of course I don't mean me, specifically;
> I've read the PL2004 content thoroughly enough to recognize. But am
> thinking about the perspective of a casual visitor to the site. If you
> know what I mean, and might agree with it...then the next part...
>
> What to use as good visual cue to have the visitor conscious where they
> are. Distinguishing between the two sections: the PL2004 winners progam
> information section v the lots-of-programs information section. For a
> suggestion on what might work, I don't have any suggestion in mind. But
> I figure that if I could get you to take my perspective, then you'd from
> there be able to come up with a fitting title design
I agree - I think an offwhite background - change/ remove most of the
color at the top -> implying visually that these are secondary pages .
. .
The thought has been in my mind too, being slothful I haven't done
anything about it - I wanted to see if these were going to be permanent
web pages before I got involved in that . . .
It's helpful to know that you feel the same way - adding it to the todo
list . . .
Sharon Page
"Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote :
>Are you discussing the PL2004 pages?
I guess it depends on their final appearance?
As I moved into the pages from the start page I realized
that the programs listed could get very long on some pages.
If there were muliple sub categories listed per page... a mid
page jump feature would be nice. Even if placed in random
places.
> I'll add *TOP* links at the bottom of the various web pages when I have
> the strength - it's a good idea. . . IMO though that's *not* play -
> it's just grunt work :(
I know....I figured you would get the humor. :-)
Lots of people think those little extra features just appear
like magic. I am still amazed you added the bookmark feature
as quickly as you did.
> I haven't hyperlinked on the Program Info Category Index page because
> that would add another layer of complexity to the process - and another
> way to go wrong. . . *after* the subcategories are in good shape . . .
I mentioned it because it would give the home webpage the
same access feature you were giving to other pages being referenced.
Less worry about broken links is good too. :-)
SLP
*****
http://www.best-page.us
Susan Bugher
> Speaking of the W word.
>
> (What was the saying? "I love work, can stare at it for hours.")
I think it's "I love work, I can *look* at it for hours." Staring
requires an *effort*, looking is more passive. ;)
> Something that might well take a lot of labor, but still to possibly put
> up for consideration eventually. It's an additional Sort-By category in
> the Program Information pages. Both for PL listings, and this one.
>
> A Sort-By category for supported OS.
>
> Mainly, it would give Linux users a way quickly locate those programs that
> run on their OS.
>
> . . .
>
> (It would also help serve in a possible future scenario. One of these years,
> it might become that some material number of the programs that make it to PL
> do not run on 9x Windows, and just the later versions.)
*Already* true in a fair number of cases. Then there are those who
prefer no install, open source etc. etc. Most of that information has
already been gathered for PL2004 programs. The data would have to be
split into separate fields to have useful sorting in a table. IMO a new
web page would be needed to display it. Some work involved, but not
overwhelming. OTOH it's sometimes hard to find that kind of data for a
program - so the tables would be somewhat incomplete/ less than 100
percent accurate . . .
IIRC word search doesn't work in your PL2004 CHM file - could that be
implemented? That would be a good way to find that kind of information
easily.
Getting back to the Program Information pages . . . Your question leads
us to a more basic question: What info should be on those pages and how
is it going to get there?
IMO the primary purpose of the pages should be to provide a list of
programs that *might* be suitable for a given task. (Secondary purposes
include noting last freeware versions etc.)
ISTM that the pages should focus on basic information that does not
change rapidly.
*Further* information can be gained by a search of the ACF archives,
starting a thread to discuss which program is best, visiting the web
pages, Google searches etc. etc. etc.
To date the pages include programs I had information about. Since I'm an
info junkie - IMO it's a good *start*. ;)
There are some gaping holes that need to be filled in - programming is a
weak area - there are many others . . .
ISTM we can use the same kind of discussions ACF has always had as a
tool to build the web pages. When a topic is under discussion
subcategories for that topic can be reviewed and revised as part of the
discussion.
From time to time people post useful lists of programs for particular
tasks - those lists can be incorporated into the web pages.
IOW I think we can *maintain* a useful set of pages without a *great*
deal of effort.
The setup *is* flexible and can grow to include more info if there is an
interest in having it. . .
Susan Bugher
> "Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote :
>
>
>>Are you discussing the PL2004 pages?
>
>
> I guess it depends on their final appearance?
> As I moved into the pages from the start page I realized
> that the programs listed could get very long on some pages.
> If there were muliple sub categories listed per page... a mid
> page jump feature would be nice. Even if placed in random
> places.
Most of the pages have two distinct parts - the top and bottom sections
are one part - the mid section is the other. The mid section is
extracted *entirely* from the database page that contains the program
information. Adding *TOP* links in mid page would screw up the system .
. . IOW, not a chance. . . KISS . . . ;)
>>I'll add *TOP* links at the bottom of the various web pages when I have
>>the strength - it's a good idea. . . IMO though that's *not* play -
>>it's just grunt work :(
>
>
> I know....I figured you would get the humor. :-)
> Lots of people think those little extra features just appear
> like magic. I am still amazed you added the bookmark feature
> as quickly as you did.
I have to confess I thought you were serious. Many people think of the
kind of the stuff *I* enjoy doing as pure torture - I thought maybe you
enjoyed that. ;)
>
>>I haven't hyperlinked on the Program Info Category Index page because
>>that would add another layer of complexity to the process - and another
>>way to go wrong. . . *after* the subcategories are in good shape . . .
>
>
> I mentioned it because it would give the home webpage the
> same access feature you were giving to other pages being referenced.
> Less worry about broken links is good too. :-)
I spent some time last night revising and adding program links, author's
names etc. - ISTM that good *data* is the *primary* necessity ATM so I'm
focusing most of my effort there. . . :)
omega
> omega wrote:
>
> > A Sort-By category for supported OS.
>
> IIRC word search doesn't work in your PL2004 CHM file - could that be
> implemented? That would be a good way to find that kind of information
> easily.
I'm not sure what you mean by word search not working? But here is a guess
for why no results would come up (has happened to me). On the lower left
corner of the Search Pane, there are checkboxes:
[ ] Search Previous Results
[ ] Match Similar Words
[ ] Search Titles Only
The PL2004.chm file is set to keep your settings from the last time you
ran it. Such as which pane at the forefront, window sizings...and also
those checkboxes. So if one of them is left checked from previous, like
Search Titles Only, it could render results nul.
Another setting perhaps to watch, it's under Options on the toolbar:
"Search Highlight Off/On." It's on by default, but if left turned off,
that could be inconvenient. When have been rendered a list of Found
Topic pages on your search, and click one, it's the highlighting of your
search terms that let you know where the hits were. You are not jumped
automatically to their locations on page; instead, it's having the
occurences highlighted as the single aid provided, and usually best
left set to On.
In PL2004, I tested a couple of (simple*) searches:
linux
os NEAR xp
The results worked all right. List of thos topic pages which contained
the occurences. Click one of the pages to have it load, and look for the
highlighted hits.
Beyond that, with the results from that search, I cannot /natively/ do
anything especially interesting. The HH feature of adding a topic page to
the favorites list does not serve use here. Basically, at this point of
having my search results rendered, I'd need to call up an external program,
to copy/paste the sections in the pages that describe the relevant programs.
In contrast to when using some of the fancy, general search utilities,
whose results lists offer features sucha as relevent extracts, and automatic
jumps to highlighted occurences.
Maybe that's adequate though? Or maybe not? The thing is, nothing within
my knowledge comes up, for whether there is anything that can be done in
compiling the CHM that might aid for making groups of results hits handier
to benefit from.
The single thing related to searches that has occurred to me, it's a
different subject. A "Find in this Topic" on the toolbar. I've seen
in it a couple of CHMs. It brings up the same "Find" dialog as when
using an IE browser. It is not in the ordinary options when compiling.
It might be an active-x control or something. I plan to rtfm, and see
if I can find out the story for such an option...
___________
(*) Simple search was all that seemed applicable here; but on a general
note, about the HH viewer's Search, I want to mention that it does
Boolean (AND OR NEAR NOT), and wildcard, and nested expression.
MSFT's document on using the HH viewer
http://www.mailandfiles.com/users/omega/Viewhlp.chm (58k)
--
Karen S.
omega
omega <m...@privacy.net>:
> Beyond that, with the results from that search, I cannot /natively/ do
> anything especially interesting. The HH feature of adding a topic page to
> the favorites list does not serve use here. Basically, at this point of
> having my search results rendered, I'd need to call up an external program,
> to copy/paste the sections in the pages that describe the relevant programs.
Thinking about it. I just got a seed of a possible thought. That I create
a set of .htms, one per program. That I do not list them from the Contents
pane anywhere (and maybe/maybe not in the Index pane). So they would reside
basically hidden, and come up specifically as a result of certain kinds of
searches.
The user would then be able, from Search Results, to add any of those
individual program .htm's to their Favorites panel in the CHM.
Just a seed of thought. A main issue for deciding such a plan, I'd have
to look into some way, some tool, to have these created with at least some
degree of reasonable automations.
. . .
Also, if implemented. It would likely be into the larger PL.chm file. When
it is eventually rebuilt (I plan to do a rebuild largely from scratch, when
the time comes). The reason not into PL2004.chm is because what I want from
this latter, above all else, is the highest simplicity of streamlined steps.
Such that it is most easily synched from pricelessware.org content (by me,
or by anyone who might one day adopt the activity).
--
Karen S.
omega
> omega wrote:
>
> > Speaking of the W word.
> >
> > (What was the saying? "I love work, can stare at it for hours.")
>
> I think it's "I love work, I can *look* at it for hours." Staring
> requires an *effort*, looking is more passive. ;)
Of course! I'd sensed something was essentially off in how I was
remembering the saying. Even merely reading that word "stare" was
giving me an uncomfortable sensation of exertion.
[...]
> > A Sort-By category for supported OS.
> >
> > Mainly, it would give Linux users a way quickly locate those programs that
> > run on their OS.
>
> > (It would also help serve in a possible future scenario. One of these years,
> > it might become that some material number of the programs that make it to PL
> > do not run on 9x Windows, and just the later versions.)
>
> *Already* true in a fair number of cases. Then there are those who
> prefer no install, open source etc. etc. Most of that information has
> already been gathered for PL2004 programs. The data would have to be
> split into separate fields to have useful sorting in a table. IMO a new
> web page would be needed to display it. Some work involved, but not
> overwhelming. OTOH it's sometimes hard to find that kind of data for a
> program - so the tables would be somewhat incomplete/ less than 100
> percent accurate . . .
I consider the data available in a fairly solid way when it's a case
of whether a program has incarnations for Linux in addition to Windows.
In fact, the primary reason this particular Sort-By column struck me as
useful was to provide a small compromise for those who have requested
the large thing: a special Linux section.
It's the case of something like compatibility in 9x v NT generation where
incompleteness is inevitable. Often a developer simply hasn't tested on
both systems. In many cases works fine on both; but of course in many other
cases, nope. So for that level of OS sorting, the column would, yes, have
incompleteness issues.
> Your question leads us to a more basic question: What info should be on
> those pages and how is it going to get there?
The most important stage of things is formulating the question, as you
have done. I'm mainly going to leave the question there, as is, at this
moment. Responding well takes fair contemplation.
> IMO the primary purpose of the pages should be to provide a list of
> programs that *might* be suitable for a given task. (Secondary purposes
> include noting last freeware versions etc.)
>
> ISTM that the pages should focus on basic information that does not
> change rapidly.
Agree.
> *Further* information can be gained by a search of the ACF archives,
> starting a thread to discuss which program is best, visiting the web
> pages, Google searches etc. etc. etc.
Ah, I'm going to go ahead and say one thing, impulsively.
When we are on the web and looking into a program that might interest us,
what is usually the most immediate thing that we crave... It is to see
/what it looks like/. A screenshot might not be worth a thousand words,
but it is worth at least a hundred.
Sure, we can sometimes find screenshots once we go visit homepages. But
then again, that's sometimes many extra steps. And a feature we really
appreciate in a freeware archive, it's a handy way to access screenshots
for the programs listed.
The Q again...
> What info should be on those pages and how is it going to get there?
So, my statement "screenshots are neat," it needs to consider the important
factor of "how is that going to get there." I'm not proposing building a
mountain, ie local database of screenshots. Instead, more conservative. I
wonder whether it could be feasible to have some efforts contributed towards
providing an external screenshot link for each program ?
> To date the pages include programs I had information about. Since I'm an
> info junkie - IMO it's a good *start*. ;)
>
> There are some gaping holes that need to be filled in - programming is a
> weak area - there are many others . . .
>
> ISTM we can use the same kind of discussions ACF has always had as a
> tool to build the web pages. When a topic is under discussion
> subcategories for that topic can be reviewed and revised as part of the
> discussion.
>
> From time to time people post useful lists of programs for particular
> tasks - those lists can be incorporated into the web pages.
I've saved many of those extra-useful posts that have passed through ACF.
Yet my imagination is too limited, as to how they would translate easily
into web content. For example, they rarely operate standalone, and instead
read better with a few other messages in their thread. Nor can I envision
well how you might get a trend started, for getting people to make an
occasional special effort to post content that could work in a standalone
way on the web (a slightly different matter than usenet conversation)...
Current limits of my own imaginings aside, I trust that you will soon
develop good ways to inspire contributions into this project....
> IOW I think we can *maintain* a useful set of pages without a *great*
> deal of effort.
>
> The setup *is* flexible and can grow to include more info if there is an
> interest in having it. . .
Count me as having strong interest. Dwell on the possible forms it can take,
and then I'm near inclined to even use the word - exciting.
--
Karen S.
omega
> Then there are those who prefer no install, open source etc. etc.
Hey, look what I found!
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_SYSTEMUTILITIES.php?sortby=n.i.
I am pleased to see that one there, the column for no-installs.
. . .
Speculating into abstract future...I'd like if we could develop a special
page listing exclusively "environamentally green" programs. The no-install,
no registry, no files outside its directory. I don't mean this as a column
on the program page, since it would be too much to check every program
against that criteria. Instead a separate page made up of a dynamically
accumulated list of those programs confirmed to merit that status.
--
Karen S.
David Simpson
<whoise...@kvi.net> typed furiously:
>omega wrote:
>
>> Speaking of the W word.
>>
>> (What was the saying? "I love work, can stare at it for hours.")
>
>I think it's "I love work, I can *look* at it for hours." Staring
>requires an *effort*, looking is more passive. ;)
>
Try: "Work fascinates me. I can sit and watch it for hours."
I was impressed by the site and I will be back.
In regard to the "Top" button dilemma simply add the code for the
button at the end of the code that fetches the data from the database.
By doing that, each time the code does a fetch, it auto magically
places a button just after the information for a program. If you fetch
three pieces of information you get three "Top" buttons. If you are
using CSS it should not be all that difficult or time consuming. One
piece of code should fix all your pages. If not you'll need to use
lots of "paste" commands. Best of luck.
Susan Bugher
> Also, if implemented. It would likely be into the larger PL.chm file. When
> it is eventually rebuilt (I plan to do a rebuild largely from scratch, when
> the time comes). The reason not into PL2004.chm is because what I want from
> this latter, above all else, is the highest simplicity of streamlined steps.
> Such that it is most easily synched from pricelessware.org content (by me,
> or by anyone who might one day adopt the activity).
I just uploaded PL2004 pages - a few program updates. We should probably
talk a little bit about coordination. Do you want me to post to ACF
every time I make an update?
Do you want to email your updated CHM files to me for uploading or would
you rather upload them somewhere else where I can grab them?
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>Then there are those who prefer no install, open source etc. etc.
>
>
> Hey, look what I found!
>
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_SYSTEMUTILITIES.php?sortby=n.i.
>
> I am pleased to see that one there, the column for no-installs.
>
> Speculating into abstract future...I'd like if we could develop a special
> page listing exclusively "environamentally green" programs. The no-install,
> no registry, no files outside its directory. I don't mean this as a column
> on the program page, since it would be too much to check every program
> against that criteria. Instead a separate page made up of a dynamically
> accumulated list of those programs confirmed to merit that status.
IMO it would work better to juat add that to the program info pages - I
could use the n.i. column (n.i.-n.r. or whatever for those programs). If
someone posts a list I can add/update the info.
Susan Bugher
> I was impressed by the site and I will be back.
good to hear :)
> In regard to the "Top" button dilemma simply add the code for the
> button at the end of the code that fetches the data from the database.
> By doing that, each time the code does a fetch, it auto magically
> places a button just after the information for a program. If you fetch
> three pieces of information you get three "Top" buttons. If you are
> using CSS it should not be all that difficult or time consuming. One
> piece of code should fix all your pages. If not you'll need to use
> lots of "paste" commands. Best of luck.
No CSS but I *could* add "top" to *every* program description fairly
easily - it's difficult to add just a *few* - at intervals . . .
and. . .
There are Anti "top" button and Pro "top" button opinions - soooooo -
I'll add *one* "top" button at the bottom of the pages and hope that
everyone is reasonably happy with the compromise.
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>>IOW I think we can *maintain* a useful set of pages without a *great*
>>deal of effort.
>>
>>The setup *is* flexible and can grow to include more info if there is an
>>interest in having it. . .
>
> Count me as having strong interest. Dwell on the possible forms it can take,
> and then I'm near inclined to even use the word - exciting.
I think the process can work in much same way as the Freeware Wish List
works - by requests to add info. For example:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_TEXT.php
has a list of text editors. If someone reviews the page and doesn't find
a particular editor they can ask to have it added.
Second example, see a recent thread: Looking forprg to compare two text
files
A list of programs for that task was created during the discussion -
those programs have been listed in a subcategory on the text page.
Threads like that are useful now. If participants review the existing
data on the Program Info pages the threads will be even more useful.
Adding info that goes *beyond* the lists of programs can be done by
adding links to a subcategory. The Multi-Media page *has* a link to
dadiOH's dandies. The Text Editor subcategory will soon have a link to
the Text Editor Review page.
Information about each program can be added by linking the program to a
web page. I'll add the descriptions of programs shown on the PL2004
nominations pages as examples (soon).
Much information *could* be added to the categories or subcategories by
linking to pages on the Pricelessware site or elsewhere. Comparisons,
features, cross-references etc. etc. etc. IMO the Program Information
pages can "grow" in any direction the group wishes to take.
HTH
David Simpson
<whoise...@kvi.net> typed furiously:
>David Simpson wrote:
>
> > I was impressed by the site and I will be back.
>
>good to hear :)
>
>> In regard to the "Top" button dilemma simply add the code for the
>> button at the end of the code that fetches the data from the database.
>> By doing that, each time the code does a fetch, it auto magically
>> places a button just after the information for a program. If you fetch
>> three pieces of information you get three "Top" buttons. If you are
>> using CSS it should not be all that difficult or time consuming. One
>> piece of code should fix all your pages. If not you'll need to use
>> lots of "paste" commands. Best of luck.
>
>No CSS but I *could* add "top" to *every* program description fairly
>easily - it's difficult to add just a *few* - at intervals . . .
>
>and. . .
>
>There are Anti "top" button and Pro "top" button opinions - soooooo -
>I'll add *one* "top" button at the bottom of the pages and hope that
>everyone is reasonably happy with the compromise.
>
>Susan
I. personally, rarely use "top" buttons so I have no real opinion.
Perhaps you should investigate CSS as It would, in my humble opinion,
make your job easier as you would only have to design your page once.
Adding extra details then becomes easy.
Susan Bugher
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
I've "borrowed" the Category Index page (above URL) temporarily to try a
.PHP Alphabetical List page.
The "old" alphabetial page is here:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_AlphabeticalList.htm
Please take a look at both and tell me which you prefer.
Bjorn Simonsen
>> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_AlphabeticalList.htm
>Please take a look at both and tell me which you prefer.
PHP, very nice. Would prefer change of order, to :
PROG. - CAT. -URL - AUTH.
or maybe :
CAT. - PROG. -URL - AUTH.
Either way will make it easier to navigate/browse/search IMHO.
All the best,
Bjorn Simonsen
omega
> I just uploaded PL2004 pages - a few program updates. We should probably
> talk a little bit about coordination. Do you want me to post to ACF
> every time I make an update?
I'd sort of had the notion of having Httrack do its query for updates approx
once a week. Do you think that the PL2004.chm should be more timely than that,
for reflecting updates at the site?
> Do you want to email your updated CHM files to me for uploading or would
> you rather upload them somewhere else where I can grab them?
Seems it makes more sense that I send to an email address of yours. Only,
I first have to get around to using email again (I quit a couple years ago,
strange as that sounds). So until I normalize to SMTP instead of FTP, will
you bear with me?
I ran an update mirror tonight (04 March).
For transfer to your server:
http://www.mailandfiles.com/users/omega/PL2004.chm
--
Karen S.
Bjorn Simonsen
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
Don't know if possible, but would be nice when sorting on column -
like by Author, if "something" comes before nothing. So that one does
not have to scroll past the many empty cells (assuming there will
always be some) to get the Author list when sorted by Author.
All the best,
omega
> Susan Bugher wrote in <104gahr...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
> >> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> >http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_AlphabeticalList.htm
> >Please take a look at both and tell me which you prefer.
>
> PHP, very nice.
Yes, totally the winner: P_CategoryIndex.php
> Would prefer change of order, to :
> PROG. - CAT. -URL - AUTH.
> or maybe :
> CAT. - PROG. -URL - AUTH.
>
> Either way will make it easier to navigate/browse/search IMHO.
My pref would be close to the above, but with URL at the end. CAT PROG &
AUTH are all what I'd sort by; where URL would be an action I'd take.
--
Karen S.
Sharon Page
"Susan Bugher" <whoise...@kvi.net> wrote
> Susan Bugher wrote:
>
> > http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> I've "borrowed" the Category Index page (above URL) temporarily to try a
> .PHP Alphabetical List page.
I prefer the one above... I like the neat looking data/table format.
SLP
******
http://www.best-page.us
Susan Bugher
Good points. I use the PL2004 Program Index page as a quick way to go to
the program description. I'm working on the assumption that *this* page
will be used mainly to:
1) find a URL for the program
2) sort programs by author
3) see if a program is listed (or should be added)
Agree/ disagree? The page sorts initially on the first column. ISTM that
most people would want to see the page in alphabetical order to start
with.
Changing the order of the columns is simple. I'll try PROG - CAT -
AUTHOR - URL next . . . see what the feedback is . . .
I'm not sure what upper limit on size is desireable. I hate slow loading
pages - perhaps others are more tolerant. Any thoughts on that?
ATM I don't envision adding direct links to the program pages - that
would increase the page size significantly. ATM - the alphabetical page
is 131 KB. The .PHP page is 390 KB when saved as a HTML file.
The sort mode is ASCII - program names are all upper case so they will
sort in alphabetical order. I could do that "invisibly" but it would
increase the page size dramatically. I also used "link" instead of
showing the URL to keep the page size down. The links do sort in
alphabetical order - not much help if you can't see it . . . could be
changed or a company column could be added . . .
Bjorn - I will change the Author sort so that blanks go to the bottom (I
can do that with little or no increase in page size). Thanks for the
suggestion.
Please keep the comments coming. :)
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>I just uploaded PL2004 pages - a few program updates. We should probably
>>talk a little bit about coordination. Do you want me to post to ACF
>>every time I make an update?
>
>
> I'd sort of had the notion of having Httrack do its query for updates approx
> once a week. Do you think that the PL2004.chm should be more timely than that,
> for reflecting updates at the site?
How often will people *download* the updates - especially casual
visitors to the site? ISTM that many will only download it *once*.
FWIW I usually update the program descriptions once or twice a month.
Maybe update the CHM once a month so the ACF "regulars" can get the
updated info?
>>Do you want to email your updated CHM files to me for uploading or would
>>you rather upload them somewhere else where I can grab them?
>
>
> Seems it makes more sense that I send to an email address of yours. Only,
> I first have to get around to using email again (I quit a couple years ago,
> strange as that sounds). So until I normalize to SMTP instead of FTP, will
> you bear with me?
>
> I ran an update mirror tonight (04 March).
> For transfer to your server:
> http://www.mailandfiles.com/users/omega/PL2004.chm
Got it. :) Either way works fine for me - just let me know when there's
a new version.
Susan Bugher
> Perhaps you should investigate CSS as It would, in my humble opinion,
> make your job easier as you would only have to design your page once.
> Adding extra details then becomes easy.
I think it's already on my endless todo list . . . somewhere . . .
along with PHP . . . :)
Bjorn Simonsen
>I'm working on the assumption that *this* page
>will be used mainly to:
>
>1) find a URL for the program
>2) sort programs by author
>3) see if a program is listed (or should be added)
Disagree, me thinks *most* visitors will stop by that list to see
1) what programs are listed in category X outside of those already
on the PL and that I know of? (few if any reads everything in a.c.f :)
2) what other fine apps did this author write?
3) is my favorite or any other goodies I know missing from this nice
list?
- in that order.
URLs relevant in all cases, but not the first most people will look
for. If program name is known, or author -> google. Only the dedicate
few will come to your list for URLs only. Only my guess of course.
(I hope we are talking about the same list, the extended - programs
mentioned in group but not on PL one? - it's been a long day :)
>Changing the order of the columns is simple. I'll try PROG - CAT -
>AUTHOR - URL next . . . see what the feedback is . . .
Sounds good.
>Bjorn - I will change the Author sort so that blanks go to the bottom (I
>can do that with little or no increase in page size). Thanks for the
>suggestion.
Nice, thank you very much.
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher wrote in <104hcdo...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>
>>I'm working on the assumption that *this* page
>>will be used mainly to:
>>
>>1) find a URL for the program
>>2) sort programs by author
>>3) see if a program is listed (or should be added)
>
>
> Disagree, me thinks *most* visitors will stop by that list to see
>
> 1) what programs are listed in category X outside of those already
> on the PL and that I know of? (few if any reads everything in a.c.f :)
I don't think I can list *subcategories* on that page - it would get too
big and. . .
the Internet page (for example) has 400 programs. I *wish* I could put
everything on one page - IMO that would be the best arrangement . . .
> 2) what other fine apps did this author write?
> 3) is my favorite or any other goodies I know missing from this nice
> list?
>
> - in that order.
>
> URLs relevant in all cases, but not the first most people will look
> for. If program name is known, or author -> google. Only the dedicate
> few will come to your list for URLs only. Only my guess of course.
> (I hope we are talking about the same list, the extended - programs
> mentioned in group but not on PL one? - it's been a long day :)
same list - yes :)
>>Changing the order of the columns is simple. I'll try PROG - CAT -
>>AUTHOR - URL next . . . see what the feedback is . . .
>
>
> Sounds good.
>
>
>>Bjorn - I will change the Author sort so that blanks go to the bottom (I
>>can do that with little or no increase in page size). Thanks for the
>>suggestion.
>
>
> Nice, thank you very much.
Revised pages are up if you want to take a look:
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php
> All the best,
> Bjorn Simonsen
Susan
omega
> >can do that with little or no increase in page size). Thanks for the
> >suggestion.
>
> Nice, thank you very much.
Me too!
I always wanted that sort-order of blanks last. (It was just one of those
/few/ times when I didn't think to raise up my bowl and ask.)
--
Karen S.
Susan Bugher
> I always wanted that sort-order of blanks last. (It was just one of those
> /few/ times when I didn't think to raise up my bowl and ask.)
Anything else? ask away, now's a good time to *shape* the pages . . .
Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
programs added as separate files . . .
have a look around. . .
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
I'm off to bed . . . :)
Bjorn Simonsen
>> Disagree, me thinks *most* visitors will stop by that list to see
>>
>> 1) what programs are listed in category X outside of those already
>> on the PL and that I know of? (few if any reads everything in a.c.f :)
>
>I don't think I can list *subcategories* on that page - it would get too
>big and.
Not what I meant. Language barrier on this of the fence, sweedish
cheef syndrom perhaps. Retry:
1) what programs are listed in the broad and general category I'm
interested in, say System utilities for example, in addition to
the *programs* I have already seen listed on the main PL site and
that otherwise already know of?
Never ment to suggest you should list sub-categories on that page :)
Bjorn Simonsen
>Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
>page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
>programs added as separate files . . .
>
>have a look around. . .
>
>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
Wow! Very nice indeed! Nice and not mention helpful!
Since your asking for input... maybe you could to add some leading
text on top of first page - in addition to what is already there? I
mean just something so that people like my self understand we are
supposed to click the category links above the main Category Index
page - instead of simply staring stupid at that big table that we have
already sorted twice ways ... :)
Now how can I sort the file managers according to if they offer single
or dual pane? (kidding;)
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher wrote in <104iv5i...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>>Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
>>page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
>>programs added as separate files . . .
>>
>>have a look around. . .
>>
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
>
> Wow! Very nice indeed! Nice and not mention helpful!
>
> Since your asking for input... maybe you could to add some leading
> text on top of first page - in addition to what is already there? I
> mean just something so that people like my self understand we are
> supposed to click the category links above the main Category Index
> page - instead of simply staring stupid at that big table that we have
> already sorted twice ways ... :)
Will do - there and on the Program Index page too.
> Now how can I sort the file managers according to if they offer single
> or dual pane? (kidding;)
Tell me which is which and I'll make two subcategories. :)
*or*
if you want to add *more* information than that. . .
Do a feature comparison of file managers and I'll link a web page with
the info to the File Utilities page. I used a simple format for the
program description files I added yesterday - other info can be added
the same way and shown as INFO if it's about more than one program. (see
the Multimedia page or the Text page for examples).
Here's a template:
-----------
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD> <TITLE> Prog. Info. (www.pricelessware.org)</TITLE>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFF4">
<blockquote><pre>
********[YOUR INFORMATION HERE]********
</pre></blockquote>
<hr width="80%">
<p><CENTER><b><A HREF="http://www.pricelessware.org">Pricelessware
Home</A></b></CENTER>
<BR><CENTER><B>© alt.comp.freeware 1999-2004</B></CENTER>
<BR><CENTER><B><A HREF="#TOP">TOP</A></B></CENTER><BR>
</html>
------------
next question? ;)
omega
> Anything else? ask away, now's a good time to *shape* the pages . . .
I've only now started reading... I'd be disappointed in myself if I could
not eventually come up with at least some kind of criticism/suggestion/
argument. But this is a big one, need time. So much there!
> Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
> page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
> programs added as separate files . . .
Looking GREAT!
> have a look around. . .
>
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
Three hundred sizty-seven pages! Breathtaking. You must have secretly
enlisted all of Santa's elves to help you make this.
> I'm off to bed . . . :)
And, now, it's AM. Go forth woman, get out that chisel and continue to
build that castle. <G>
--
Karen S.
Bjorn Simonsen
>Tell me which is which and I'll make two subcategories. :)
>
>*or*
>
>if you want to add *more* information than that. . .
Heh...got me there. But think I have had just enough of File Managers
for a while. Thanks for the update though. What I will try do later
(if you haven't already :) is to see if any of the FMs/urls mentioned
in the last couple of threads needs to be added to your P page ....:)
All the best,
Born Simonsen
dszady
> omega wrote:
>
>> I always wanted that sort-order of blanks last. (It was just one of those
>> /few/ times when I didn't think to raise up my bowl and ask.)
>
> Anything else? ask away, now's a good time to *shape* the pages . . .
>
> Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
> page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
> programs added as separate files . . .
>
> have a look around. . .
>
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> I'm off to bed . . . :)
>
> Susan
Good job! I find the whole site makeover astonishing to say the least.
--
°¿° Member: Maine SETI@home
http://www.earths-ocular.com/
Registered Linux User: 347957
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>Anything else? ask away, now's a good time to *shape* the pages . . .
>
>
> I've only now started reading... I'd be disappointed in myself if I could
> not eventually come up with at least some kind of criticism/suggestion/
> argument. But this is a big one, need time. So much there!
IIRC you thought back-up programs should be in FILE UTILITIES and had
other category changes you thought would be an improvement in PL2004.
Now's your chance. :)
I'd like to use the Program Information pages to work out categories/
subcategories for PL2005 and also to place programs into the most
appropriate subcategory. Then when PL nomination time rolls around again
anyone nominating a program will know its category and subcategory.
>>Sort thing is done, pages have been "bleached", rearranged Program Index
>>page, Text Editor Review link added to the text page, info for some
>>programs added as separate files . . .
>
> Looking GREAT!
:)
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> Three hundred sizty-seven pages! Breathtaking. You must have secretly
> enlisted all of Santa's elves to help you make this.
The program descriptions are taken from the PL2004 Nominations pages
(nom. - not selected) - thought it would be good to have them here. . .
>>I'm off to bed . . . :)
>
> And, now, it's AM. Go forth woman, get out that chisel and continue to
> build that castle. <G>
I'm working! I'm working! - I added the note that Bjorn asked for - that
was a real toughie. ;)
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher wrote in <104k228...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>
>>Tell me which is which and I'll make two subcategories. :)
>>
>>*or*
>>
>>if you want to add *more* information than that. . .
>
> Heh...got me there. But think I have had just enough of File Managers
> for a while. Thanks for the update though.
hehe - just wanted you and others to know that it's *possible* to add
any info the group *wants* to add.
> What I will try do later
> (if you haven't already :) is to see if any of the FMs/urls mentioned
> in the last couple of threads needs to be added to your P page ....:)
Thanks! That would be helpful. :)
Bjorn Simonsen
>if any of the FMs/urls mentioned
>in the last couple of threads needs to be added to your P page ....:)
Ok, File Manager links not on your pages (AFAIK), as promised:
First, Tubonavigator is currently listed on your P page with download
link to REMs page <http://woundedmoon.org/win32_freeware.html>
w/version 1.46 listed as last freeware. But someone (fan club,users?)
have put up a "hosting" site for TN, in the authors absence, offers
version 1.47 as last version: <http://turbonavigator.us/>
Site offers links to 5 diffent d/l locations for 1.47 and 4 for 1.46.
So to the other File Managers currently not listed on your pages.
Links mostly from the recent File Manager threads:
DLFiles <http://dlawlis.pair.com/>
DualXplorer <http://delphi.icm.edu.pl/authors/a0004178.htm>
d/l: <http://delphi.icm.edu.pl/ftp/tools/DualXplorer.zip>
F file manager <http://filemanager.free.fr/features.htm>
Fast Explorer <http://thesoftpro.tripod.com/downloads/fe/fe.zip>
Fileant <http://fileant.com/>
TriDComm <http://tridcomm.com/>
Windows File Explorer <http://freesoftlabs.com/>
MS WinFile.exe from WinNT 4.0 SP4, see line 71, right column on
<http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/xp_tweaks.htm>.
and xplorer2 <http://www.netez.com/2xExplorer/>
the new (alpha version) file manager from the 2xExplorer author.
d/l: <http://www.ps.ic.ac.uk/~umeca74/x2alpha.zip>
Susan Bugher
> On Sat, 06 Mar 2004 02:25:35 -0500, Susan Bugher wrote:
>
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> Good job! I find the whole site makeover astonishing to say the least.
Thanks. :)
I'm especially hoping we can develop good lists for business and hobby
apps, apps for kids etc. etc. etc.
IMO the pages should make a good starting point - let us spend less time
discussing what's available, more time discussing what's *best*. :)
Bjorn Simonsen
>MS WinFile.exe from WinNT 4.0 SP4, see line 71, right column on
> <http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/xp_tweaks.htm>.
d/l link:
<http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/WINFILE.EXE>
But perhaps not appropriate on PL? Free as such, but not freeware. Or?
Susan Bugher
> Bjorn Simonsen wrote in <ra5k409boffuqghdh...@4ax.com>:
>
>
>>if any of the FMs/urls mentioned
>>in the last couple of threads needs to be added to your P page ....:)
>
>
> Ok, File Manager links not on your pages (AFAIK), as promised:
>
> First, Tubonavigator is currently listed on your P page with download
> link to REMs page <http://woundedmoon.org/win32_freeware.html>
> w/version 1.46 listed as last freeware. But someone (fan club,users?)
> have put up a "hosting" site for TN, in the authors absence, offers
> version 1.47 as last version: <http://turbonavigator.us/>
> Site offers links to 5 diffent d/l locations for 1.47 and 4 for 1.46.
IMO v 1.47 should not be recommended. There's some sort of data-mining
in v1.47 - maybe harmless, maybe not (ACF archives have discussions
about this).
There is also a bug - saved this quote from the author's site:
There is a bug in v1.47 that prevents it to work correctly under Win9x
and WinME systems. It is due to some features designed exclusively for
NT platform (WinNT 4.0, Win2000, WinXP...) and on these systems TN works
without any problems. I'm working on the fix for the bug but in mean
time please use older version of Turbo Navigator if you are running
Win9x operating system. Both versions can be found on download page. I
am sorry for inconvenience.
</q>
> So to the other File Managers currently not listed on your pages.
> Links mostly from the recent File Manager threads:
>
> DLFiles <http://dlawlis.pair.com/>
>
> DualXplorer <http://delphi.icm.edu.pl/authors/a0004178.htm>
> d/l: <http://delphi.icm.edu.pl/ftp/tools/DualXplorer.zip>
>
> F file manager <http://filemanager.free.fr/features.htm>
>
> Fast Explorer <http://thesoftpro.tripod.com/downloads/fe/fe.zip>
>
> Fileant <http://fileant.com/>
>
> TriDComm <http://tridcomm.com/>
>
> Windows File Explorer <http://freesoftlabs.com/>
>
> MS WinFile.exe from WinNT 4.0 SP4, see line 71, right column on
> <http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/xp_tweaks.htm>.
>
> and xplorer2 <http://www.netez.com/2xExplorer/>
> the new (alpha version) file manager from the 2xExplorer author.
> d/l: <http://www.ps.ic.ac.uk/~umeca74/x2alpha.zip>
Thank you. :)
Susan Bugher
Not quite sure what you are asking here. Is this a MS file -> legality
of DL from this site is dubious? If that's what you mean IMO the app
probably shouldn't be shown. . .
I listed some MS apps on the Prog. Info pages that are not freeware -
but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
have the OS. (Can't remember ATM but think I just said MS in the Ware
column.) ISTM that's sort of a gray area - something for the group to
decide - leave them in or take them out?
Bjorn Simonsen
>>>MS WinFile.exe from WinNT 4.0 SP4, see line 71, right column on
>> d/l link:
>> <http://www.kellys-korner-xp.com/regs_edits/WINFILE.EXE>
>I listed some MS apps on the Prog. Info pages that are not freeware -
>but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
>have the OS.
Having thought about it ...same applies here i guess. Thing is,if you
do ftp search for winfile.exe (pick any engine at
<http://www.ftpsearchengines.com/>) you'll find it (various versions
of it) distributed all over the place, in NT\SP directories as well as
older versions from Win3x etc. Thus, I can see no harm in linking to
it. But on the other hand, this is an old Windows File Manger, which
exist in many versions (updates), and some may be buggy (as I have
just learned, see below), and since we have so many new free new ones
- we probably do not *need* a link for it. So I suggest - don't list
it.
Bug: The file I posted a link to is from Windows NT4 (file version
4.0.1371.1.). It seems it is buggy. Posted a note about this in the
thread where I posted the URL. It would not display \WinnT on my C_
drive. Only, I figured it was not a bug, but a feature <g> .... but
not anymore. Found a more recent version (v 4.0.1381.91)
<ftp://ftp2.granit.ru/Microsoft/NT/ServPack4/Year2000/SP/i386/winfile.exe>
which did away with the "feature", or more likely a bug :)
Susan Bugher
>>but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
>>have the OS.
>
> Having thought about it ...same applies here i guess. Thing is,if you
> do ftp search for winfile.exe (pick any engine at
> <http://www.ftpsearchengines.com/>) you'll find it (various versions
> of it) distributed all over the place, in NT\SP directories as well as
> older versions from Win3x etc. Thus, I can see no harm in linking to
> it. But on the other hand, this is an old Windows File Manger, which
> exist in many versions (updates), and some may be buggy (as I have
> just learned, see below), and since we have so many new free new ones
> - we probably do not *need* a link for it. So I suggest - don't list
> it.
Sounds like a plan to me. I'll won't show it on the web page. Thanks
again for the list - the apps have been added. (revised pages soon)
omega
>
[ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php ]
>
> I listed some MS apps on the Prog. Info pages that are not freeware -
> but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
> have the OS. (Can't remember ATM but think I just said MS in the Ware
> column.) ISTM that's sort of a gray area - something for the group to
> decide - leave them in or take them out?
There is already sw made by MSFT in the PL. Making a new rule that MSFT
categorically not allowed would be most strange. The special ware column
for MSFT is a good compromise. Let's you know that the license might be
be weird reading.
Speaking of grey area, and this is the actual topic I wanted to mention.
PC Mag utils. Even thought they are regularly recommended in ACF, it'd
be hard to put them in the category of freeware. I'm curious to get
clarification about the decision. The inclusion of this Ware type.
PCMag Ware: - Free to use if you have it on your computer
- Absolutely prohibited to redistribute
--
Karen S.
Bjorn Simonsen
>PCMag Ware: - Free to use if you have it on your computer
> - Absolutely prohibited to redistribute
If the license (for the individual distribution) says so. AFAIK - from
a quick look in my pcmag archive collection, it seems pcmag
(Ziff-Davis) started to add such "no distribution" clauses to their
various util archives some time in 1998.
Btw, see <http://garbo.uwasa.fi/pub/pc/pcmagutl/pcmagutl.txt>
Ergo, better not list.
omega
Susan, how about the matter of Requests for Removals?
If that were to be in the procedures, then I have an immediate one. I
request that the following are removed:
BABYA PHOTO WORKSHOP GRAPHICS
BABYA SYSTEM 2004 DESKTOP
BABYA*
There is not one person on ACF who will use these worthless things.
Secondly, there is the matter of the Babya maker's abuse of public
forums, including ACF. His relentless disruptions, his maniacal
self-promotions.
--
Karen S.
omega
Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
> I listed some MS apps on the Prog. Info pages that are not freeware -
> but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
> have the OS.
I am more leaned towards the opinion that we should not crowd into the
listing the ~60 or whatever it is applets that are distributed as part
of the Windows CD.
If do go with rule of thumb of no applets that come as part of Windows,
that would wipe the following (and any similars that I did not spot):
Wordpad
Windows calculator
Windows sound recorder
Msconfig
A slightly less simple matter would be something like this (from the list):
Windows media player
Its difference is that there are new releases continuously available,
notably different than which was originally included as part of the
Windows CD.
And then for that particular example, the Windows Media Player, we have
another subject. That this procuct gets much worse with each higher version.
So its inclusion would have to be treated with special attention.
--
Karen S.
Bjorn Simonsen
>> First, Tubonavigator is currently listed on your P page with download
>
>IMO v 1.47 should not be recommended. [...]
Thanks for the info, appreciated!
>> So to the other File Managers currently not listed on your pages.
Couple more items for the FM category:
muCommander <http://freshmeat.net/projects/mucommander/> **
"muCommander is a cross-platform file manager. It features a
Norton Commander-style interface and runs on any OS that has
support for the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition."
Some File-Manager addons from: <http://www.winability.com/fmutils/>
Formerly shareware - now free.
FM StepUp for Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
FM StepUp NT for Windows NT 3.5x/4.0 (32-bit version) FREE!
FM Toolbar for Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
FM Guardfor Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
Some Explorer addons from <http://www.baxbex.com/products.html>
Free for use at home [separat downloads]
OpenExpert - Open With submenu for explorer's menu
FolderBox - displays additional folders
in the lower part of Explorer
bxNewFolder - Use a hotkey to create a folder
Notice, of the latter three you already have
FolderBox -> FILE UTILITIES
Folder box -> FILE UTILITIES
but not AFAIK: bxNewFolder
omega
A couple more Requests for Removal.
1. ACDSEE.
Did I miss something? Was there ever a freeware version?
2. Association Manager (1.3a By Alexander Peckover)
This program is severely broken and does damage to the registry. Even on
a bare, virgin system with a small registry, it inflicts a nasty number
of erroneous and bad entries. Matters become much worse when this prog
hits a full, developed registry. I have taken logs of its behaviors
on both a virgin system and my own. I've warned about it in ACF. And I
make this final effort here. To advise it not be linked for download by
the unwarned.
--
Karen S.
omega
This one is shareware, unless things have very recently changed...
http://www.code-genie.com/
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
> [ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php ]
>
> PC Mag utils. Even thought they are regularly recommended in ACF, it'd
> be hard to put them in the category of freeware. I'm curious to get
> clarification about the decision. The inclusion of this Ware type.
They are there for information - as a heads-up - these *aren't* freeware
now. I'm hoping to avoid a repeat of last year when several PCMag
programs were nominated for the PL. :)
I also included the few PW 01-03 programs that are now $ware and don't
AFAIK have a last freeware version available - with a "now $ware"
notation. Again that's just for information . . .
ISTM that it would be useful to have some information like that included
- *final* decision is up to the group - include or omit?
omega
Any use for a few author entries into the data? Or would it be too
impractical, too get data of this form entered in?
AceHTML Free Visicom Media
AceFTP Visicom Media
AceMoney Lite MechCAD Software
AC Broswer Konrad Papala
AD-AWARE Lavasoft Team
ACF Notes Ur I.T. Mate Group (Steven Burn)
Adobe* Adobe
Amaya W3C
AnalogX* AnalogX
AntiVir PE H+BEDV Datentechnik GmbH
AsciiDif Adrian Carter
Atlantis Nova Rising Sun Solutions
AutoIt Jonathan Bennett
BatchRun Outer Technologies
Bookmark Manager (BMM) R. Vasicek
BookmarkPriest Philip Perkmann
Bookmark Wizare Moon Software
BrainBox circle-of-excellence (Peter E.H. Smee)
Cacheman Outer Technologies
Capture AnalogX
Calypso Micro Computer Systems
Catfish Equi4 Software (Jean-Claude Wippler)
CD2HTML Falk Petro
Clean System Directory Kevin Solway
Cociter - Cogitum Co-Citer [internet - browser tool] Cogitum LLC
ColorBox Kobayashi Software
Color Selector KOY Software
Color Set Arisesoft
Columnizer Gulf Coastal Freeware
Comparator SoftByte Labs
Compfold Malcolm Pescod
Cool Beans System Info Cool Beans Software
Correlate PE Correlate Technologies
Crypt Edit Polysoft (Ulyanov Ilya)
CSDiff ComponentSoftware, Inc
CSE HTML Validator AI Internet Solutions
CWordpad Cetus Software
Display Partition Information (Partinfo) Powerquest
CustomizeIE NirSoft (Nir Sofer)
Depends.exe - Dependency Walker Steve P Miller; (c) MSFT;
DependencyWalker.com
dBworx PLWorx Software Development
Dialog Box Assistant Duality Software
Dupelocator Midnight Blue Software
Editor2 Nikos Bozinis
Edxor Dariusz Stanislawek
FavTool Microsoft
FileAsoc RHA (Minisystems)
FileNote Moon Software
FileTargets Moon Software
FolderBox BAxBEx Software
Fontlister Peter Theill
Freezip Dariusz Stanislawek
Fresh Diagnose FreshDevices Software
Fresh Download FreshDevices Software
Hostess Ray Marron
HTML2Table Stefan Pettersson
HTMStrip Wayne Software (Bruce Guthrie)
JBCat Jan van den Borst
omega
another payware that crept itself in
omega
> omega wrote:
> > [ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php ]
> >
> > Speaking of grey area, and this is the actual topic I wanted to mention.
> > PC Mag utils. Even thought they are regularly recommended in ACF, it'd
> > be hard to put them in the category of freeware.
>
> now. I'm hoping to avoid a repeat of last year when several PCMag
> programs were nominated for the PL. :)
>
> I also included the few PW 01-03 programs that are now $ware and don't
> AFAIK have a last freeware version available - with a "now $ware"
> notation. Again that's just for information . . .
>
> ISTM that it would be useful to have some information like that included
> - *final* decision is up to the group - include or omit?
Approach One. This list is freeware. It is less strictly freeware than
(what should be) high standards of PL; but more strictly freeware than
what gets discussed in ACF.
Approach Two. This is mostly freeware. Also included is this type of
exception: PCMag ware; former PLs turned pay; xxx. And there will be
a symbol or a color to demark these...
Approach Three. (?)
--
Karen S.
Susan Bugher
>>Susan, how about the matter of Requests for Removals?
>
>
> A couple more Requests for Removal.
>
> 1. ACDSEE.
>
> Did I miss something? Was there ever a freeware version?
<q>
ACDSEE earlier ver 2.2 is freeware and available at
http://www.oldos.org/files/acdsee22win31.exe
</>
> 2. Association Manager (1.3a By Alexander Peckover)
>
> This program is severely broken and does damage to the registry. Even on
> a bare, virgin system with a small registry, it inflicts a nasty number
> of erroneous and bad entries. Matters become much worse when this prog
> hits a full, developed registry. I have taken logs of its behaviors
> on both a virgin system and my own. I've warned about it in ACF. And I
> make this final effort here. To advise it not be linked for download by
> the unwarned.
IMO this is a *key* question. What do we do about programs that get a
bad review? I tend to save info about bad programs in order to avoid
them. ISTM that adding a warning would be better than omitting those
programs from the list. Agree? Disagree?
Susan Bugher
>>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
>
> Susan, how about the matter of Requests for Removals?
>
> If that were to be in the procedures, then I have an immediate one. I
> request that the following are removed:
>
> BABYA PHOTO WORKSHOP GRAPHICS
> BABYA SYSTEM 2004 DESKTOP
> BABYA*
I agree. They got added because they were nominated by A.A. for PL2004.
There are a few other programs from the PL2004 nominations that IMO
should be removed - TBD.
Susan Bugher
It was free in 2002. I'll check - and remove it if it's shareware.
omega
> >
> > Did I miss something? Was there ever a freeware version?
>
> <q>
> ACDSEE earlier ver 2.2 is freeware and available at
>
> http://www.oldos.org/files/acdsee22win31.exe
> </>
Gee, never knew! That it had never been freeware was an assumption
I'd had my whole life long....
> > 2. Association Manager (1.3a By Alexander Peckover)
> >
> > This program is severely broken and does damage to the registry. Even on
> > a bare, virgin system with a small registry, it inflicts a nasty number
> > of erroneous and bad entries. Matters become much worse when this prog
> > hits a full, developed registry. I have taken logs of its behaviors
> > on both a virgin system and my own. I've warned about it in ACF. And I
> > make this final effort here. To advise it not be linked for download by
> > the unwarned.
>
> IMO this is a *key* question. What do we do about programs that get a
> bad review? I tend to save info about bad programs in order to avoid
> them. ISTM that adding a warning would be better than omitting those
> programs from the list. Agree? Disagree?
That discussion last winter, some people were saying how much they would
value some attention to having thumbs-down type of reviews associated with
programs. I guess you could set that up with the "more info" links...
. . .
But a program like this one here, it is beyond a thumbs-down. Normal bad
would be it's lame, doesn't work correctly, etc. Wrecking the registry,
that's as serious a matter, I should think, as programs that are malignant
to the system by /calculated/ design (adware and spyware).
This program is also distinct for another reason. Usually when something
does some great mound of trash into the registry, it's during install, or
first run, and that's when we're monitoring, and thus can quickly recover.
But this one, it's damage is done only later, when you don't expect, when
you have clicked an innocent command. And it is not something you can undo
afterwards, its intricrate rewriting of the HKCR filetype keys. Not unless
you had a regmon running specifically at that time.
It is not a program that is around very many parts. I think it could easily
die off on its own. I'd like to see it deleted out of existence. Probably
the programmer feels the same way (notice he now keeps no web presence for
it), having discovered his mistakes.
--
Karen S.
omega
> omega wrote:
> >>http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_CategoryIndex.php
> >
> > Susan, how about the matter of Requests for Removals?
>
>
> I agree. They got added because they were nominated by A.A. for PL2004.
> There are a few other programs from the PL2004 nominations that IMO
> should be removed - TBD.
Those drive-by nominations. GRRR.
--
Karen S.
Susan Bugher
> http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php
>
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>I listed some MS apps on the Prog. Info pages that are not freeware -
>>but are often suggested in ACF in response to requests. Free *if* you
>>have the OS.
>
>
> I am more leaned towards the opinion that we should not crowd into the
> listing the ~60 or whatever it is applets that are distributed as part
> of the Windows CD.
>
> If do go with rule of thumb of no applets that come as part of Windows,
> that would wipe the following (and any similars that I did not spot):
>
> Wordpad
> Windows calculator
> Windows sound recorder
> Msconfig
I disagree. When someone has a task they want to perform and wants to
know what apps can do the job these are often mentioned. ISTM the list
should provide that information too.
> A slightly less simple matter would be something like this (from the list):
>
> Windows media player
>
> Its difference is that there are new releases continuously available,
> notably different than which was originally included as part of the
> Windows CD.
>
> And then for that particular example, the Windows Media Player, we have
> another subject. That this procuct gets much worse with each higher version.
> So its inclusion would have to be treated with special attention.
The Program Information pages just tell people a program exists. . .
dszady
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>>
>> omega wrote:
[..]
> Approach One. This list is freeware. It is less strictly freeware than
> (what should be) high standards of PL; but more strictly freeware than
> what gets discussed in ACF.
>
> Approach Two. This is mostly freeware. Also included is this type of
> exception: PCMag ware; former PLs turned pay; xxx. And there will be
> a symbol or a color to demark these...
>
> Approach Three. (?)
3. This list is freeware according to the strict standards of the
majority(?) of posters to alt.comp.freeware unless duly noted.
(I hate those last three words.) If they were used in the front - "Unless
duly noted, this.. - I would hate them there also.
What are the standards BTW?
--
°¿° Member: Maine SETI@home
http://www.earths-ocular.com/
Registered Linux User: 347957
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher wrote in <104kbel...@corp.supernews.com>:
>
>>>First, Tubonavigator is currently listed on your P page with download
>>
>>IMO v 1.47 should not be recommended. [...]
>
> Thanks for the info, appreciated!
Thanks for bringing it up - I added a note: v 1.47 is not recommended
That's the kind of information I think it's helpful to have in the
Program Information pages - easy to lose track of it otherwise.
>>>So to the other File Managers currently not listed on your pages.
>
>
> Couple more items for the FM category:
>
> muCommander <http://freshmeat.net/projects/mucommander/> **
> "muCommander is a cross-platform file manager. It features a
> Norton Commander-style interface and runs on any OS that has
> support for the Java 2 Platform, Standard Edition."
>
> Some File-Manager addons from: <http://www.winability.com/fmutils/>
> Formerly shareware - now free.
> FM StepUp for Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
> FM StepUp NT for Windows NT 3.5x/4.0 (32-bit version) FREE!
> FM Toolbar for Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
> FM Guardfor Windows 3.1x/95/98 (16-bit version) FREE!
>
>
> Some Explorer addons from <http://www.baxbex.com/products.html>
> Free for use at home [separat downloads]
> OpenExpert - Open With submenu for explorer's menu
> FolderBox - displays additional folders
> in the lower part of Explorer
> bxNewFolder - Use a hotkey to create a folder
>
> Notice, of the latter three you already have
> FolderBox -> FILE UTILITIES
> Folder box -> FILE UTILITIES
> but not AFAIK: bxNewFolder
Thank you for the additional info. :)
omega
omega
Aw, come on, Dszady, I expected a smack for that one - but not the
killfile. Let me back out (it's dark in here).
--
Karen S.
Susan Bugher
> On Sun, 07 Mar 2004 08:42:33 -0800, omega wrote:
>
>
>>Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>>
>>>omega wrote:
>
> [..]
>
>>Approach One. This list is freeware. It is less strictly freeware than
>>(what should be) high standards of PL; but more strictly freeware than
>>what gets discussed in ACF.
>>
>>Approach Two. This is mostly freeware. Also included is this type of
>>exception: PCMag ware; former PLs turned pay; xxx. And there will be
>>a symbol or a color to demark these...
>>
>>Approach Three. (?)
>
>
> 3. This list is freeware according to the strict standards of the
> majority(?) of posters to alt.comp.freeware unless duly noted.
>
> (I hate those last three words.) If they were used in the front - "Unless
> duly noted, this.. - I would hate them there also.
>
> What are the standards BTW?
4. Programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts (not a complete list).
I'll fill in the Ware info *when* someone volunteers it - IMO that
column will always be incomplete. . . so ISTM the *general* statement
about the programs is simply "mentioned in ACF posts".
The list is a source of information. Perhaps we need to define a list of
the questions it attempts to answer?
1. What programs are available for zzz?
2. What is the last freeware version of xxx?
3. Is yyy still freeware?
4. Is xyz Spyware?
5. What programs are no-install?
6. Are there other programs by the same author?
7.
8.
9.
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
> [ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php ]
>
> I'm wondering if it would be a reasonable idea to post a list of the prog
> entries that need URLs. For people to post any applicable URLs that they
> know. Would it make a mess, or could it help? A list in some variation of
> this form...
If someone sorts the Program Index page on the URL column they can see
which
ones are missing . . .
Information would be appreciated. FYI note - I'm showing the *home page*
URLs whenever possible - that's less likely to change than a URL to a
program description page - also works better for grouping programs by
author etc. etc. Some programs have a DL link - I'm revising those when
I can find a description to link to. . .
Susan Bugher
>>[ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php ]
>
>
> Any use for a few author entries into the data? Or would it be too
> impractical, too get data of this form entered in?
Easy to enter - thanks. I already have some Company info in my file -
can show it as a separate column or combined with the author column. Any
preference?
omega
>
> 4. Programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts (not a complete list).
Do you mean "Freeware programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
Or do you mean "Any programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
Or "Programs of Ware types xx yy & zz that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
> 1. What programs are available for zzz?
Similar question here...
--
Karen S.
omega
> omega wrote:
>
> >>[ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php ]
> >
> > Any use for a few author entries into the data? Or would it be too
> > impractical, too get data of this form entered in?
>
> Easy to enter - thanks. I already have some Company info in my file -
> can show it as a separate column or combined with the author column. Any
> preference?
Same column. My most precise preference would be that when there are two
entries, it's company first in the column.
(I assume developers prefer to have their company name displayed, when it
exists. But I like to be able to see author name, too, when available.)
--
Karen S.
omega
> > 4. Programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts (not a complete list).
>
> Do you mean "Freeware programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
>
> > 1. What programs are available for zzz?
>
> Similar question here...
Before waiting an answer, let me add that which is my initial
(uncontemplated) reaction.
(a)
If you modify to "Freeware programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
and "What freeware programs are available for zzz?", that's the camp I'm
comfortable in. Freeware fills the playground so very fully all by itself.
To take on addressing payware et al, that'd be stepping into an other field.
Not that payware has been unleashed on the list so far. But there is not
yet clarity on what is definitively excluded.
(b)
Not that I don't have some tiny glint of a purpose that you might be
outlining. A master reference list, useful for the context of ACF
conversations as they actually happen. Reminds me of how AUE liked
to define two types of grammars. Descriptive and Prescriptive.
... (unfinished glint)
--
Karen S.
dszady
Been watching the baseball game: Red Sox - Yankees (Yankees Suck!).
The word "Clipart" is more profane than some of the posts I've written.
(Ya! Right!)
Out of the dungeon with you, Maiden. Go forth, spread the word and tell
your minions, "Clipart Sucks!".
And so it shall be written and so it shall be done. :)
omega
> The list is a source of information. Perhaps we need to define a list of
> the questions it attempts to answer?
>
> 1. What programs are available for zzz?
> 2. What is the last freeware version of xxx?
> 3. Is yyy still freeware?
> 4. Is xyz Spyware?
Would there be a major logistics problem to design two lists? One for free
and benign programs. And one for the other: PCMag ware, PL turned-payware,
free nagware, etc.
--
Karen S.
omega
> Out of the dungeon with you, Maiden.
Noble sir, I thank you.
> Go forth, spread the word and tell
> your minions, "Clipart Sucks!".
> And so it shall be written and so it shall be done. :)
I shall enscribe your FAQ onto the very thickest of parchment, hard as
treebark, and make every FREE CLIPART barbarian swallow it down whole,
until they beg to purge themselves of their foul past, and prove ready
to enter the pure lands of freeware.
Will that help?
--
Karen S.
Susan Bugher
> Susan Bugher <whoise...@kvi.net>:
>
>>4. Programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts (not a complete list).
>
> Do you mean "Freeware programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
> Or do you mean "Any programs that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
> Or "Programs of Ware types xx yy & zz that have been mentioned in ACF posts"
I meant programs that the group considers okay for discusssion. That
definition is pretty loose - different people have different standards.
. . ISTM that we *can't* do much more than that. . . it was difficult to
get Ware info for programs nominated for PL2004 (never did get it for
some nominations). IMO not much point in setting a different standard if
you can't tell if it's being met . . .
>>1. What programs are available for zzz?
>
> Similar question here...
IMO this should be determined as we go along. IOW when the group reviews
programs that are available for zzz the group can decide which programs
should be added or dropped on the Program Information pages.
ISTM that the list will depend on the topic being discussed. IMO not
much point in trying to list *all* Freeware browsers or HTML editors. . .
Susan Bugher
ISTM that most people would rather look for info on *one* list - two
lists would make it harder to find. JMHO.
Susan Bugher
> CodePad
>
> another payware that crept itself in
looks like freeware from here:
http://shicola.d2.cz/codepad/faq.php
Q: Can I get CodePad source files?
A: CodePad is freeware, not OpenSource.
Susan Bugher
> omega wrote:
>
>> Would there be a major logistics problem to design two lists? One for
>> free
>> and benign programs. And one for the other: PCMag ware, PL
>> turned-payware, free nagware, etc.
>
> ISTM that most people would rather look for info on *one* list - two
> lists would make it harder to find. JMHO.
trying to come up with a good way to do this. . .
I added another column to the Program Index page with this information:
Abbreviations: Column 2:
NR = not recommended (search the ACF archives for more information)
$ = no longer freeware.
http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php
If that looks like a plan I'll add the same column and explanation to
the other pages.
Comments?
dszady
Ah... Ya... That's the ticket.
Where are these pure lands that you dare speaketh of?
In a long ago dark dank post of freeware that history hath lost except made
possible by the spoken word of mouth? The word of "truth"?
But what is "truth"?
It ain't Clipart.
Susan Bugher
>>[ http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/programs/P_ProgramIndex.php ]
>
>
> Any use for a few author entries into the data? Or would it be too
> impractical, too get data of this form entered in?
That was a big help Karen :) - a couple of things:
> Capture AnalogX
Different program with the same name - by NestSoft
> Calypso Micro Computer Systems
now owned by Rose City Software
omega
> omega wrote:
>
> > CodePad
> > another payware that crept itself in
>
> looks like freeware from here:
>
> http://shicola.d2.cz/codepad/faq.php
I was thinking of a different one. Looking on the web now, also clears up
the matter of name collision. The payware's full name is Trellian CodePad.
The freeware CodePad, by ShiCola, which you have listed and linked...well,
that's one that had escaped by collections. So I got to stop everything
now, and download it right away. :)
--
Karen S.
omega
> >
> > Capture AnalogX
>
> Different program with the same name - by NestSoft
Too bad. Brings AnalogX's count down to only 6 or 7 progs on the list.
> > Calypso Micro Computer Systems
>
> now owned by Rose City Software
One of those involved histories. I'd actually kept some of the ACF posts
that explained the succession of events and current status. But was not
thinking it over at the time of typing the short author list.
--
Karen S.