You Must be Joking. - jeremymatthews_dotmac

Alpha.

I would say, by the download numbers alone, the public disagrees :)

Also, if you don't want to use the utility, then don't.
It's that simple.

Yes, not everyone would agree that it is for "routine maintenance". That's why that phrase is never mentioned.

-sw

"Don't censor the airwaves...use your head instead :)"

Reply to This

Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 08:23 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - jeremymatthews_dotmac

Alpha,

I almost forgot to mention a few things:

1) It's a package - meaning it can be used in conjunction with Apple Remote Desktop on LOTS of macs simultaneously! Most other programs are one-mac-at-a-time utilities.
2) It's a package - meaning it can be used alongside imaging or in conjunction with NetBoot for when folks run into trouble; so it can be used with other packages for hands and technician-free troubleshooting
3) We'll check the paths, but this has been tested and works fine on all macs we've run into so far. Please give us any specifics you can offer, so we can improve it!

If you would like it to perform other actions, or if there is anything its lacking, please let us know. We're happy to make FREE software better!

Lastly, I would say this kind of behavior discourages folks who would like to help out the rest of the world. No need for all the darts! After all, I don't see any software listed under your name :)

Thanks again, and looking forward to your comments-

-sw

"Use your head before you complain; what have you offered?"

Reply to This

Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 08:41 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - pwargo

Wow, such an astute developer. Especially the bit in the description of the current version where you rip the bullet items right from the page mentioned in the comments.

Also, about the "I don't see your name on any software" comment: Guess what, you won't see my name on any as well - Nor do I make my own cars or televisions. Software is for the consumer, not the developer. And, if you go by number of downloads, you're fooling yourself. I download quite a bit of software to eval for my users, and use very little of it.

Reply to This

Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 11:05 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - jeremymatthews_dotmac

pwargo,

Why shouldn't we mention those? They seem to be the point of contention here. Doesn't that make some real basic sense? I'm actually following alpha's comments on this one...

And as for this:

"Also, about the "I don't see your name on any software" comment: Guess what, you won't see my name on any as well"

Too bad; we need less critique and more honest work. If you'd like to contribute positively towards the experience of others, we'd be happy to receive some honest work.

And this:
"software is for the consumer, not the developer"

Not always true; software is for whomever wants to use it. Ask yourself this: what is Xcode for?


If you have some honest feedback, or are offering to contribute, we're more than open. Anyone who wants to complain should offer to help...if they _really_ care at all. ANYONE can complain. And, honestly, if you want to change things, write your own software, or offer to contribute.

Thanks again,
sw

- If critics cared, they contribute!

Reply to This

Tuesday, December 27 2005 @ 12:37 PM PST

You Must be Joking. - alphasubzero949

You really are full of yourself.

Tell you what, I downloaded your dmg.zip twice (why you packaged it twice like that is beyond me) since the first time around it refused to mount...are you going to boast about the two added hits to your download counter?

Now let's move onto your wonderful EULA. I don't even know where to begin in pointing out the ridiculousness of it. I'll let others read it and judge for themselves. Remember kids, all of that legal mumbo jumbo for a script that you could do with one line in the Terminal, and it's a no-brainer:

sudo rm -rf /Library/Caches/* /System/Library/Caches/* ~/Library/Caches/*

Oooh, but how dare anyone learns this on their own from digging into your scripts...

Tell me; what exactly can you improve on that command besides your doo-dads about clearing caches on multiple machines (which you shouldn't even be doing in the first place)? Please do enlighten me and the rest of us.

Everyone else reading this?

As if that weren't bad enough, installing demands an admin password without an explanation as to what it's really going to do. Anyone with half a brain knows not to readily submit such a password without understanding what exactly the piece of software intends to do with the privilege escalation. So to take care of that (which may be violating his precious EULA), we go digging inside the installer package and have a look at CleanCachesBySW.info inside the localization folder and note the NeedsAuthorization flag. Change it to NO. Then, to be sure that this wonderful program won't go screwing with areas of the system you don't want it to go, you'll need to head over to Info.plist in the Contents folder and change the path to say...your home folder (hopefully in a non-privileged sandbox account).

While you're at it, bust out Pacifist and have a look inside the package.

Now that the installer has been disarmed, try actually running it and see what you get. Really, do it. You just might be surprised (or not).

He wants your admin password so that he can exploit Apple's built in Installer tool to install a simple script that could have easily been done with one command in the Terminal...or better yet by physically going to the Cache folder and removing the problematic file(s) in question. And you don't need a script or program to do it (along with the reasons of why you shouldn't).

Bottom line: You are one pretentious developer to be discrediting me for being what I am...a conscientious consumer who won't stand for bad and misleading software. I'm actually helping other Mac users (if that's what you wanted) by pointing them away from this garbage.

PS...what exactly have you done for this to be warranted version 3.0 beside your laughable EULA and 'bug' fixes?

Reply to This

Friday, January 06 2006 @ 03:24 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - jeremymatthews_dotmac

alphasubzero949,

I see a lot of flaming here, without you even having looked at the revised package. I will go ahead and respond to a few comments even though you have clearly not checked it out yet:

"PS...what exactly have you done for this to be warranted version 3.0 beside your laughable EULA and 'bug' fixes?"

I would say...take a minute and actually check it out. Isn't that what a critic is supposed to do?

Next:
"a script that you could do with one line in the Terminal, and it's a no-brainer:
sudo rm -rf /Library/Caches/* /System/Library/Caches/* ~/Library/Caches/*"

This has changed...see previous comment.

Next:
"Oooh, but how dare anyone learns this on their own from digging into your scripts..."

Well, that's the license agreement. I'm sure most software companies in the world don't care how you examine their software. Go ahead and ask! I'm sure Microsoft and Apple don't care one bit about those silly license agreements...

Next:
"Tell me; what exactly can you improve on that command besides your doo-dads about clearing caches on multiple machines (which you shouldn't even be doing in the first place)? Please do enlighten me and the rest of us."

I thought the "what's new" section did that....hmmm. AND, we're open to the responses we receive. I don't believe you offered anything yet.

Next:
"Everyone else reading this?"

Probably not.

Next:
"As if that weren't bad enough, installing demands an admin password without an explanation as to what it's really going to do. Anyone with half a brain knows not to readily submit such a password without understanding what exactly the piece of software intends to do with the privilege escalation. So to take care of that (which may be violating his precious EULA), we go digging inside the installer package and have a look at CleanCachesBySW.info inside the localization folder and note the NeedsAuthorization flag. Change it to NO. Then, to be sure that this wonderful program won't go screwing with areas of the system you don't want it to go, you'll need to head over to Info.plist in the Contents folder and change the path to say...your home folder (hopefully in a non-privileged sandbox account)"

Where to begin. You broke the license agreement. More than once. You admitted to doing so. _Not_ a great idea. It asks for permission because installers should. You shouldn't let anything "autoinstall" without at least asking. This seems pretty clear enough.

Next:
"He wants your admin password so that he can exploit Apple's built in Installer tool to install a simple script that could have easily been done with one command in the Terminal...or better yet by physically going to the Cache folder and removing the problematic file(s) in question. And you don't need a script or program to do it (along with the reasons of why you shouldn't)."

There is no "exploit" that I'm aware of. You read the Read ME, the license (more than once), etc. They are clear. This is one of the reasons developers use PackageMaker. Read the docs, and _then_ make some comments...:
http://developer.apple.com/documentation/DeveloperTools/Conceptual/SoftwareDistribution/Concepts/sd_install_quick_look.html

Yes, you don't need a piece of software to do this. But then again, isn't that why software is around at all? To make life easier? Think about it...

Next:
"Bottom line: You are one pretentious developer to be discrediting me for being what I am...a conscientious consumer who won't stand for bad and misleading software. I'm actually helping other Mac users (if that's what you wanted) by pointing them away from this garbage."

If that is your belief, so be it. Feel free to be a critic instead of offering up something of value. People do it all the time. Folks who can, do. Folks who can't, criticize. I'm not out to discredit you; frankly, I could care less about your reputation. This is just a response.

Our bottom line: if you want to discourage others from using our software, feel free. So far, the public seems to disagree. And, we're always open to some honest feedback to help make this a better product. But, abide by the rules, do your homework, and be polite about it. Especially from someone who isn't offering up a solution of their own.

alpha, we don't have anything against you personally. In fact, we're completely open to hearing about how you would improve the product. Since you believe that you have some great insight into tools such as these, we welcome your positive contribution.

Thanks, and have a great day!

-SISU Works

Reply to This

Friday, January 06 2006 @ 04:53 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - alphasubzero949

"Where to begin. You broke the license agreement. More than once. You admitted to doing so. _Not_ a great idea.." Don't make me laugh and don't threaten me (I'd really love to see your EULA try to stand up on legal grounds). Really, anyone can easily look at the package for themselves (Show Package Contents) and see for themselves. It doesn't take a computing genius to do so because OS X by default already gives you the tools (Finder, TextEdit or even Property List Editor). Pacifist is just icing on the cake. To tell you the truth, I always examine software I'm about to install. That's the smart thing to do, regardless of what developers full of themselves think in their EULAs. Apparently since you have your panties in a wad over users constructively criticizing your software by berating them for what they are - users - I'm not going to bother with you anymore, as it is pointless to continue.

Reply to This

Friday, January 06 2006 @ 12:07 PM PST

Name-calling? Really? - jeremymatthews_dotmac

alpha

We forgot to mention this:
"...You are one pretentious developer..."

Please, don't resort to name-calling. We're simply responding to some of your statements. No need to bring this down to that kind of level.

And, as always, we sincerely look forward to some ideas and feedback regarding the product. I do hope we've explained the answers to your questions in a satisfactory manner; please let us know if there are any other questions you have regarding this product.

We look forward to your ideas in making this a better product!

Thanks again,
SW

Reply to This

Friday, January 06 2006 @ 05:11 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - Canteen Boy

alpha,

Many of us out here appreciate your comments and analysis. It's comments like yours that that challenge and encourage users to learn more about OS X. And thanks for the heads up.

Reply to This

Tuesday, January 10 2006 @ 11:04 PM PST

You Must be Joking. - Xeater

Well, in all fairness, a one-click GUI app that cleans caches is a nice thing to have for OS X. However, there are already many fine applications that clean caches and every other imaginable maintenance/tweak for OS X (Cocktail, Onyx). These alternatives are so far superior to Clean Caches that it makes one wonder why the author even bothered - no sense in reinventing the wheel. Heh, at least he's not charging for his redundant app.

Reply to This

Wednesday, December 28 2005 @ 01:54 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - jeremymatthews_dotmac

Xeater,

Riddle me this: which app can clean caches for multiple macs simultaneously?
Cocktail? No. I haven't found one that does.

As a PACKAGE, our software can be run through Apple Remote Desktop or NetBoot/NetInstall for MULITPLE MACS SIMULTANEOUSLY. I still can't fathom why some folks don't get this....its great for "cleaning out caches" on hundreds of macs at the same time.

nothing else really comes close

Is it another cleaning utility? Yes.
Are there any other that have its ability to handle multiple macs at the same time? No.

If this was another utility that had _no_ clear value over anything else, we prolly wouldn't waste the dev time. But it does. And the download numbers between the 6-8 sites put it in the thousands in less than a few weks.

Obviously, some people _get_ its uselfulness.

So, to recap....
Is it another utility? Yes
Do any other utilities like these offer the ability to handle multiple macs at the same time? No.

Thanks,
sw

Reply to This

Wednesday, December 28 2005 @ 03:38 AM PST

You Must be Joking. - june8

Onyx cleans cash files for multiple user accounts!

Reply to This

Monday, May 15 2006 @ 12:43 AM PDT

You Must be Joking. - ToeKnee2

They're not talking about multiple user accounts on a single Mac. Many utilities, including Onyx, do that. This company's free software can be run on Apple Remote Desktop or via Netboot to service dozens, hundreds, or thousands of Macs at the same time.

Reply to This

Tuesday, May 16 2006 @ 06:28 AM PDT