I don't believe that in my previous comment I meant to imply that SnapNDrag is fully equivalent to Snapz pro; it isn't -- *except*, so far as I can see, in regard to capture of screens that do not contain moving images or sound. In the case of "still" screen images, I believe it actually has an advantage over Snapz Pro in that with its "timed" shutter release, it's possible to get the cursor off screen before capture.
My comment was much more meant to apply to what I find the serious problem of requiring a new serial number every single time the application is reinstalled -- EVEN IF it is via a backup.
(What follows is a discussion of this specific broad issue. Read on only if interested.)
Yes, Ambrosia *does* make it easy to get a new serial number IF one can easily and immediately get connected to the internet. If you can't, as I noted, your're SOL. (Think about it: If you're not accessible to the internet, SOL; if your ISP is down, SOL; if the software supplier's site is down . . .or busy . . . or whatever, SOL!)
Even more importantly, what would it mean to a serious graphics worker if every time you even restored from a backup you had to apply to the software creator for a NEW/DIFFERENT serial number -- even if it were easy? I probably have 25 different plug-ins for Photoshop *alone*. It's bad enough that for a very few of these you have to re-enter the SAME serial number every time you reinstall or restore from a backup. But, at least you don't have to get on the internet and get a *different* one to do so.
Thankfully, in most cases, you don't have to do a thing. In the very few exceptions, you can simply go to your records and usually paste in (or occasionally re-enter) your licensed serial number.
Think about the *general case*: what it would mean to have to re-apply for a new serial number again, and again, and again, and again, and . . . !
To me, it comes down to this question: what does an application "backup" *mean* when one is deliberately denied the means to initialize your properly licensed application without re-applying to the manufacturer?
Snapz Pro IS a good -- in some ways, unique -- application. And I DO understand that the people at Ambrosia believe many have misused its serial numbers. Somehow though, I have to hope there's a better solution than Ambrosia has come up with. My sense is that software suppliers that make life difficult for their users are asking for trouble. (Think, for example, about QuarkXpress. I know a lot of pros who for that very reason have wanted to move away for a l o o o o o o ng time . And now that InDesign offers a strong alternative . . . . . . .
Existing users, log in. New users, create a free account. Lost password?
Re Snapz Pro vs SnapNDrag - pneaman
I don't believe that in my previous comment I meant to imply that SnapNDrag is fully equivalent to Snapz pro; it isn't -- *except*, so far as I can see, in regard to capture of screens that do not contain moving images or sound. In the case of "still" screen images, I believe it actually has an advantage over Snapz Pro in that with its "timed" shutter release, it's possible to get the cursor off screen before capture.My comment was much more meant to apply to what I find the serious problem of requiring a new serial number every single time the application is reinstalled -- EVEN IF it is via a backup.
(What follows is a discussion of this specific broad issue. Read on only if interested.)
Yes, Ambrosia *does* make it easy to get a new serial number IF one can easily and immediately get connected to the internet. If you can't, as I noted, your're SOL. (Think about it: If you're not accessible to the internet, SOL; if your ISP is down, SOL; if the software supplier's site is down . . .or busy . . . or whatever, SOL!)
Even more importantly, what would it mean to a serious graphics worker if every time you even restored from a backup you had to apply to the software creator for a NEW/DIFFERENT serial number -- even if it were easy? I probably have 25 different plug-ins for Photoshop *alone*. It's bad enough that for a very few of these you have to re-enter the SAME serial number every time you reinstall or restore from a backup. But, at least you don't have to get on the internet and get a *different* one to do so.
Thankfully, in most cases, you don't have to do a thing. In the very few exceptions, you can simply go to your records and usually paste in (or occasionally re-enter) your licensed serial number.
Think about the *general case*: what it would mean to have to re-apply for a new serial number again, and again, and again, and again, and . . . !
To me, it comes down to this question: what does an application "backup" *mean* when one is deliberately denied the means to initialize your properly licensed application without re-applying to the manufacturer?
Snapz Pro IS a good -- in some ways, unique -- application. And I DO understand that the people at Ambrosia believe many have misused its serial numbers. Somehow though, I have to hope there's a better solution than Ambrosia has come up with. My sense is that software suppliers that make life difficult for their users are asking for trouble. (Think, for example, about QuarkXpress. I know a lot of pros who for that very reason have wanted to move away for a l o o o o o o ng time . And now that InDesign offers a strong alternative . . . . . . .
Reply to This
Monday, January 24 2005 @ 03:17 PM PST