Existing users, 
Advanced SearchUser Name Macsure
Member Since 2002-11-29
Total number of Feedback Posts: 19
Total number of comments: 12
Last 10 Feedback Posts by Macsure [ Search for All ]
VisualHub 1.33 (Mac OS X)
Video Hub is the "GraphicConverter" for video work!
I got started with homemade videos in the summer of '06 - using only my Canon PowerShot A620 (and later added a Canon PowerShot S3-1S). I was amazed at the video quality obtained from the cameras but... I have tried using iMovie ('04, '06 and '08)- the first thing I noticed was the amount of time for these apps to "import" AVI files. Too much time spent "just waiting" for clips to appear in the clip-selection selection window - before any work (creative or otherwise) could proceed. Add to that that most of my homemade videos (while having decent picture quality) won't play on many DVD players and would contain "unintended" pauses and skips. - The end video product was just too crummy to justify the amount of *time!* I was spending to produce them A friend recommended VisualHub to me late last year. Almost at once, I could see my work speeding up and I quickly learned the (simple) added features which iMovie provides with a lot more grief and a lot less clarity. I made a mistake a couple times - setting the video size when recording to either 640 x 480 or 320 x 240 - but forgot which I had selected and changed it in the "middle" of my video shooting. Well, QuickTime can't change the "display size" of the original file to another size - but Visual Hub - CAN! I "rescued" two projects where I made that mistake by simply selecting the smaller size for those large (display) size cllps I shot in error. BTW - the small size means you get double the "minutes" of video on the same size SD memory card - and - there is no loss (that I can see) of quality in the final (DVD) videos. The VisualHub-produced DVDs play flawlessly: goodbye halts and skips! "the GraphicConverter of Video" - only it costs less than the very versatile GraphicConverter. [alert admin]
Saturday, May 03 2008 @ 10:37 PM PDT
GraphicConverter Classic 5.8 (Mac OS 9)
'Bout time to update the reviews here 
It's time to update reviews, so I'll start off by saying that version 5.8 (universal code) should have been designated GC v. 6.0 rather than continuing the "impression" that it's still pre-MacIntel code inside. Mr. Lemke's only fault as far as I can see - this version designation is a little confusing. That "used for less than a month" is misleading in my info bar - I've been a GC user since version 3.83. It's this new unicode version to which I refer now. Still a 5-star app. Whenever Thorsten Lemke "messes up" - it's brief and temporary because he promptly issues new versions with bugs fixed. I don't see how he can keep up with user requests for new features - but he does, and that sometimes results in a glitch or two. 5.8 works like all preceding versions - very well. And there's some nice touches arising from user requests. Like "shadowed text" in the browser and slideshow - makes file paths much easer to read against light backgrounds and eliminates the need for adding colored borders (to make text visible). Another feature I hadn't tried before (there're so many) - converting slideshow (folders containing images) to QuickTime movies. This feature works flawlessly, including the ability to set frame rates and display sizes. The resultng movies can be imported into iMovie for addition of sound tracks, effects and titles. I've had a ball this past week, making my own animated movies with GC, some PhotoShop, and iMovie (with iDraw a recent addition to my animation project software.) To think - I paid $30 some years ago and have gotten about 20 upgrades free. How many 3rd party apps give that much value? [alert admin]
Read Comments (1) | More Info | 3 of 3 users found this helpful
Sunday, February 12 2006 @ 09:45 PM PST
DoubleTake 2.0b10 (Mac OS X)
Many times, 2-page magazine photos "don't match" and part of the image is "lost" where the right and left pages are joined in manufacturing. I tried matching with DoubleTake and was able to "fake" the small (1/4 inch) blank between the right and left pages (with Clone Tool in PhotoShop) so that the image looked complete and fully aligned. PhotoShop Merge can't do this< at least not as well or as quickly>, so I'd say DoubleTake is worth it as an extra photo-stitching tool. [alert admin]
Post a comment | More Info | 2 of 2 users found this helpful
Saturday, January 28 2006 @ 11:32 PM PST
MimMac 1.7 (Mac OS X)
First let me say that, like others posting on MimMac 1.7, I have limited experience with backup applications. I've used previous versions of MimMac and used CarbonCopyCloner a couple of times to create a bootable external disk. 1. I agree (so far) that MimMac is not easy to learn to use. I blame myself mostly - I have not had time to do repeated experiments and this app is one which self-teachers should spend time on. My main "complaint" so far is that choosing the options available for file incremental backups has resulted in duplication of ALL files, rather than just the ones which have "changed" since the last run. But this DID work in previous versions - I must be missing something! (Probably failed to write "note to myself." And need to study Instruction Manual some more.) 2. I chose MimMac originally because it was more usefull than CCC - it could perform file backups as well as clone my System. I have a large archive of pictures & graphics which needs at least weekly backups. As I say, previous versions proved quite capable and I'm sure I'll "get it" when I run MimMac again - with more attention. 3. One thing I always wanted to know about backing up systems to create a bootable drive was: Does this REALLY work in reverse, say after wiping the Startup Disk and "cloning back" from the bootable external disk. This is important and my "objection" to all the backup info I could find was that everyone seemed to assume this would work with the apps being discussed. It's NOT obvious to those who've never tried it and it's a 'do or die' experiment which leaves a small chance of having to "start over" - reinstalling and updating from whatever software restore disk you may have. I'm happy to report: Last week I used the erase-mirror feature of MimMac 1.7 on my Startup Disk and it worked very well. The benefit (added to the security) is that the "new" Startup Disk is now completely defragged, 42,000 (combined total) file and disk fragments are GONE. Note: Repairing permissions b4 & after - using Disk Utility - seems to be needed whether or not MimMac is set to do it. This resolves the 'arguments' about the safety and feasability of defragging journaled OS X drives. First, - journaling DOES NOT eliminate the problem of fragmentation. Second - by mirror / cloning to the Startup Disk, fragmentation is eliminated (or reduced by 99.99%). For this alone, I would keep using Mimac. 4. Support: When I first tried MimMac 1.7, it "duplicated" rather than incrementally updated all my Home Folder - this meant I had to delete all the older files, and some of those were locked, requiring "force empty" of the trash and making the whole process time-consuming. I then tried to revert to an older version and found that older versions don't work anymore. That's when I sent in a bug report on 1.7. I am very positive on the support for this app. Benjamin Timm responded 3 hours later, he gave me a quick, accurate explanation of the problem and suggested a couple of "fixes" which were easy to follow. *[Note that "quality of support" is dependent on "quality of feedback" which users provide developers of any application.] 5. Cost - few people would argue that MimMac is costly. At $10 it's cheaper than SuperDuper (I can only judge by user comments that it's 'worth it') - and only a fraction the cost of "big name" backup applications which are even more difficult to understand and use. MimMac is worth $10 and potentially much more. [alert admin]
Post a comment | More Info | 1 of 1 users found this helpful
Saturday, November 26 2005 @ 12:43 PM PST
GraphicConverter X 5.7.2 (Mac OS X)
Best Developer Support on the Planet!
I have had only the most minor problems with GraphicConverter since first purchasing it at around v. 3.8. But when I tried to browse a folder containing 147 large image files with v. 5.7.2 - it crashed immediately. I emailed the crash log and relevant info to Lemkesoft. Within HOURS I got Thorsten's request that I try out a "debug vervsion" of GC and report results. I downloaded and installed the debug version, put it through over one hour of testing (not just the browser functions) and reported back: It works perfectly. I also subscribe to the Yahoo! GraphicConverter User Group - I observe the same rapid response and solutions there - even to 'the dumbest questions.' Further, Thorsten is constantly responding to "requested features" which add to GC's capabilities. It just flat-out amazes me that this developer is so dedicated to quality and customer support for a product which costs so little and performs it's "advertized functions" so well. Thorsten Lemkie is the best software (for Macs) developer I know of - possibly the best one on the planet. Note: No developer can or should respond to those who just want to rant and complain. When a problem arises, it is the user's responsibility to provide complete, non-insulting feedback. Only THEN can a developer's responsiveness and performance be judged accurately (and fairly). [alert admin]
Read Comments (1) | More Info | 16 of 16 users found this helpful
Wednesday, November 09 2005 @ 10:55 AM PST
()
Hi folks, I followed the developer's recommendation to use Sp@mX for 30 days. I kept at it because of the claim by the vendor that one month was required for Sp@mX reports to kick-start the various ISP security departments into action against the spammers being reported. Well... kinda. Users (at least this one) don't hear from the ISPs regarding Sp@mX generated complaints. We have no way to know if Sp@mX is performing as advertised. It seemed there was some tapering off of spam over the last 13 days. The average received for the first 18days was 30 / day. Since then, it has averaged 19 / day. Only a 37% reduction after the "recommended trial period." The total for the entire 31 days was 789 actual spam messages. This is not good enough. I think many spammers KNOW they have to move around to different ISPs and when one ISP shuts them down, they move, (probably to a predetermined new email service). Also - remember that "spam" can be sent by computers belonging to "regular people" who don't know their Windows box has been hijacked. Often, this "other victim" only discovers this belatedly. So the spam just keeps on coming, often the same stuff you've been getting for days or weeks. So, the theory behind Sp@mX may be flawed; as the claim states there will be 100% elimination of spam (after a sufficient period). The other real negative is that there is no way to automate "corrections" - Sp@mX continued to mis-identify 90% of legitimate emails as spam. As previously noted - each time you run Sp@mX, it lists ALL messages still residing on the remote email server - including those you've downloaded and "processed" (meaning read, responded to, deleted, etc.). So there's no "memor" of designated "OK" emails. So the Sp@mX user must carefully review these lists and make sure to identify legitimate emails for every session. This is time consuming and invites errors- if you fail to spot a legitimate email and uncheck it, Sp@mX sends out a complaint on that one too! You CANNOT do this sorting / checking in haste. Sp@mX does seem to have a limited memory - if you run a 2nd session within a short time after the first run, Sp@mX will remember SOME of the legitimate emails you "unchecked" in the earlier session. But that's not good enough to even say, "OK, I can live with that." It is VERY annoying when I see my sister's emails consistently mis-identified as spam!! After all, her return email address is NOT, "insanemongoose@chiantong.net" Is Sp@mX worth the 20 bucks? NO - not when you include the cost of your time to eyeball each item in every email download and consider that real screw-ups might occur, causing you to spend even more time on straightening things out. At least Apple's Mail.app filters accurately & consistently - why can't Sp@mX do the same? Thumbs down on this one, folks. (I won't review this again unless the creator comes out with a significantly better version.) [alert admin]
Read Comments (2) | More Info | 2 of 4 users found this helpful
Sunday, June 19 2005 @ 04:33 AM PDT
Cocktail 3.6.1 (Mac OS X)
*censored*tail leaks your admin password in the clear. Just take a look at this report: From the SecurityFocus advisory: Since *censored*tail needs administrative privileges the user is prompted for the admin password upon startup. The actual maintenance is done by command line utilities that are executed in an insecure manner: *censored*tail creates a new process and lets /bin/sh pipe the admin password using echo into sudo, which then will execute the utility, like this: sh -c echo 'PASSWORD' | sudo -p '' -S sudo update_prebinding -root / Exploitation: Knowing *censored*tail is waiting for some Unix utility to have finished its work, just execute 'ps ax' on the terminal and search for the password. ============== That, plus this app is just a pretty wrapper for running standard command line scripts. Compared to RixSteps "Clix" - *censored*tail is just "mini-bloatware" providing 500 fewer commands than Clix. So I've become a switcher, the only money spent is on *censored*tail when "everyone was donating for it." [alert admin]
Read Comments (1) | More Info | 3 of 4 users found this helpful
Saturday, May 07 2005 @ 06:30 PM PDT
SiteGrinder 1.0.4 (Mac OS X)
SiteGrinder Registration System
The thing to do, I guess, would be to bring this registration system up as a topic on PhotoShop usergroups. If the rest of the PhotoShop community is going along with this, then I would too. I am interested in a good site buildng app. One which is "integrated" with PhotoShop is really interesting. It's too bad we have this barrier to widespread use and consequent useful feedback. [alert admin]
Saturday, March 19 2005 @ 04:02 AM PST
Forensic Suite 2.22 (Mac OS 9, Mac OS X)
Re: "That's all we need more tools for them to invade our lives" Look, I agree we don't want govt prying into our private lives (it violates the Constitution if there's no indication of a crime being committed). But "they" ALREADY HAVE this software and more. FYI - The FBI and other law enforcement often send confiscated Mac drives to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police because THEY have even better ability to "hack a Mac." So, if YOU happen to have the $$$, it's kinda nice to be equally armed and serves a legitimate need if you're just recovering your data from a trashed Mac HD. It's cheaper than a lot of professional recovery services. And you MIGHT get into that business yourself if you want to recover the cost of the software. [alert admin]
Read Comments (1) | More Info | 1 of 4 users found this helpful
Saturday, March 12 2005 @ 03:32 PM PST
iDefrag 1.01 (Mac OS X)
Anyone who's spent time in Apple Support Discussions will quickly wonder - what is the need for iDefrag? I've lost count of the times I've seen the assurance that OS 10.2 and above DO NOT NEED DEFRAGING (if Journaling is enabled). In fact, there are an equal number of warnings against defragging the current Apple drives. In the face of these facts, I'm not about to try iDefrag, and my copy of Micromat's Drive 10 remains safely stored away in my desk drawer. I'm no expert -- just reporting what I've observed time after time over the past year. Anyone have a response to this? [alert admin]
Read Comments (4) | More Info | 2 of 6 users found this helpful
Friday, December 24 2004 @ 12:12 PM PST
Last 10 Comments by Macsure [ Search for All ]
I can understand your feelings about this - others have complained of 'apparent' bait & switch tactics by this developer. But there's a sound technical reason which requires (so far) THREE different version of this applicaton. That is:When Apple releases each major point-upgrade (Jaguar-Panther-Tiger) - they've made major changes to the System in order to increase functionality (and to compete with Windows OS). This, in turn, requires major re-writing of…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Wednesday, November 09 2005 @ 10:33 AM PST
Hi, Be assured, with the pace of upgrades for not only GC but OS X itself, NO ONE is keeping up very well. :-) As you know, when OS X is upgraded, this starts a ripple of 3rd party app upgrades. Altogether, it consumes a lot of hours (and some added expense) for each Mac owner. Depending - developing a little resistane to the idea that we "gotta have the latest" helped me quite a bit.…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Saturday, August 20 2005 @ 04:52 PM PDT
Hi, Be assured, with the pace of upgrades for not only GC but OS X itself, NO ONE is keeping up very well. :-) As you know, when OS X is upgraded, this starts a ripple of 3rd party app upgrades. Altogether, it consumes a lot of hours (and some added expense) for each Mac owner. Depending - developing a little resistane to the idea that we "gotta have the latest" helped me quite a bit.…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Saturday, August 20 2005 @ 04:32 PM PDT
Your point is accurate. But did you know that Apple technicians still recommend that even disk fragments not be removed? I learned this recently - the explanation is that defragging utilities can "accidentally" over-write the "hot zone" on the disk - where certain essental files are kept. I agree also with your statement about optimizing to keep PhotoShop from not going crazy, slowing down. But for the average user, the risk…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Saturday, March 19 2005 @ 05:16 PM PST
Hello Claus, I agree with you that Apple should include more languages like Finnish in Pages. Have you posted your request (for inclusion of Finnish in Pages) at the Apple Feedback webpage? It is located at: http://www.apple.com/feedback/pages.html Good luck, I hope Apple satisfies your need.
Original feedback item : Read More
Saturday, March 19 2005 @ 05:09 PM PST
Thanks for the heads up - that is wacky. You gotta wonder -- sounds like a scam operation to me. (I mean - some way to scam Adobe.)
Original feedback item : Read More
Sunday, February 20 2005 @ 11:42 AM PST
Your comment's got me curious: I've been using Cocktail since 10.2.8, thru 10.3.6 -- throughout this time, I've found that using Cocktail to repair permissions "does something" which Disk Utility "doesn't like." I mean that if I use Disk Utility to repair permissions immediately AFTER using Cocktail for the same operation, DU will report more problems repaired than previously. I do think Cocktail lacks some kind of "reporting" feature, showing clearly what each task…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Wednesday, December 15 2004 @ 01:19 PM PST
Dave, I've not yet tried it myself, but a lot of Mac people are using the application, "Pacifist" to inspect the contents of installers - enalbes determination of what files will be affected (changed) BEFORE proceeding with installation. In mission-critical situations like yours -- this might be a great way to avoid problems.
Original feedback item : Read More
Sunday, December 05 2004 @ 02:16 PM PST
Generally, I agree. Also, have you noticed that PhotoShop CS doesn't have as good a "New Image from Clipboard" feature as GraphicConverter? With GC, you can choose the No.2 "Image from Clipboard" and get an image with size & resolution you have PRESET, a great little time saver! I also continue using PhotoShop Elements 2 because it has a "Selection Brush" which can be set to as small as 1 pixel. After buying…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Sunday, September 26 2004 @ 03:33 PM PDT
good for mp3 no good for mp4 or aac
Why on earth would anyone convert their entire MP3 library to AAC? It looks like the music industry has not only forced Apple to release a "more compliant" file format to suit their profit-taking, but MANY seem NOT to notice that converting MP3s to AAC does nothing to improve quality. MP3s are "lossy compression" files, so data removed during the compression is NEVER restored, no matter how "lossless" the new format. Unless…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Saturday, July 03 2004 @ 12:07 PM PDT
