Existing users, 
User Name TriVectus
Member Since 0000-00-00
Total number of Feedback Posts: 6
Total number of comments: 3
Last 10 Feedback Posts by TriVectus [ Search for All ]
SCPlugin 0.7.1 (Mac OS X)
If you've ever used TortoiseSVN on Windows, this brings very similar functionality to the Finder. In fact, this was inspired by Tortoise.
Overall, this is an extremely handy utility that enables you to do SVN checkouts, commits, status checks, log checks, etc. on a directory or file right from the Finder. It doesn't have all the functionality of Tortoise, but it has all the essentials, and the rest can be done as needed directly from the command line or via a separate program (I like the free SvnX).
As this is an early release, there are some UI quirks (e.g., no select all/unselect all/invert selection commands in the commit window) and the occasional bug, and its icon badging mechanism doesn't get along very well with Leopard's icon previews, but it's still a utility I don't like to work without as I spend all day, every day working with SVN repositories.
[alert admin]Read Comments (1) | More Info
Wednesday, March 19 2008 @ 04:08 PM PDT
Interarchy 8.0 (Mac OS X)
I've been a user of Interarchy (nee Anarchie) since version 1 sometime around early '94. Back then, I was a college student running a small software company, and I used the program enough that I was at its highest usage rating (it rated the type of user you were--such as "novice"--based on the cumulative amount of data you'd transferred). I believe the rating was Net Fiend, but I could be mistaken. The landscape has changed much since those days. Today, I'm a professional web developer and Mac software programmer, and use and depend on FTP clients day in and day out. And, of course, FTP clients are no longer restricted just to the FTP protocol; they're asked to interface with servers through a whole slew of protocols, as well as implement advanced functionality like mirroring. And yet, through all this change, I still use Interarchy. In fact, it's one of only two programs--the other being BBEdit, which IIRC came out on my birthday in 1993--that have consistently remained essential tools in my toolkit. In the early 1990s, your choice of FTP client was realistically limited to Anarchie and Fetch, from Dartmouth. I regularly checked out Fetch, and though it was a fine program, always returned to Anarchie. Since then, numerous other clients have come along. Being a good pro, I have checked them all out periodically, especially around major version releases. Some of them are quite nice in what they offer, but none has matched Interarchy for its total package of power, flexibility, efficiency, and reliability when it most counts. I mentioned BBEdit. Interarchy is very much like BBEdit in that both programs offer extremely deep feature sets aimed squarely at professional users, and both are backed up by unparalleled support from companies with long, rich, Mac-only histories (and both originally created by guys who are pillars of the Mac software development community). Yes, both programs cost more than their competitors, but packing great engineering into great packages backed with great support isn't cheap. Also, keep in mind that paid upgrades are typically years apart, which contrasts with other software for which you likely pay every 12 months or less. In short, if you only rarely need the tools that Interarchy provides, you're probably better off with something less complex and less expensive (or free). Fortunately, the platform now boasts a ton of good choices for casual users. OTOH, if you are an alpha-geek OS X power user or a professional reliant on file transfer and networking tools, give Interarchy a look. And not just a casual look, either - dig deep. Read the manual, use the software heavily for the duration of the free trial, check out the community, and figure out how to modify your workflow to take full advantage of it. Trust me when I tell you that you won't regret the effort. [alert admin]
Post a comment | More Info | 7 of 7 users found this helpful
Tuesday, March 28 2006 @ 11:55 AM PST
UPS Logger 1.0.1 (Mac OS X)
A great little program that fixes a gaping hole in OS X as though it were never there. Thanks! [alert admin]
Tuesday, March 07 2006 @ 10:51 PM PST
Planets 1.0b2 (Mac OS X)
Planets does support multiple monitors in that it runs on all screens; this is unlike some screen savers that simply black out all but the primary screen. Unfortunately, while we'd love to have all screens run as one big screen, it is not feasible from a technical standpoint. Specifically, Apple's screen saver engine runs each screen instance as a separate process (program). Thus, to run all screens as one requires each screen's instance to send its state information to every other screen's instance. In the case of Planets, this would require sending information about the mass, location, and vector of every object between each screen instance after every frame of animation, resulting in a potentially very large amount of data being sent around. Since Planets performs all of its calculations in real-time, this additional burden could overload slower processors and buses. Even on faster machines that can more easily handle the load, most users don't want their screen savers consuming more processor time than necessary because it slows down background processes. As for running on dual-headed PowerBooks, it's not surprising that performance is poor. The slowness is not related to running independent scenarios on each screen--as I discussed above, doing so would actually make things slower--but rather because PBs do not contain sufficient video RAM to handle OpenGL on both displays simultaneously. As such, you will notice a similar slow-down on any screen saver or game that tries to do full-screen OpenGL on both screens. [alert admin]
Post a comment | More Info | 1 of 1 users found this helpful
Thursday, August 14 2003 @ 11:47 AM PDT
SuperLock Pro 4.5.1 (Mac OS 9)
Ian: To prevent someone from using another volume to get around SLP, we recommend using Apple's latest firmware upate, which can essentially force the user to go through SLP. Even this can be worked around, but it's a lot more difficult. For those who can't use the latest firmware, activating the soft-lock feature will at least prevent people from modifying or deleting the files on your drive should they boot with another volume. As for Conflict Catcher, please see the tip on our web site for instructions on how to make things secure:
Thursday, June 13 2002 @ 03:51 PM PDT
SuperLock Pro 4.5.1 (Mac OS 9)
been tested and verified as compatible with Mac OS 9.1, and many of our customers are using the two together. If you are experiencing a problem, there is likely something else at fault. Please e-mail support@trivectus.com, and we'll try to get it worked out. [alert admin]
Monday, April 02 2001 @ 10:42 PM PDT
Last 10 Comments by TriVectus [ Search for All ]
For the last couple of years, I've been using various other apps, including Mail, to handle my e-mail until Eudora gets a few critical feature upgrades (like WebKit integration) that should come with v7. Let me just say this: no other client comes close to Eudora in handling high volumes of mail. They may be prettier, and they may be far better at small volumes, but when you hit high volumes, not only can other clients…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Friday, September 08 2006 @ 02:56 AM PDT
As of 10.4, most of the familiar Unix commands, such as cp, support resource forks and other extended metadata (such as ACLs) by default. Such support is also in 10.4's rsync, but it's not automatic, Instead, you must specify the -E option. Keep in mind that the version of rsync on both ends of the transfer (in the case of transfers from one machine to another) must support resource forks, which is probably why it's…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Tuesday, March 28 2006 @ 12:15 PM PST
Planets does support multiple monitors in that it runs on all screens; this is unlike some screen savers that simply black out all but the primary screen. Unfortunately, while we'd love to have all screens run as one big screen, doing so would result in potentially much slower performance because of the way Apple designed the screen saver engine.
As for running on dual-headed PowerBooks, it's not surprising that performance is poor. The slowness is…
Original feedback item : Read More(1 words)
Friday, August 15 2003 @ 12:02 PM PDT
