Forum Posts Feed
Not-Standardized Project Management : IQTELL, Directory Opus, etc.
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Posted by Alexander Deliyannis
Nov 2, 2011 at 09:53 PM
Fredy wrote:
>If I understand well, and EN ?coming from? the outlining idea, EN?s tagging system has originally be meant for tagging items, and since tagging 50k of items within a flat list isn?t possible, they allow for ( but only some, 2-3 ? ) levels of tags, within a tag tree (if I understand well). But now, why fall into the trap to tag items only within EN, why not also tag files with it ?
For the record, as far as I know and experienced, there seems to be no level limitation in Evernote tags. Re the concept of tagging files and information items via the same application, it sounds powerful indeed (I am not into tags that much myself, but I appreciate unified approaches to information management). There is another application, Everdesk http://www.everdesk.com/features/overview.html (no relation to Evernote despite the similar name) which seeks to unify mail and file management in a similar concept. It needs a lot of work yet, and I am quite certain that its Quickboard launcher is not multi-launch but, as you said, we are discussing concepts here.
Posted by Mitchell Kastner
Nov 2, 2011 at 10:48 PM
Fredy,
Might I humbly suggest that you read every post in every current topic thread and count the number of lines the poster wrote and the number of posts he or she made on the topic? After you have made that calculation, perhaps you may want to consider posters abide by an unstated restriction on the length and number of posts they make. I think you will find that on the average a post is no longer than eight or nine sentences number of posts per topic is about two to three. If you agree with my calculations you may want to consider whether you want to abide by those unstated restrictions.
I know that you have lots and lots to say, but I for one do not have the time to give your chapters the consideration they deserve.
Posted by Fredy
Nov 3, 2011 at 01:10 PM
Would it not be preferable to just skip my contributions ? May I offer you some money for your efforts to scroll down ? How much is your time ?
Posted by Franz Grieser
Nov 3, 2011 at 02:59 PM
Fredy
I am also one of those who come here to share experience. I.e., I am really interested in how others manage to handle information.
I am, however, discouraged by your endless posts - I start reading and soon realize that I do not want to spend the time and effort to read the whole length of your rumblings. And I am sure that is true of others here, too. Otherwise there would be considerably more discussion with regard to your postings.
So, if you want to be read and discussed, you might reconsider Mitchell’s suggestion.
Franz
Und etwas mehr H?flichkeit den Teilnehmern gegen?ber w?rde auch nicht schaden.
Posted by critStock
Nov 4, 2011 at 12:10 AM
I was struck by Fredy’s desire to have “group launch,” which seems to me to mean launching a group of files of multiple types in their respective applications. Seeing how this would be useful, I tried it in a Directory Opus (DOPUS, for many of us) collection, and it worked perfectly on my small test sample of one pdf, one rtf and one nte (Noteliner) file. I’ve been using DOPUS for many years and have never looked back. Some specific points (quoting Fredy):
“Directory Opus has got virtual folders indeed, and it is said to be able - if you run it in the background at any time that is - to detect, and to proceed, name changes, deletions (?) and even the moving of files into other directories, i.e. the links in your virtual folders would NOT be orphaned then, but updated by DO.”
DOPUS is meant to completely replace Windows Explorer, and that’s how I’ve always used it. At this moment, DOPUS processes are using 21 MB and 66 MB of RAM and virtual memory respectively, with 7 “listers” (windows) open, on Win XP. I can’t imagine why you wouldn’t keep it running, even if you only used it once a week.
“I never succeeded in bearing DO trial version more than some hours, anytime, since DO has the utmost nagging behaviour of all trials I?ve ever trialled : After installation, I feel the urgent need to do a new Windows installation, and people say DO continues at least parts of this behaviour even after you?ll have paid your license.”
I can’t recall my trial days—it was over 6.5 years ago—but I’m puzzled by the last part of this statement. DOPUS has never nagged me about anything.
“On the other hand, and as explained, DO seems to be that prog out there that?s got nearest a real task launcher, but I don?t think it will allow for a ?select all? in those virtual folders, and then an ?Enter? would launch all those files : That would be universally known, since that would make that prog be world-class and totally unrivalled.”
This seems to be exactly what DOPUS does, at least in my small test. I suppose this means that all useful things do not automatically become “universally known” (whatever that means; should I look it up in Hegel?)
“I could live with its unfriendly licence policy, but not with its constant nagging, or only if it provided group launching.”
Again, never seen the nagging. Not sure what you mean by unfriendly license policy. It’s not cheap, if that’s what you mean, but not too bad for “world-class and totally unrivalled.”
I should add the caveat that I am still using v9. V10 was recently released. I plan to upgrade at some point, but haven’t’ yet done the cost-benefit analysis.
Cheers,
David