Forum Posts Feed
Web Research -->> WOW!
< Next Topic | Back to topic list | Previous Topic >
Pages: ‹ First < 3 4 5 6 7 8 >
Posted by JJ
Jul 5, 2007 at 09:45 PM
>>Since
>many use
>>UR, I didn’t feel it necessary to detail all that UR can do.
>
>you never know
>who’s reading the site, just like I never heard of WR, many people might not know what UR
>is.
>
>
Good point… I’ll keep this in mind ...
-jj
Posted by Jan Rifkinson
Jul 5, 2007 at 10:47 PM
JJ wrote:
>
>
>quant wrote:
>>Jan Rifkinson wrote:
>>>However, I reject
>>>the notion that
>making a comment on
>>another’s representation of facts is flaming.
>>>IMO, it’s
>simply commenting on a
>>matter of accuracy vs inaccuracy. It’s not personal.
>
>>
>>Ditto. As long as the
>>arguments are “substantiated”, I don’t see any problem,
>we are just discussing
>>:)
>>I’m, like others is here, keen to learn about other
>programs that I might use in the
>>future ...
>
>
>I would like to point out that I stand by
>my “facts” ... I am not aware of any inaccuracies I stated in my review.
>
>Since many use
>UR, I didn’t feel it necessary to detail all that UR can do.
>
>Most importantly, I use
>both product daily and have a good understanding of both products strengths and
>weaknesses.
I respect your opinion that but, for example, your statement “WR seems quicker and more stable than the current version of UR.” implies that UR is not really stable.
I happen to think this is not accurate. While you may have had problems w UR on your system, I have not so for me UR is extremely stable. Again, I don’t know about WR but will look forward to looking @ the product. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Posted by quant
Jul 5, 2007 at 11:41 PM
>Since many use
>UR, I didn’t feel it necessary to detail all that UR can do.
just one more comment :)
When I was hunting for my perfect PIM, the statement similar to yours “UltraRecall… Not bad, but could be better”, without any or with poor justification cost me about a month in time (trying various other softwares instead).
The statement read like this (citation):
“Ultra Recall: Another EATKS software. Actually, I don’t think Ultra Recall is as inclusive as other EATKS software, but it’s still way too much for a simple notetaker. Besides, it doesn’t offer any unique or special features in the notetaking category.”
http://www.donationcoder.com/Reviews/Archive/NoteTakers1/index.php
It turned out, that UR actually had/has almost all features that the others had + much more!
So, I’m a bit wary every time I read some comparison without clearly noting side by side what one soft does, does better/worse or doesnt do at all, compared to the other one ...
Posted by Derek Cornish
Jul 6, 2007 at 12:27 AM
JJ
> Have you tried using WR with the network add-in???
No, not yet. Initially when it came out I simply assumed that I had to be on a network, had to have Microsoft SQL Server 2000 or 2005 installed, had to have a server O/S, etc (I hadn’t read the User Guide - http://www.macropool.com/en/download/webresearch/extensions/wr_network_userguide.pdf.)
After reading it I wasn’t much the wiser, but at least the technical requirements looked feasible for me. But I’ve still dillydallied over trying it out for a number of reasons (none of which are necessarily valid or deal-breaking):
- because the cost if I decided to use it would be around $39 for a single user, I think);
- because it seems such a roundabout way to get full indexing of MS and pdf programs (as you commented, this should be in the basic program - and AFAIK it isn’t for any web-capture software);
- because I’m not sure of the resource implications in terms of HDD space for the extra software, file storage, indexing, etc; and
- because I’m not clear how well it handles pdf files.
What do you think about the above? How is it working out for you?
Of course, the answer to all these “reasons” would be to take my own advice and d/l the add-on, but I’m a bit short of space these days - too much CRIMPING :-). I think my reluctance to do so is probably also related to how I use WR - i.e. as a hyperlinked repository for files I’ve taken notes on within Zoot and which Zoot cannot import at this time. This makes Zoot my main point of access when searching for information about what’s in WR’s files. For indexed searching of WR, I usually export any relevant project files into the windows filing system and index them, along with Zoot’s db exported to a huge htm file, and all other relevant files I have knocking around in various folders, using dtSearch (a free indexed search program like X1 would probably do as well). Not an elegant solution, I know, but it’s one way of dealing with the problem of notes and files in proprietory databases.
More than you or anyone else wanted to know probably :-).
Derek
Posted by Cassius
Jul 6, 2007 at 07:27 AM
Personally, I usually do not find comments on comments and their authors as useful as comments on/descriptions of the software. Having said this:
While a side-by-side comparison of products would be nice, such comparison would have to be done by someone very familiar with all of the products…probably too much to expect most of the time. Partial info can, however, be quite useful. For instance, my earlier posting requesting info on OneNote elicited enough useful information for me to be able to decide that it is not for me. The responders also saved me much time that I would otherwise have spent trying ON. For this I am most grateful.
Finally, as has been pointed out, each of our systems probably has accumulated some quirks over the years that might cause a particular software program to act flaky. For example, the Kensington Expert Mouse [actually a large trackball] disabled the “CTRL- =>” and “CTRL- <=” functions on my Win XP Media Ctr. Edition Toshiba laptop. On a previous Win 2000 machine, it caused no problems.
Again, personally, if I were to find a program I REALLY liked, but it acted flaky, I’d post a question listing my machine’s specifics and asking others what their experiences have been.
-c