John's Profile

Member since January 11, 2006

  • Name

    John Sherwood

  • Location:

    United States of America

Favorite Files

  1. Ad Muncher
  2. ALShow
  3. Arovax Shield
  4. Avant Browser
  5. Bart's PE Builder
  6. BS.Player
  7. Core Force
  8. CubicExplorer
  9. ESET NOD32 Antivirus for Windows (32-bit)
  10. FFDShow
  11. GX::Transcoder
  12. IE Tab
  13. K-Lite Mega Codec Pack
  14. Koepi's XviD Codec
  15. Microsoft Visual Studio
  16. muCommander for Windows
  17. nLite
  18. Norton Internet Security
  19. One-click BackUp for WinRAR (OCB)
  20. PearPC
  21. REAPER for Windows (x86)
  22. RocketDock
  23. Simplyzip
  24. Sunbelt Personal Firewall
  25. TaskInfo
  26. ViPlay
  27. VirtualDub
  28. VLC (VideoLAN) for Windows
  29. VMware Player
  30. Wireshark
  31. WW2D
  32. xpy
  33. µTorrent for Windows

Recent Posts

  1. Review - wikidPad

    1.8 Beta 5 (Nov 25, 2006)

    OK, bimzalazim. There are several things about what you've said that harm your credibility:

    1. Your review has nothing whatever to do with this actual piece of software.

    2. Wikipedia got their name from the fact that they are an encyclopedia that uses a wiki data structure (hence "wiki - pedia") to store their information. The fact that you assume any use of the term "wiki" automatically must be related to them shows a significant ignorance about them (making one wonder how you could have any valid information about them at all if you don't know this fundamental piece of information).

    3. Many of us in this particular community (BetaNews/FileForum) have authored articles, edited articles, or participated in discussions on Wikipedia articles, and if *you* had, you would know that the Wikipedia community ruthlessly calls biased authors on the carpet and flags their articles for revision to a neutral format. The reason that I am sure that is the case is that your review was biased in the extreme, unsupported, and off topic, none of which would be tolerated by the Wikipedia community.

    ***ON TOPIC***
    This is a neat piece of software. It can use some more polish, but can't everything.

  2. Review - µTorrent for Windows

    1.6.1 Beta Build 483 (Nov 25, 2006)

    Great Software
    Small as h3ll
    Really robust, never a problem yet

    Overall, this is the most impressive torrent engine I've used.

  3. Comment - XP Won't Run on Intel MacBook, iMac

    1.6.1 Beta Build 483 (Jan 13, 2006 - 12:31 AM)

    Sorry gawd, but here I have to disagree with you:

    > No MAC has ever come close to the network
    > tools Windows has as default, seeing how
    > MACs have crappy networks, and let get on to
    > the more proven side of things.

    As of OSX at least, Mac's include a full bash shell with all of the command line tools that your hacker next door needs to nslookup, traceroute, remote login, etc. While WinXP handles a lot of different network types, and is now including a lot of network utils, you still don't get the full suite of network tools that a netfiend is likely to want, unless you install something like Cygwin utils.

    That said, it sounds like you may be thinking of the old days when Macs were doing their own thing network wise. Remember, now they are effectively a unix box with a more stable and intuitive UI, so they deal with *a lot* more network types than they used to.

  4. Comment - XP Won't Run on Intel MacBook, iMac

    1.6.1 Beta Build 483 (Jan 12, 2006 - 11:46 PM)

    Not only is transparency a gimick, but it is one that WinXP does support at the OS level, but it is undocumented, and has no interface.

    There are a couple of free utilities out there that give you hotkey and rightclick control over the WinXP native window transparancy though:

    http://www.chime.tv/products/glass2k.shtml

    http://www.download.com/...000-2347_4-9661147.html

  5. Comment - XP Won't Run on Intel MacBook, iMac

    1.6.1 Beta Build 483 (Jan 12, 2006 - 11:16 PM)

    To the best of my knowledge, they still don't intend to sell it separately, but with all of the good reasons to change their mind, one can still hope. :D

  6. Comment - XP Won't Run on Intel MacBook, iMac

    1.6.1 Beta Build 483 (Jan 12, 2006 - 4:38 AM)

    Just a few interesting observations, some mentioned in other posts:

    Reasons to run Windows on a Mac:

    * Games developers are still primarily DirectX users. Yes there are OpenGL games, but game companies like market share (i.e., DirectX on Windows).

    * Corporate Inertia among software developers. Their comfort zone is in Win32 application development. The vast majority of commercial developers will be slow to adopt the new platform for fear of betamax syndrome. This does however leave a nice niche to be filled by startups and traditional mac developers.

    * Software familiarity. Users often are reluctant to dump a program that they are comfortable with just because a better platform has become available. Witness all of the folks using MS Office when open office is free and opens and saves in portable MS Office formats (not to mention saving to PDF). It's just not the same old familiar program. Once all of their favorite programs will run on the new platform, then they might dump the old.

    * Comfort Zone. -- "I'm not sure how to do XYZ on the Mac yet... Better keep Windo$ for a bit longer"

    Reasons to run OSX86 on other than Mac HW:

    * Gives users a chance to become familiar for a lower investment.

    * Lets users learn that Mac is a platform that is more focused on usability than Windows (though admittedly not as much as when Tog (http://www.asktog.com) was evangelizing it)

    * Forces a greater degree of competition, since OSX is the most useable *nix based OS out there, and the only one that really has a chance at home market penetration (until we tech geeks get our act together and make linux truly useable as well as powerful)

    * Allows Apple to access the potential of the OS market to a degree that was previously only available to MS.

    * Assume $1000 profit on Mac PC and only $10 profit on Mac OSX86 "boxed edition". 1000 copies of the OS makes you as much money as 10 PCs, and you now have 1000 customers (i.e., poor college students) that used to be MS customers.

    * Having more users attracts more serious commercial software developers. Would you rather have 10 potential customers for your new XWidget software, or 1000?

    * The Mac OS is no longer like a car with the hood welded shut. Now it is like a car that would run forever if it was welded shut, but that comes with a fully equipped automotive garage anyhow... So I want one!

    :D

    Reasons why added HW variety doesn't hurt Apple:

    * HW manufacturers should be the ones shouldering the load of writing and testing the drivers (I have a friend who tests drivers for Macs professionally for nVidia, so this works...) and it is the HW manufacturer that is to blame if they suck.

    * Users avoid HW with shoddy drivers (except when they are from ATI, go figure...) unless they cannot (or will not) afford better. In that case, they still expect the world, but you can point a laugh when their system gets hosed, comfortable in the knowledge that it is their own fault for being too cheap (there is a line there).

    * When the cheap HW works, the system is still more stable than MS products with equivalent HW. This lets more of us "Poe Foke" get exposure to the exciting world of quality OSs (with consistent, usable interfaces. Sorry Linux guys...;), which breeds loyal users.

    In all, my perspective is self-serving. I'm tired of the inconsistency and instability of open source GUIs, but I want the power of *nix AND a reasonable amount of software. How do I spell relief? M.A.C. O.S.X.86! Does that mean that I want to give up all of the SW that I already use regularly? Not overnight!

    -John Sherwood
    --------------
    HW: AMD Sempron 2800+ on Abit NF8 mobo, 1GB RAM, 250GB HD, nVidia GeForce4 ti 4200 w/ 64MB

    OS: Windows XP Pro, Kubuntu Linux v5.10 (Breezy Badger), Knoppix Live Linux DVD v4.0.2, 50 GB just waiting for OSX v10.4.4