darkrats
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by darkrats
-
-
Does anyone really believe that Piriform will pay any attention to their user base?
Look at all the other software companies that went for the flat look (foxit, malwarebytes, etc) and how user complaints made no difference at all.
It would be incredible if Piriform suddenly announced that the UI would get a significant change as per user comments.
It's not going to happen.
The sad truth is, that Piriform, like other companies, will never understand that software development should be a co-operative process.
Not just making major changes and then giving users the finger, or the silent treatment (which seems to be what we are getting).
-
There's no use in asking Piriform not to use their flat interface. They really don't care what you think about it.
In fact, I challenge any official representative of Piriform to make a post that says, that if enough users are unhappy with the Beta UI, they'll stay with the current one.
Could it happen? Maybe, but not very likely. They don't look at CCLEANER as a co-operative effort between creators and users.
I've seen so many companies go down the same path over the years, and there's no figuring why they do it.
WinRAR has done it right. They still have the same UI, same buttons that they had many years ago.
Users can design their own skins for the program and make it look any way they want. There's even a Windows 8 skin (although it's pretty bad).
-
What bothers me the most (besides the flat buttons from Microsoft) is that the Title Bar no longer reflects the system colors. It's just plain white.
-
I have to say that the UI of 5.0 is really bad.
It looks like a child sat down and tried to copy what he/she saw, by memory.
It has been my experience that creators/companies that decide to "improve" the UI of their products rarely care about the opinions of their user community.
Complaining about it will probably not move them to reconsider the changes. In their minds the "more modern" design will always look better, just because they designed it.
Anyway, if the updated UI goes ahead, I'll likely stay with version 4 until I can find a replacement program.
I am a diehard Windows XP user, and the new UI looks so out of place that it would be difficult to continue to use it.
My plans are to build a nice Windows 7 machine, but it probably looks just as bad there.
Obviously, designed with Windows 8 in mind, and with little consideration for everyone else.
It's going to be a sad day indeed, when version 5 makes it's debut.
-
Checked another thread and found you have to turn off Active Monitoring and then go to the Advanced Tab and turn it off there too.
Then CCleaner seems to work the way it's suppose to for use Free users. I really dislike software that do their job only if you allow internet access.
Unlike browsers etc. that are designed to use the net, system utilities should be able to run whether or not you have a connection.
Please (ccleaner creators) don't play around with the free version of your product.
Just make the professional version free too, if you have a need to add realtime functionality.
-
I've used the free CCleaner for many years, and was never disappointed until now.
Version 4.18.4842 now allows system monitoring (under options). This is a deal breaker for me.
The thing I liked about the free version was it's simplicity.
With the latest version, you need to allow internet access to use the system monitor option.
With the latest version, you can't close the program by clicking on the X, it just shrinks to the system tray.
With the latest version, it makes a startup entry (msconfig) even when monitoring is turned off.
The subtle padlocks next to the monitoring options seems like an advertising push to get us to upgrade.
I know my opinion is not going to change the direction this nice utility seems to be going, but maybe others feel the same.
It's just not the simple, useful tool that it was just a day ago.
Why do the creators of this software feel the need to tinker with something that was perfect?
-
Not sure if that applies here, because I have never been offered Chrome by any other application or installer I've used as far as I can recall. But it's a good thought.
-
I just finished helping a friend install and use the free version of Recuva, talking her through it over the phone.
We both downloaded from the same link (piriform.com). She is using Vista and I'm using XP. Didin't expect any surprises.
So we run the installers together.
Mine goes from choosing English to the Install button.
Her's has additional options to install Chrome etc.
That can't be right. We both have the same installer.
Back to the site and again download from the same link.
She end's up with additonal steps asking if she want Chrome installed.
So what's going on here?
Is it because she has Vista and I have XP?
Not a big deal, but it's making me crazy!'
Thanks.
-
I'm guessing that Speccy needs to connect to the net so that it can get information for the "network" module of the program. But why does the Speccy Installer need to access the net during installation?
CCleaner v5.00.5050 looks like ****
in CCleaner
Posted
Are you trying to say that, because I think it's a hopeless situation, I shouldn't post here?
My comment was directed at my fellow users, not at Piriform who don't care what I think about their product.
Who knows? Maybe someone who has some influence will decide to post something.
All I can do is make short rant once in a while, even though it likely won't make any difference.
As a user of Ccleaner, I think I should be allowed to do that, anyway.