Help me be convert from DirectoryOpus

[admin]

I have never used (or even encountered) a software license that is per-person, yet can be used on however many machines one wants. This is a new paradigm as I see it.

Yes? I never cared to look at many other license definitions. I find the concept license-per-person very natural. License means: allowance to use. To restrict this to one machine is a further complication of the idea, it seems to me. And to allow any other people to use the program on that same machine, is a quite unrealistic scenario. How many computers are shared between persons? The opposite is true nowadays: persons are shared between computers, IOW: one person has many computers. So, again, I find XY's scheme very natural and modern. And a very good deal compared to per-machine licensing.
The family computer, of course, is a different story...


BTW, I find software cracking a harmless teenager game. The bad guys are the ones that use cracks/serials although they could easily afford to buy.

[Jeff Bellune]

The bad guys are the ones that use cracks/serials although they could easily afford to buy.

I think the *really* bad guys are the ones who crack the software and then re-sell it at a much cheaper price than the original developer or company.

[admin]

The bad guys are the ones that use cracks/serials although they could easily afford to buy.

I think the *really* bad guys are the ones who crack the software and then re-sell it at a much cheaper price than the original developer or company.

Even *worse* are the guys that enslave children to crack software for them, that they then re-sell it at a much cheaper price...
(I invented this, but I'm sure it's real in some corners of the planet.)

[avsfan]

One licensing arrangement that Borland used (back when they were still in business!) was that you could use the software "like a book." In other words, you were allowed to install it on any number of machines, and any number of people were allowed to use it, as long as no two people were using it at the same time, just like no two people can read the same book at the same time in two different locations.

I don't know how well it worked for them, but I remember thinking that it was a nice, simple way to describe what they were trying to accomplish.

Just a thought...

[mwb1100]

I have never used (or even encountered) a software license that is per-person, yet can be used on however many machines one wants.

Actually, this is not all that uncommon, especially with shareware. What I find is that when software has a 'per-user' license you are often able to choose: 1) the software is licensed for as single person to use on multiple machines, or 2) the software is licensed to a single machine for use my more than one person.

But not both. So this might work for a 'family' license if Don is inclined to that. If your family of 4 has only one computer, then one license is needed. If your family of 4 has 3 computers, then 3 licenses are necessary.

If your family of 4 is like my family of 4, then you still only need one license, because everyone else in the family is nearly blissfully unaware of what files are and XY would confuse and scare them. MS Word handles files. Everything else are pictures or songs, but not files. (Imagine a conversation that starts like: "Move those files to your 'My Pictures' folders." response: "but those aren't files, they're pictures...").

[Jeff Bellune]

If your family of 4 is like my family of 4, then you still only need one license, because everyone else in the family is nearly blissfully unaware of what files are and XY would confuse and scare them. MS Word handles files. Everything else are pictures or songs, but not files. (Imagine a conversation that starts like: "Move those files to your 'My Pictures' folders." response: "but those aren't files, they're pictures...").

Precisely why I said that I will most likely be the only family member that ever uses XYplorer.

[admin]

One licensing arrangement that Borland used (back when they were still in business!) was that you could use the software "like a book." ...

I like that. Fine with me. But I won't change my definition now, because, as Jeff Bellune already said, the majority of users never take a look at the license definition anyway.

[admin]

I have never used (or even encountered) a software license that is per-person, yet can be used on however many machines one wants.

Actually, this is not all that uncommon, especially with shareware. What I find is that when software has a 'per-user' license you are often able to choose: 1) the software is licensed for as single person to use on multiple machines, or 2) the software is licensed to a single machine for use my more than one person.

Pretty much "like a book".

Although, when I think about it, "book" is not a very good metaphor here, since you finish a book and pass it on. Software is more like a tool (surprise! ), so I'd rather say "Like a hammer" or "Like a guitar". You can play it as many bands as you like, and you can also lend it to your drummer if you are crazy enough, but you can't play the same guitar with others at the same time.

[admin]

If your family of 4 is like my family of 4, then you still only need one license, because everyone else in the family is nearly blissfully unaware of what files are and XY would confuse and scare them. MS Word handles files. Everything else are pictures or songs, but not files. (Imagine a conversation that starts like: "Move those files to your 'My Pictures' folders." response: "but those aren't files, they're pictures...").

Precisely why I said that I will most likely be the only family member that ever uses XYplorer.

Well then. Keep them on the pictures-are-no-files level and you are fine with just 1 license!

BTW, there is a freeware version of XY which might serve general family file management needs...

[Jeff Bellune]

BTW, there is a freeware version of XY which might serve general family file management needs...

Thanks, Don, but the cost of a single license is not an issue for me. You deserve at least that much.

What matters is doing the right thing with respect to the developer, and also getting the most useful product for my investment.

I would rather spend $240 on 5 DOpus licenses (they said a sixth install on my personal laptop was OK without a separate license) than spend $50 on a single XY license *if* it turns out that DOpus meets my needs better than XY.

And if you would have required me to buy an XY license for each of the 7 members of my family at $50 each, I would have done that *if* it turns out that XY meets my needs better than DOpus.

OT: I am the IT guy for my family. Managing 6 computers requires standardization as much as possible. I purchased a new Internet security solution for all of my computers, a new disk maintenance solution for all of my computers, and new family-safe monitoring program for all of my computers, just because I could apply the new solutions across all the machines. My old security, maintenance and monitoring solutions worked just fine on the older machines, but were not viable on the newer ones.

To me, the standardization was worth the cost. It will be the same for whatever file management solution I choose.

Sorry to go on so long. Hopefully this thread will help others "see the light".

[admin]

1. I really like XYplorer!
2. I also really like Directory Opus.

Then you say the high pricing of DO made you think about switching to XY. But in a later post you say that money is not the crucial point but who does the job better.

Hmmm, is that a contradiction or did I misunderstand something?

[Jeff Bellune]

1. I really like XYplorer!
2. I also really like Directory Opus.

Then you say the high pricing of DO made you think about switching to XY. But in a later post you say that money is not the crucial point but who does the job better.

Hmmm, is that a contradiction or did I misunderstand something?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my description.

I'm not stupid. I don't want to spend more money than I have to. A single XY license at $50 is very attractive when compared to 5 DOpus licenses at $240. But if it turns out that DOpus is better for me in my situation, then I will pay what I have to in order to get the solution I need.

Initially, I browsed the XY web site and got an idea of its feature set. The first examination indicated that XY offered fewer features than DO. Before leaving the XY site for good (and to likely not return), I wanted to see what the cost of licensing would be. Your unique (to me) licensing scheme and the relatively low cost prompted me to install the demo of XY and make a thorough evaluation of the product.

Again, standardization is key for me. I don't want to install DOpus on my personal machines and spend the time to become proficient with the app if the rest of the family's machines are running XY. If one machine runs XY, then they will *all* run XY. If one machine runs DO, then they will *all* run DO. The time I save by only having to learn one file manager really well will offset the cost of the manager, whether that cost is $50 or $240.

Does that make more sense?

-Jeff

[admin]

>Does that make more sense?
Yep.

[j_c_hallgren]

Again, standardization is key for me. I don't want to install DOpus on my personal machines and spend the time to become proficient with the app if the rest of the family's machines are running XY. If one machine runs XY, then they will *all* run XY. If one machine runs DO, then they will *all* run DO. The time I save by only having to learn one file manager really well will offset the cost of the manager, whether that cost is $50 or $240.

Does that make more sense?

-Jeff

I think there are many cases where "IT" admins use a different utility than the typical user, so I don't see having two programs as that much of an issue, and besides, can you get as much direct interaction with developers of DO as you've already had with Don? That's the "feature" that I tend to publicize often, as it's quite unusual...that, plus the ability to help direct the improvements in a quick and timely manner, as we sometimes do here is another "feature" that makes XY better than many other products...

[Jeff Bellune]

Again, standardization is key for me. I don't want to install DOpus on my personal machines and spend the time to become proficient with the app if the rest of the family's machines are running XY. If one machine runs XY, then they will *all* run XY. If one machine runs DO, then they will *all* run DO. The time I save by only having to learn one file manager really well will offset the cost of the manager, whether that cost is $50 or $240.

I think there are many cases where "IT" admins use a different utility than the typical user, so I don't see having two programs as that much of an issue

I think you misunderstand me. I don't really care what the rest of the family uses - even Windows Explorer is fine. What I don't want to do is get all comfy with DO on my 2 main machines, then have to go and get comfy with XY on the other 4 family computers. I'd like to get comfortable with one file manager, and have it installed on all 6 computers.

...can you get as much direct interaction with developers of DO as you've already had with Don? That's the "feature" that I tend to publicize often, as it's quite unusual...that, plus the ability to help direct the improvements in a quick and timely manner, as we sometimes do here is another "feature" that makes XY better than many other products...

There are experienced DO users on their forum that give a lot of their time to interact with other DO users, but interaction with the developers of DO is as limited as any other "normal" software package.

Don's participation here in the forum, where he is willing to listen to our suggestions and ideas, respond to them and (*gasp*) actually implement the better and more popular ones is amazingly unique! I'm investing quite a bit of time this weekend to make sure that XY is right for me, because I really want to be able to make XY my file manager of choice. I've already got a ZIPping program and an FTP add-on for my browser, so, thanks to Don's help, there is really only one obstacle remaining: I just don't know how much I'll miss being able to see both the source and target file lists at the same time (no Dual Pane in XY).

(Sidebar: is there a satisfactory workaround for not having DP? Tab-dropping is OK, but it's not quite there for me. I still have to open the target tab after I drop just to make sure the files/folders went where they were supposed to.)

I'm enjoying XY so far!

-Jeff

EDIT: I thought I'd post a screenshot of what I've done so far.