SoftwareOK updates

Submit updates of portable freeware that are already listed in the database.
Message
Author
User avatar
I am Baas
Posts: 4150
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:51 am

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#31 Post by I am Baas »

Stud_PE Binary comparison:

Files are identical.

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#32 Post by guinness »

I am Baas wrote:Stud_PE Binary comparison:

Files are identical.
Thanks for testing.

romulous
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:51 pm

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#33 Post by romulous »

guinness wrote:Thanks for testing.
Seconded.

Well, that clears up the question of the "updates" I guess. Very sad. :(

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#34 Post by Midas »

romulous wrote:Seconded.

Well, that clears up the question of the "updates" I guess. Very sad. :(
Thirded... :evil:

User avatar
Checker
Posts: 1628
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Ingolstadt [DE]

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#35 Post by Checker »

Well it's obviously this version:
romulous wrote:1. The author is making no changes, except to the version number (ala MuseTips Text Filter).
But: The author is permanently telling us, that the updates includes fixes, optimizations and improvements ... and that's not o.k. Image

romulous
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:51 pm

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#36 Post by romulous »

It's a shame his programs are still being bumped up to the front page (NewFileTime), it only encourages the behaviour.

User avatar
Midas
Posts: 6725
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 7:09 am
Location: Sol3

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#37 Post by Midas »

romulous wrote:It's a shame his programs are still being bumped up to the front page (NewFileTime), it only encourages the behaviour.
Maybe a special condition could be set for some entries where they would only be updated if a file change was verified... :|

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#38 Post by guinness »

Midas wrote:
romulous wrote:It's a shame his programs are still being bumped up to the front page (NewFileTime), it only encourages the behaviour.
Maybe a special condition could be set for some entries where they would only be updated if a file change was verified... :|
I would honestly say this is more work for those who update the TPFC entries, as more often than not they don't use the application themselves, I know I don't. Checker does most of the updating so I would just leave it in his hands on whether or not an update is considered worthy or not.

As I said above I appreciate they (SoftwareOK) are providing free applications, but I drawn the line when I (as a developer) find they're creating false accusations of an update to 'bump' their application, the vague change-log descriptions didn't bother me I put this down to a lack of English skills.

It now makes it even harder for genuine developers (like me) who may push an update with a 2 line change-log once in a while to be taken as a credible update, I feel obliged to apologise every time!

User avatar
Checker
Posts: 1628
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 1:00 pm
Location: Ingolstadt [DE]

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#39 Post by Checker »

romulous wrote:It's a shame his programs are still being bumped up to the front page (NewFileTime), it only encourages the behaviour.
Sorry for doing some updates here at TPFC.
NewFileTime changed size from 53760 to 54272. So I think something has been changed :wink:

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#40 Post by guinness »

Corrections in the function Import / Export from the text files
This wasn't as ambiguous as the last couple of updates they've had.

User avatar
webfork
Posts: 10821
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:06 pm
Location: US, Texas
Contact:

Re: SoftwareOK updates

#41 Post by webfork »

[On an unserious note]
guinness wrote:It now makes it even harder for genuine developers (like me) who may push an update with a 2 line change-log once in a while to be taken as a credible update, I feel obliged to apologise every time!
We should edit this site several times in small ways (change logo, get change the background) and then declare the site is at 9.0 and ready for deployment at nuclear silos vs top secret ninja assassins.

Post Reply