What programs have been suggested, but aren't in the DB.

[guinness]

So I didn't want to post this message in the Submission Forum, but I have noticed that applications which have been suggested and are confirmed as 100% Portable are still not in the Database, is there a reason for this? Personally I would love to see more applications being added to create a dynamic and unique database.

[donald]

Could you give examples of proven portable programs?

[guinness]

Sure, here are a couple. This is only a discussion, because I love to add Portable (Stealth) applications to TPFC DB.
http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... 58&start=0 - Moo0 ConnectionWatcher
http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... 58&start=0 - Advanced Renamer - ADDED: http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=1848
http://www.portablefreeware.com/forums/ ... 04&start=0 - HWMonitor - ADDED: http://www.portablefreeware.com/index.php?id=1831

[guinness]

Just to clarify for those new to the site...

How to get a new Database Entry into the main TPFC Database?
When an application is added it is given a rating by the user who added it e.g. CCleaner V1.23.454 (0/5) <= Number on the right. Ratings are determined by how popular the user is and range from 0 - 5.

The number on the right must reach a value of 10 before it will be shown in the public database, otherwise it can only be found by using [@] APPNAME in the Search field. To increase this value, users (must be logged in) vote by clicking the thumbs (This app rocks!) to increase the value. Once it has reached 10 this application will be shown to the public.

You can see who has voted for the application by clicking on the right hand value. A list will be shown of the users who have accepted it as Portable, with the corresponding rating they have.

Note: You must be logged into TPFC for any of the above to take affect.

Edit: I deleted a section of text which was based upon my opinion of the voting system, which may not have reflected the views of the other PF members.

[Napiophelios]

Note: Users ideally should vote for an application if it's Portable and not on the basis that they have no reason to use the application. This is because only about 70 users actually have a rating within TPFC community.

That's some shakey criteria for voting "This App Rocks!" in my opinion.

90% of the apps in the database are portable..that's why they are there.
And about 60% are freakin useless when compared to other apps listed.

While diversity and longevity (even for useless apps) is important to the database
Why in the world would I vote for an application (despite it being perfectly portable)
that I find no value in?

Isnt that the whole idea of a rating system;
to seperate the good from the bad,
the timeless from the obsolete?
Its only natural that some fall to the side...

I mean its a popularity rating right?

"ideally":adverb in a perfect world, in theory, preferably, if possible, ...

[guinness]

Obviously users are going to have a different opinion of how the rating system should be used.
I believe - The left hand value as the value which defines that you think "this application rocks!" where the right hand defines whether the application is included in the main DB, based on meeting the criteria of being Portable as per the FAQ.

Maybe the two should be separated from one another, because some applications which I have no use for e.g. Enigeo (sorry joby_toss) I still vote as being included but not as "This app rocks!"

I edited the first post accordingly. Sorry for any problems.

[Napiophelios]

Obviously users are going to have a different opinion of how the rating system should be used.
I believe - The left hand value as the value which defines that you think "this application rocks!" where the right hand defines whether the application is included in the main DB, based on meeting the criteria of being Portable as per the FAQ.

Maybe the two should be separated from one another, because some applications which I have no use for e.g. Enigeo (sorry joby_toss) I still vote as being included but not as "This app rocks!"

I edited the first post accordingly. Sorry for any problems.

No problems man just my opinion.

I thought about it some more and I see your point.
I can understand wanting to grow the database,even if it contains entries I wouldnt use
cause the info included in the entries is very helpful.
I dont know how many times I have looked up programs specifically for the info included in TPFC entries.

I might vote a newly discovered app in if its portable
but if I dont like it, its a sure bet I will remove it from my favorites once listed.

Between the comments section and forum discussion its pretty easy to gauge a "portability" rating,
so ultimately I will reserve my lasting vote for the popularity aspect.

[guinness]

I appreciate you being honest. This subject of how people use their vote hasn't been discussed before.

I went in all guns blazing telling people how they should vote, but I see a lot of users (yourself included) contributing to the forum, testing, discussing, updating and yeh your right I want a dynamic Portable database as a user myself.

[Andrew Lee]

BTW, for those interested, here's the current distribution on user ranks:

• Rank 1: 21
  Rank 2: 19
  Rank 3: 9
  Rank 4: 5
  Rank 5: 27
  Total: 82 members

On application voting, my original intention was not only to tag apps that you currently use, but also apps that you could potentially use i.e. apps that you find interesting or catches your eye. Then the idea is to create a list of all the noteworthy apps from all these personal tags, and filter out the mundane stuff.

So the question is: do you think the system has succeeded in doing this so far?

There has been close to 4000 tags created so far, so one cannot say there's been a lack of interest.

So if you think you have submitted a worthy portable app, but cannot even get 2 R5 members to become interested enough to pony up the 10 points to make the entry public, how do you think this can be improved?

Edit: I have updated this announcement to include more details about the submission process. Feel free to add to it please!

[guinness]

Well, it's a great system for new members (R1,R2) wanting to add applications and I think it has been working. BUT ... for those members who have had a certain number of applications added to the DB (and have been approved) should gain an automatic 10, because their applications are more often than not Portable and meet the standard FAQ rules.

For example, the 27 who have R5, probably 8 are active within the community. I then have to hope 7 out of the 8 are listening to ensure my added application is included, knowing fair well that all applications I add are Stealth. At the moment I have or know of 10 (or so) applications which are Stealth, but still are on 5 points, because those that generally vote for applications have been away on Holiday! Also I noticed if I add an application on someones behalf, their points don't get included into the right hand value. E.g. I added a program suggested by Cornflower and it's still on 5 and not the 10.

So my overall point is those with a good reputation in TPFC should be given a little more leeway than other members. Who these members are is another discussion!

[joby_toss]

Concentrated power is always a bad idea.
I always thought that apps should be voted by at least 3 members to get in. More testing done, the better.
...just rushing...

[guinness]

True. Maybe it should stay the same.