Professional Web Applications Themes

Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with? - Mac Applications & Software

My vote - Aladdin's Stuffit Deluxe. Stuffit Deluxe is hands down, the buggiest commercial software I use on a daily basis (still, that's probably because I no longer use any MicroSloth products). It's also been one of the more expensive - every few months I waste another $30 on an upgrade I'm forced to get to stay compatible, yet the bugs never seem to disappear. Regards, Jamie Kahn Genet -- If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate....

  1. #1

    Default Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    My vote - Aladdin's Stuffit Deluxe.

    Stuffit Deluxe is hands down, the buggiest commercial software I use on
    a daily basis (still, that's probably because I no longer use any
    MicroSloth products). It's also been one of the more expensive - every
    few months I waste another $30 on an upgrade I'm forced to get to stay
    compatible, yet the bugs never seem to disappear.

    Regards,
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  2. #2

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g08cq8.1agj1cj1dmida8N%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     

    I've been using SD 4.5 for several years with no upgrades and no
    problems.
    --
    D.F. Manno
    net
    "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what
    they do not want to hear." (George Orwell)
    D.F. Guest

  3. #3

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <supernews.com>,
    "D.F. Manno" <net> wrote:
     
    >
    > I've been using SD 4.5 for several years with no upgrades and no
    > problems.[/ref]

    I found Stuffit Expander 7.0 couldn't expaind MIME doents but 6.01
    could. I demanded my money back. It was news to the tech support
    person who processed the refund.

    The QA department at Aladdin should be ashamed.

    --
    DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...



    Michael Guest

  4. #4

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <tdl.com>,
    "Michael Vilain <net>" wrote:
     

    So should tech support, if they're processing refunds for a free
    product.
    --
    D.F. Manno
    net
    "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what
    they do not want to hear." (George Orwell)
    D.F. Guest

  5. #5

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    Tom Harrington <no.spam.dammit.net> wrote:
     
    >
    > You're not forced to put up with it. If you don't want to put up with
    > it, don't.[/ref]

    I do if I want to do things like creating segmented stuffit archives.

    With nearly every new version of SD Aladdin change the format forcing
    people to either upgrade to keep the functionality of the Deluxe version
    (magic menu and the rest), or downgrade to the limited Expander and
    throw away the advantage of Deluxe.

    Still it doesn't matter which I use - I'm still stuck with the same bugs
    in the Stuffit Engine :-(

    Regards,
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  6. #6

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    Jamie Kahn Genet <net.nz> wrote:

    Consider OpenUp for decoding, and one of the many zip available to
    compress files? There are many flavors and many criteria (eg maintain
    resource forks etc.) but you certainly could find yours...

    Herve


    --
    Frédérique & Hervé Sainct, net
    Frédérique's initial is missing in front of the above address
    l'initiale de Frédérique manque devant l'adresse email ci-dessus
    Frédérique Guest

  7. #7

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g09s55.1uncqgc2n0jalN%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     
    > >
    > > You're not forced to put up with it. If you don't want to put up with
    > > it, don't.[/ref]
    >
    > I do if I want to do things like creating segmented stuffit archives.[/ref]

    You don't if you consider alternative solutions for doing the same
    thing. One possibility would be a segmented disk image. If you
    described what it is you're really trying to do, someone here might have
    an alternative that meets your needs.

    --
    Tom "Tom" Harrington
    Macaroni, Automated System Maintenance for Mac OS X.
    Version 1.4: Best cleanup yet, gets files other tools miss.
    See http://www.atomicbird.com/
    Tom Guest

  8. #8

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    D.F. Manno <net> wrote:
     
    > >
    > > How do you expand archives created with newer versions?[/ref]
    >
    > Stuffit Expander 7.0.3[/ref]

    and how do you cope with the older version of the Stuffit Engine being
    overwritten by the newer version?
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  9. #9

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    Frédérique & Hervé Sainct <net> wrote:
     

    I helped write below? How magical!
     

    Seriously though, I am aware of many alternatives to Aladdin's buggy
    products. It's the need to stay compatible with others that forces me to
    use Stuffit (which I wouldn't mind so much, if only it worked).

    Regards,
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  10. #10

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g0awhm.1bl1ohcxlyofyN%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     
    > >
    > > Stuffit Expander 7.0.3[/ref]
    >
    > and how do you cope with the older version of the Stuffit Engine being
    > overwritten by the newer version?[/ref]

    I save a copy of the older version of the Stuffit Engine before
    installing a new Expander. Afterwards, I just replace the new Engine
    with the old one.
    --
    D.F. Manno
    net
    "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what
    they do not want to hear." (George Orwell)
    D.F. Guest

  11. #11

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g0ax73.1j3vpoqwfbefgN%net.nz>, Jamie Kahn Genet
    <net.nz> wrote:
     

    Well, thus far you've only provided one example of what you say is a
    bug. (Though I'm not convinced it isn't a problem elsewhere, with
    malformed input.) So, two questions:

    1) Got any other examples of bugs in this "extremely buggy" program?

    2) Have you reported any of these problems to Aladdin, or are you just
    hoping they'll magically go away by themselves?

    Although I'm not as happy with Aladdin as I used to be in the "good old
    days", I haven't had any problems whatsoever with Stuffit. (Unless the
    file I'm trying to work with has somehow been corrupted by some
    external force, which cannot be blamed on Stuffit.) So I don't think
    it's really fair to characterize it as bug-riddled software.

    --
    -Thomas

    <http://www.bitjuggler.com/>
    Thomas Guest

  12. #12

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <260820031630516024%com>, ThufirHawat
    <com> wrote:
     

    To be fair, if Aladdin opened up the format at this point, it would
    destroy the company. You can't really expect this to change. If you
    don't like it, invent a time machine and go back in time (more than a
    decade) to the point when Stuffit wasn't the standard. Therein lies
    the problem!
     

    Hmm... interesting. So, though you don't like Stuffit, it's the only
    program that has all the functions you need. I don't think you can
    blame this on Aladdin or the guy who initially wrote it.

    This might sound like I'm being an Aladdin butt-kisser, but I've
    actually been quite ed with some of their poor business decisions
    lately (such as the method of distributing the last update to Stuffit
    Deluxe, requiring that we go through forms and whatnot on the web
    store). However, I have very little complaint with the product,
    especially given that you can technically get much of the functionality
    without spending a single cent.

    --
    -Thomas

    <http://www.bitjuggler.com/>
    Thomas Guest

  13. #13

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <260820031155219809%spam.me>,
    Thomas Reed <spam.me> wrote:
     
    >
    > To be fair, if Aladdin opened up the format at this point, it would
    > destroy the company. You can't really expect this to change. If you
    > don't like it, invent a time machine and go back in time (more than a
    > decade) to the point when Stuffit wasn't the standard. Therein lies
    > the problem![/ref]

    You mean there was such a time? StuffIt was the standard when I started
    using Macs, and that was in 1989. And that was before Aladdin bought
    it, when it was still shareware.

    --
    Tom "Tom" Harrington
    Macaroni, Automated System Maintenance for Mac OS X.
    Version 1.4: Best cleanup yet, gets files other tools miss.
    See http://www.atomicbird.com/
    Tom Guest

  14. #14

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <tph-8FF98B.13473326082003localhost>, Tom Harrington
    <no.spam.dammit.net> wrote:
     
    > >
    > > To be fair, if Aladdin opened up the format at this point, it would
    > > destroy the company. You can't really expect this to change. If you
    > > don't like it, invent a time machine and go back in time (more than a
    > > decade) to the point when Stuffit wasn't the standard. Therein lies
    > > the problem![/ref]
    >
    > You mean there was such a time? StuffIt was the standard when I started
    > using Macs, and that was in 1989. And that was before Aladdin bought
    > it, when it was still shareware.[/ref]

    Yes, there was a battle for standard supremacy in the '86-'89
    timeframe. The last serious contender to StuffIt was a program called
    CompactPro. Actually, by 1989, Aladdin had acquired StuffIt from
    Raymond Lau, but they weren't pushing company branding quite so hard at
    that time.

    --
    Spenser
    sbt Guest

  15. #15

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g08cq8.1agj1cj1dmida8N%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     

    You mean APART from Windows, I presume.
     

    I went back to v6.5 and am staying put till they get the bugs out of 7.

    But to be truthful, the buggiest non-MS product I've used would have to
    be (the original) Quark Xpress 4. Problems is a gross understatement.
    I'm surprised publishers weren't jumping out of downtown office
    buildings on a pace akin to that Monty Python sketch. It was bad.

    Beyond that, I wasn't too impressed with the initial release of
    AppleWorks 6 and iMovie 3 either. It's rare Apple lets something that
    decrepit escape the lab.

    Buggiest ONGOING app I use -- Suitcase.
    --
    Cheers,
    _Chas_
    http://www.apple.com/switch
    non-spammers can write to chasm at mac (dot com)
    Charles Guest

  16. #16

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    ThufirHawat <com> wrote:
    [snip] 
    >
    > Which one? I am not aware of a single alternative which can decode all
    > the formats of StuffIt at the same time (though RAR decoding is pure
    > crap).[/ref]

    I keep a suite of utilities to take over from Stuffit. See
    <http://www.macorchard.com/helper.html> for an excellent list. Not all
    are free, they all crash less than Stuffit.

    Compact Pro is great, but sadly dead in the water now OSX is on the
    scene :-(

    Regards,
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  17. #17

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    Charles Martin <org> wrote:
     
    >
    > You mean APART from Windows, I presume.[/ref]

    *grins*
     
    >
    > I went back to v6.5 and am staying put till they get the bugs out of 7.
    >
    > But to be truthful, the buggiest non-MS product I've used would have to
    > be (the original) Quark Xpress 4. Problems is a gross understatement.
    > I'm surprised publishers weren't jumping out of downtown office
    > buildings on a pace akin to that Monty Python sketch. It was bad.[/ref]

    Yeah - I heard some horrible stories about Quark back then. Several
    people I know have switched to Indesign and been glad of it. Not always
    possible, of course.
     

    Really? I always used Font Reserve and have found it very stable. Guess
    I made a good choice.

    Regards,
    Jamie Kahn Genet
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    Jamie Guest

  18. #18

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    I hear ya! Aladdin is one lousy company. They have gone complacent
    years ago ridding on their proprietary format.

    I wouldn't use .sit unless I absolutely have to.

    -J
    Jay Guest

  19. #19

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g0dga1.b5phfk8ou7joN%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     
    > >
    > > I save a copy of the older version of the Stuffit Engine before
    > > installing a new Expander. Afterwards, I just replace the new Engine
    > > with the old one.[/ref]
    >
    > How does the newer expander work with an old stuffit engine???[/ref]

    Perfectly.
    --
    D.F. Manno
    net
    "If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what
    they do not want to hear." (George Orwell)
    D.F. Guest

  20. #20

    Default Re: Buggiest commercial software we're forced to put up with?

    In article <1g0dglo.185h21bt428qkN%net.nz>,
    net.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote:
     
    >
    > Really? I always used Font Reserve and have found it very stable. Guess
    > I made a good choice.[/ref]

    I've never had problems with Suitcase 10 (I used to use ATM Deluxe so I
    can't comment on earlier versions).

    The current version of Font Reserve is, however, dismal. It breaks up
    your suitcases in order to have them conform to the organisational
    scheme used by its vault, but in the process it often destroys family
    relations between fonts. It is also impossible to use Postscript fonts
    via Font Reserve if they identified as a dependent style in the main
    FOND resource without having separate FOND resources associated with
    them. This means that for many fonts, you can access only the regular
    style and not bold or italic variants since the program incorrectly
    identifies them as orphaned postscript files.

    André

    --
    n.b. there are no monotremes in my email address
    Andre Guest

Similar Threads

  1. SCSA testing software (HELP! don't let them steal my software)
    By Dr. David Kirkby in forum Linux / Unix Administration
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: August 15th, 06:49 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: July 4th, 06:46 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139