privatemeta

Member
 View profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    7

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by privatemeta

  1. Posted

    Hi,

    I know this is an older version of the Apex Setup, but I wanted to share this anyway.

    My latest Microsoft Security Essentials Version reported Malware in the setup files with the versions 1.3.8 and 1.3.9, named "Win32/OpenCandy". As the version is fairly recent however, I just wanted to report it in case you want to avoid false positives in the future, or maybe you included something like that by accident.

  2. Posted

    More detailed info on it in here: http://forums.apexdc...dpost__p__26699

    People, please at least read the changelog before you report a bug, thank you :angry:.

    As it doesn't really matter WHERE i reply to that:

    I really don't like it when I have an application like that not being able to minimize to tray. From time to time I have smaller screen size set and every icon counts.

    Apart from that I know quite a lot of people who set the icons on Windows 7 from hiding label to always show label, it's just their favorite.

    It's good that you incorporate functionality into the taskbar, but it's not like you have to delete the old tray functionality. Please leave it as a configurable choice. If you have to, set the default to not hide in the tray, but at least let me save a little bit of space with applications I REALLY don't need in the taskbar (and yes, although I like ApexDC++, I really don't need it there all the time).

    Please give me a good reason apart from "We are the devs, we can decide that" and "Other apps do like win messenger that too" - I don't like the fact that messenger doesn't hide to tray either, so that's not a valid argument for me (and I guess for a lot of others too).

  4. Posted

    You know, that is probably not even true about 1.3.0 being buggier than 1.2.2... 1.3.0 has countless bug fixes (many from StrongDC merges, but that is irrelevant), it just so happens that the new bugs in 1.3.0 are more visible in every day use than the ones you had on 1.2.2.

    What I am trying to say is that there will always be bugs... some more severe than others. And in terms of severe bugs, 1.3.0 has about one or two of those to my count (the xml nesting depth issue, and certain plugin related bug),

    I acknowledge that some of the other bugs in 1.3.0 might be annoying... and that's why we are working on 1.3.1 as fast as we can manage. But if we work on it too fast then people will start saying: "This bug was in 1.3.0, why isn't it fixed in 1.3.1"

    We could have pushed out an update the day after 1.3.0 had been released to include the few fixes we were missing from StrongDC 2.40, but we did not do that because we knew that there are also other bugs that needed to be addressed from our own changes.

    Sure you can say that we should have done more throughout beta testing... but in regards to that we have limited resources and time. It also did not help that that some of the less severe bugs in 1.3.0 are on areas which are not used by everyone.

    Also remember that ApexDC is a freeware open source project, so we have no obligations to anybody, nor does any of you have any obligations to us. You dislike the way we do things then there is always the other choice.

    Not that I would want to make open source projects less worthy, I'm not even saying that some users might have to be forced or they would run around with gaping 10-year-old security holes, but there's a difference between

    "I want to wait for the next, slightly more stable version" and "ok, now I have to go to the website, download the new program, uninstall the old one or the 'YOU HAVE TO UPGRADE' message won't disappear, install the new one just so I can start it again", but maybe you might just call me narrowminded there. I never said anything against update reminders, but it was just my opinion that the way it is now seemed slightly over the top...

  5. Posted

    You're a lucky guy, no version of apexdc had ever been perfect to me. Although 1.2.1 was sooo close to be. :D

    Regarding your filelist - afaik a temporary solution for you is to lower the level of complexity of your folder tree in your share to meet the xml nesting requirement of 16.

    Yeah, that might be an idea if that actually were an option. The folder tree is rather minimal already.

  6. Posted

    This is probably caused by a hard limit in the new xml parser in 1.3.0. This will be fixed in 1.3.1 which will be out any day now.

    Regarding this update message, I don't see why people are so displeased with upgrading their clients in the first place, it's not like you'll loose anything ion the process if you do it correctly.

    (this comes from someone who updates his client multiple times a day at best times).

    Especially when the reason for blocking old versions was clearly stated in more than one place. Or would you prefer your client to be exploitable over the internet.

    I'm not USING my client over the internet, but that's beside the point... I guess you're doing it because others wouldn't update regularly, but it just makes me sorta pissed off that I have update from a (for me) perfectly working installation to a (again for me) buggy installation.

    Edit:

    P.S.: It's just bad that there's no possibility for advanced users to chose the point or time of upgrading.

  7. Posted

    Since I installed version 1.3.0, I cannot open my own file list anymore if it's over a certain size (somewhere around 1TB and up).

    I tried to rebuild or rehash all files, but that didn't work, as soon as I reached over the TB area, the own file list closed instantly. I can still open others file lists though.

    (I wouldn't have switched, but because of the update message I couldn't use the old version anymore)