Angelo Face
United States of America
No favorite files added yet
2.0 Beta 2 (Sep 8, 2007)
What's with all the fake reviews? Shameless way to push the rating up on yet another media player...
1.3.0.4 (Mar 14, 2007)
Can't format without it.
Minor changelog:
v1.3.0.4
* fix: Index error during driver integration
* fix: ftemp file missing during hotfix pack integration
2.6 Beta 3 (May 17, 2006)
Amazing program.. I only have one problem with it. It does not preload images "next to" the current image you're viewing to speed up image loading. It's such a simple technique and would vastly improve the app, even if it uses more memory. Just make it an option.
2.60 Build 606 (May 14, 2006)
Drivers for relatively simple devices should not consume more than 10MB of disk space, period. I don't care what kind of interface they have, it's just bloated beyond a point. However, these do work just fine for my mouse and I haven't had any real complaints. Much better than the old MouseWare drivers, that's for sure.
2.6 Final (Feb 24, 2006)
huppel: News flash... this isn't Photoshop. It's free. Get over it.
This app rocks for being a free alternative to paint, with way more features. Combine this with PhotoFiltre and you can do a whole lot of stuff that Photoshop can.
2.6 Final (Apr 26, 2006 - 1:37 PM)
might want to read up on raid a little before spewing a bunch of misinformation.
with raid 0 (and several other raid configurations), you cannot just "keep adding drives" without rebuilding the entire array. once you build it, you're stuck unless you want to lose all your data.
and having a raid 0 is actually worse than a single 750gb drive in terms of reliability, because if one drive goes the entire array goes, and there's more chance for failure with more drives.
not every one can get away with 100gb or so of storage, like you apparently can. let people buy what they want...
2.6 Final (Aug 24, 2005 - 2:10 PM)
details? like misspelling "lose"?
2.6 Final (Apr 22, 2005 - 5:16 PM)
Rochester.NY.14609.042205.Forecast.READ.NFO-RZR
2.6 Final (Apr 19, 2005 - 2:34 PM)
well, to a certain extent hardgiant is correct in point #1. he's not really talking about software that utilizes concurrent threading, but merely running two separate cpu-intensive applications simultaneously. while a dual core (or dual processor) machine would definitely benefit in this case, how many of you really do this? who is zipping a gig worth of data at highest 7-zip compression while running the photoshop ripple filter on a 5000x5000 pixel image?
this would be much more beneficial in a server which handles many roles at once. your average "power user" really would only benefit from this once in a great while.
2.6 Final (Apr 18, 2005 - 5:08 PM)
really only currently good for bragging rights. this processor is about as useful as a 64-bit cpu in a 32-bit environment. until more apps/games are rewritten to use concurrent threading, this will be significantly slower than the best single core processors on the market now.
those that make extensive use of high-end applications that can take advantage of this technology could jump on the bandwagon, but may as well wait until the price comes down.