User forums now online! Please see the latest post in the Announcements forum for more information.

Author Topic: Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!  (Read 1093 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« on: 2014-10-10 03:16:51 »
Not much to say. Looks like the technical division and support division pays no attention to support tickets and forum posts. One would think that a fundamental issue as per my previous post would be the first issue to be addresses in a new release.
See previous post:
http://forums.cerious.com/forum/index.php?id=3924

aslaksen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 88
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #1 on: 2014-10-10 05:31:59 »
Yes, I think this is an important point.

From the changes list it is clear they are making lots of changes, but they seem to be very different from what we discuss on the forum.

For instance, my complaint about TWAIN settings not being stored, has not been addressed.

Helmer Aslaksen

Gary

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #2 on: 2014-10-10 07:17:23 »
I wanted to comment within 2 minutes of using the new build but thought I'd wait to see if anyone else would post.  Cerious did fix the annoying 'background tasks' error, but not one other item we have complained about.  It is apparent that Cerious does not listen to its loyal user base.  If these builds are the basis for TP10 - wouldn't all of these issues be carried over?  If TP10 is another rewrite then heaven help us.

I'll keep TP9 on my system, but only for the purpose of testing any further updates.  TP7 remains the gold standard.

dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #3 on: 2014-10-18 00:46:50 »
I finally received an answer to my support ticket about the sorting and guess what? I was told that it is the sorting method users requested. I can not believe this is true as the sorting in the latest Version 9 makes no sense at all if you work with  larges volume of images and sub-sets as they are not sorted together to compare, etc. There are even forum users agreeing with me. So now what? Version 7.2 is the only version that makes any sense at the moment, but I have security issues in Windows 8.1 when trying to do some editing using external programs within ThumbsPlus. When I run it as admin, it works, but then when I try to open an image outside of ThumbsPlus it keeps opening another instance of ThumbsPlus. ThumbsPlus is driving me insane at this point in time where it has been my favorite piece of software for years. I am not unjustly negative people, I am just trying to manage and edit media files.

Gary

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #4 on: 2014-10-18 10:25:39 »
Trust me.  You are NOT being negative.  Cerious is being its normal lazy self.

The problem lies with Windows (surprise, right??).  Beginning back in XP they decided to default sorts to numeric as opposed to alphabetic.  However, there is a buried option to make Windows 7 sort alphabetic by default (I have no idea if this works in the horrid Windows 8):

http://www.askvg.com/how-to-disable-numerical-file-name-sorting-and-enable-classic-literal-sorting-in-windows-xp-vista-and-7-explorer/

This changes the default order for Windows, but individual applications can override and use their own order.  Obviously TP7 forces alphabetic and TP9 forces numeric with no way to override (hence the laziness).

I made the change to force alphabetic sorts on my system and it indeed works but of course not in TP9.

The file manager I use (XYplorer) provides an option to sort numerically or alphabetically overriding the Windows default.  I do not know what you do with image files in TP, but XYplorer has a wonderful thumbnail capability and can store thumbnails in its proprietary database files.  You can create user defined toolbar buttons that will call external programs based on selected file(s) or folders(s).  If you have any interest the site is:

http://www.xyplorer.com/index.php

Sorry I cannot be of real help, but I can sure sympathize!

Cheers,
Gary

dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #5 on: 2014-10-18 11:53:51 »
Wow Gary thanks for the tip on Xyplorer. Works like a charm. If I only can get the selected file to jump to the top, I can stop using ThumbsPlus all together. I work with a lot of sub-sets images. The idea is to view them together. If I press C for images starting with C it would be nice if that image is then displayed at the top with c1, c2,c3 etc. under it and not in the next window. I know I am asking for a lot, but working with loads of images daily, it is just easier if I don't have have to scroll down.  What I mean is, when I press C in Xyplorer it jumps to the correct image but it is displayed sort of at the end of the window and I need to scroll to see the rest of the sub set. If the selected image shows at the top then the following images will show under it in the same windows. Do you know if there is a setting to do this?

Your help and responsiveness is much appreciated.

Gary

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #6 on: 2014-10-18 13:03:20 »
Glad to be of any help I can.

There has been a lot of discussion in the forums of the issue you raise.  It is a problem for some just as with you.  I get around it by using the Info Panel (toggle it on or off with F12 or clicking the small blue box arrow to the far right of the status bar).  XYplorer has a mind boggling list of configuration options.

Anyway, I bring up the info panel and select find files by name & location then search for files by name.  As in your example I would search for c[0-9]*.* for start with c1, c2, c3 ... c9 or c[123]*.* for start with c1, c2 or c3.  (Be sure to check Include subfolders and Auto sync.)  The find list will appear in detail mode, but you can then click the toolbar button to toggle thumbnails.

I have attached some screen caps of a few option settings, the toolbar buttons I like, an Info Panel example and what my thumbnails look like.  I hope this is of some help.

Cheers,
Gary










dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #7 on: 2014-10-19 01:05:51 »
Hi Gary

Thank you for taking time with this post. It is much appreciated. Your assistance helped me in many ways to get rid of major frustrations I had with ThumbsPlus.

Daan van Rooijen

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 831
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #8 on: 2014-10-19 04:39:59 »
Keep in mind that a simple change to your numbering method would have avoided the problem (eg. "photo-01, photo-02, photo-02a, photo-02b, photo-03, photo-10" -- this sorts correctly both alphabetically and numerically), and that if you want to see images together that are scattered throughout a listing, all you have to do is enter the common part of their name (eg. photo-02) in the filter box above the thumbnail listing (to the right of the funnel icon).
I'm volunteering as a moderator - I do not work for Cerious Software, Inc.

dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #9 on: 2014-10-19 05:36:11 »
Thank you for your time in responding. Unfortunately your solution is not the answer for me or other users. I have been using ThumbsPlus for almost 16 years and have a lot of experience. The sorting worked 100% in version 7.2. and I just don't understand why it was changed. All the other software packages I downloaded work 100% like ThumbsPlus 7.2 did. Unfortunately they don't have the one feature I use most and that is to call an external program from within so I can't use them. I am using version 7.2 together with Xyplorer at the moment until I find another solution.  I have tried your solution before, but with hundreds of thousands of files, it is not a working solution. Filtering large sub-sets is not solving the problems as they are then also not sorted correctly.  I will definitely not recommend any version of ThumbsPlus to anyone other than version 7.2

Clarification:


As you can see in version 7.2 photo-011 is sorted after photo-01 and photo-032 after photo-03 - the correct way. In version 9 photo-011 is sorted after photo-03 and photo-032 after photo-11 which is incorrect. Since when is the number 032 higher than 11?
Now work with this sorting when you have thousands of images and sets to deal with.

Daan van Rooijen

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 831
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #10 on: 2014-10-19 07:15:02 »
> and I just don't understand why it was changed.

The default 'Filename' sort order is now the same as it is in Explorer, I believe. It's true that users had been asking for that because they preferred file listings to be consistent with Windows.

However, that same ordering method was already present in TP as "Numeric Filename", and I do agree that TP should also offer a straight alphabetic filename sorting option like before.

So, when you next talk about this to Cerious, I'd recommend that you explain that point clearly. They could simply make 'Numeric Filename' the default for consistency with Explorer, and keep 'Filename' strictly alphabetical like in TP7, so that both popular methods remain available to users. Actually, they may not even be aware that 'Filename' and 'Numeric Filename' are currently sorting the same way - it could be a simple bug rather than a feature.

> I will definitely not recommend any version of ThumbsPlus to anyone other than version 7.2

It's only a problem when you have a large collection of files that follow an erratic, inconsistent file numbering system (why use numbers in filenames if you are going to treat them like regular alphabetic characters anyway?). But then, I'm sure that there are quite a few of those around.

Another argument in favor of alphabetic sorting is that it should be a bit faster.

> Since when is the number 032 higher than 11?

Well? :-)
I'm volunteering as a moderator - I do not work for Cerious Software, Inc.

Gary

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 209
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #11 on: 2014-10-19 09:16:21 »
Daan,

At first I thought TP9 followed the policy of Windows which is to sort smart numeric.  However, I changed the policy to alphabetic and it does not affect how TP9 sorts files.

File naming is not always under our control and it is nice to be able to sort in the order that is essential for our requirements.

Many applications solve a file name collision by adding the character 1 to the end of the current file name.  A1.jpg becomes A11.jpg which becomes A111.jpg, etc.  If there is an A2.jpg and A3.jpg, the A1 files will no longer sort together even though they are related.

So, I go through the effort to name my files A00.jpg, A01.jpg, A02.jpg, A99.jpg since I will never have more than 100 files in the series.  The editing application takes A10.jpg and adds 1 to make the unique A101.jpg and this file now sorts last, not following A10.jpg.  No matter how many digits I add to file names to keep them in sequence, that 1 is going to blow the sequence.

It would be rather nice of Cerious to add options to sort true alphabetic in addition to the smart numeric.

As far as asking for the feature, it seems Helmer did ask and was told smart numeric was the choice of the user base.  (Exactly what user base does Cerious listen to?)  So, no offer to add back a feature that was present in TP7.

If this is a bug in how "Name" vs "Numeric Name" work then it should be fixed.  But with the endless list of persistent bugs in TP9, what are the chances this would get fixed?

Cheers,
Gary

Daan van Rooijen

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 831
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #12 on: 2014-10-19 10:47:16 »
> So, no offer to add back a feature that was present in TP7.

Yes, that's why I made suggestions as to what he could tell them in response.

If the alphabetic 'Filename' order was changed to numeric on purpose (for consistency with Explorer) then the same thing could have been accomplished by simply making 'Numeric Filename' the default (unless more trickery is involved there than just the numeric sub-sorting of filenames that contain numbers). Or, the 'Filename' sort option in the menu may mistakenly activate routines that perform the 'Numeric Filename' sorting, in which case it is a bug.

It seems unlikely to me that the present situation, in which the Filename and Numeric Filename sort options both behave the same (and in which no proper alphabetic sorting is available), was created on purpose.
I'm volunteering as a moderator - I do not work for Cerious Software, Inc.

Pete Wieland

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 86
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #13 on: 2014-10-19 16:18:22 »
I had an email from Laura Shook a couple of weeks ago, and this is her explanation:-

"Actually this is the way it must work. We had to change our sort with Windows! If you have other characters or other languages you will see the difference in the sorting. Again, this is by design we have to sort with the same criteria as Windows. "

Doesn't make much sense to me as TP7 can sort as expected under Win 7, and I use several other programs that can be configured to sort either way as well.

dfmsrsa

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 16
    • View Profile
Version 9 SP2 Beta 3: Disappointment!
« Reply #14 on: 2014-10-20 00:59:54 »
Pete, I agree with you fully. Even in Windows 8 Version 7.2 sorts correctly and almost all the other programs I use sort 100% alphabetically. There is even a way to turn off intuitive sorting in Windows for those wanting to know. I am using the solution in Windows 8.1 and even File Explorer sorts alphabetically.
http://www.askvg.com/how-to-disable-numerical-file-name-sorting-and-enable-classic-literal-sorting-in-windows-xp-vista-and-7-explore
Unfortunately this has no effect on ThumbsPlus 9 as they hard coded it - almost if they don't want users to have a choice.