«

I bought ACDSee 6 last September, and it took them until March to produce an
update that addressed my initial complaints.

Since then, however, I've been quite pleased.

Some features I now use regularly:

- Adding captions and notes to the database, to produce contact sheets,
album pages, and slide shows more quickly.

- Assigning categories to images is a great help when putting together a
show or creating a CD when the images are scattered among several different
folders.

- Creating a CD without having to use a separated CD burner package is very
helpful.

- Configuring the edit menu to readily link to any of several editors that I
use and to easily choose my default editor.

- Really fast access to stored images.


I understand Microsoft Digital Image Library is getting good marks as an
ACDSee competitor. Comments?


John

On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:59:21 GMT, "John"
<> wrote:

>I bought ACDSee 6 last September, and it took them until March to produce an
>update that addressed my initial complaints.
>
>Since then, however, I've been quite pleased.
>
>I understand Microsoft Digital Image Library is getting good marks as an
>ACDSee competitor. Comments?
>
>
I tried Version 6, and the slowness of its thumbnails was very
offputting, so i went back to Version 5.

Tried the updates since then - still hopelessly slow to show
thumbnails so i'm sticking with version 5.

Bob T.

On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:59:21 GMT, "John"
<> wrote:

>I bought ACDSee 6 last September, and it took them until March to produce an
>update that addressed my initial complaints.
>
>Since then, however, I've been quite pleased.
>
Which version update of v6 are you using now? I'm using v6.0.3.0018


Colyn Goodson

email hidden

http://www.colyngoodson.com

"John" <> wrote in message
news:dXWMc.16250$ hlink.net...
> I bought ACDSee 6 last September, and it took them until March to produce
an
> update that addressed my initial complaints.
>
> Since then, however, I've been quite pleased.
>
> Some features I now use regularly:
>
> - Adding captions and notes to the database, to produce contact sheets,
> album pages, and slide shows more quickly.
>
> - Assigning categories to images is a great help when putting together a
> show or creating a CD when the images are scattered among several
different
> folders.
>
> - Creating a CD without having to use a separated CD burner package is
very
> helpful.
>
> - Configuring the edit menu to readily link to any of several editors that
I
> use and to easily choose my default editor.
>
> - Really fast access to stored images.
>
>
> I understand Microsoft Digital Image Library is getting good marks as an
> ACDSee competitor. Comments?

ACDSee 6 is now rock solid.
The infuriating thing about ACD Systems is that they consitently release
new versions FAR before they are even remotely ready for prime time, and are
VERY slow to fix things.
Add to this the fact that they NEVER admit their mistakes.
That said...I'm am very pleased with version 6 with the latest updates.
It handles my 100,000+ files, AND the 200,000+ back-ups of those with ease.

"Mark M" <> wrote in
news:_OZMc.15272$%p4.3288@okepread04:

>
> "John" <> wrote in message
> news:dXWMc.16250$ hlink.net...
>> I bought ACDSee 6 last September, and it took them until March to
>> produce
> an
>> update that addressed my initial complaints.
>>
>> Since then, however, I've been quite pleased.
>>
>> Some features I now use regularly:
>>
>> - Adding captions and notes to the database, to produce contact sheets,
>> album pages, and slide shows more quickly.
>>
>> - Assigning categories to images is a great help when putting together
>> a show or creating a CD when the images are scattered among several
> different
>> folders.
>>
>> - Creating a CD without having to use a separated CD burner package is
> very
>> helpful.
>>
>> - Configuring the edit menu to readily link to any of several editors
>> that
> I
>> use and to easily choose my default editor.
>>
>> - Really fast access to stored images.
>>
>>
>> I understand Microsoft Digital Image Library is getting good marks as
>> an ACDSee competitor. Comments?
>
> ACDSee 6 is now rock solid.
> The infuriating thing about ACD Systems is that they consitently
> release new versions FAR before they are even remotely ready for prime
> time, and are VERY slow to fix things.
> Add to this the fact that they NEVER admit their mistakes.
> That said...I'm am very pleased with version 6 with the latest updates.
> It handles my 100,000+ files, AND the 200,000+ back-ups of those with
> ease.

I haven't used ACDSee since v2.43 when I switched to ThumbsPlus. They do
extensive testing and have great support. Currently they are beta testing
version 7. You might want to check it out <www.cerious.com>

Fuzzy Logic <> wrote:

>> ACDSee 6 is now rock solid.
>> The infuriating thing about ACD Systems is that they consitently
>> release new versions FAR before they are even remotely ready for prime
>> time, and are VERY slow to fix things.
>> Add to this the fact that they NEVER admit their mistakes.
>> That said...I'm am very pleased with version 6 with the latest updates.
>> It handles my 100,000+ files, AND the 200,000+ back-ups of those with
>> ease.

> I haven't used ACDSee since v2.43 when I switched to ThumbsPlus. They do
> extensive testing and have great support. Currently they are beta testing
> version 7. You might want to check it out <www.cerious.com>

Yes, ThumbsPlus is a nice product. I do with their thumbnail indexing
is faster. ACDSee indexes my directory pretty fast. ThumbsPlus is a
lot slower. I do like its "Scan Tree" feature though, with ACDSee have
a similar option...

Raymond

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:17:20 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

>Fuzzy Logic <> wrote:
>
>>> ACDSee 6 is now rock solid.
>>> The infuriating thing about ACD Systems is that they consitently
>>> release new versions FAR before they are even remotely ready for prime
>>> time, and are VERY slow to fix things.
>>> Add to this the fact that they NEVER admit their mistakes.
>>> That said...I'm am very pleased with version 6 with the latest updates.
>>> It handles my 100,000+ files, AND the 200,000+ back-ups of those with
>>> ease.
>
>> I haven't used ACDSee since v2.43 when I switched to ThumbsPlus. They do
>> extensive testing and have great support. Currently they are beta testing
>> version 7. You might want to check it out <www.cerious.com>
>
>Yes, ThumbsPlus is a nice product. I do with their thumbnail indexing
>is faster. ACDSee indexes my directory pretty fast. ThumbsPlus is a
>lot slower. I do like its "Scan Tree" feature though, with ACDSee have
>a similar option...
>
>Raymond
I used ACDC from the begininnig and it was very handy, easy to
navigate. I updated to 4.0, then 5.0 (or whatever- 5.012etc) and it
just got so bloated that I lost interest. as the above guy says, when
you have 1000's of photos, and backups, it matters. I bought adobe's
album 2.0; haven't played with it enough to decide whether it's gonna
be THE ONE for me. when he says that ACDC is rock solid now, that's
significant; since in looking over all the choices before I went to
Album 2,0, ACDC was still my second choice. Is it still bloated? It
seemed it was trying to do everything in the world, and becomes too
complex.
What are your thoughts, Raymond and Bob?
Rick
PS- when you say ACDC is rocksolid, did you get the whole package,
with all the extra stuff or just the core image management program?

"Rick S." <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:17:20 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
>
> >Fuzzy Logic <> wrote:
> >
> >>> ACDSee 6 is now rock solid.
> >>> The infuriating thing about ACD Systems is that they consitently
> >>> release new versions FAR before they are even remotely ready for prime
> >>> time, and are VERY slow to fix things.
> >>> Add to this the fact that they NEVER admit their mistakes.
> >>> That said...I'm am very pleased with version 6 with the latest
updates.
> >>> It handles my 100,000+ files, AND the 200,000+ back-ups of those with
> >>> ease.
> >
> >> I haven't used ACDSee since v2.43 when I switched to ThumbsPlus. They
do
> >> extensive testing and have great support. Currently they are beta
testing
> >> version 7. You might want to check it out <www.cerious.com>
> >
> >Yes, ThumbsPlus is a nice product. I do with their thumbnail indexing
> >is faster. ACDSee indexes my directory pretty fast. ThumbsPlus is a
> >lot slower. I do like its "Scan Tree" feature though, with ACDSee have
> >a similar option...
> >
> >Raymond
> I used ACDC from the begininnig and it was very handy, easy to
> navigate. I updated to 4.0, then 5.0 (or whatever- 5.012etc) and it
> just got so bloated that I lost interest. as the above guy says, when
> you have 1000's of photos, and backups, it matters. I bought adobe's
> album 2.0; haven't played with it enough to decide whether it's gonna
> be THE ONE for me. when he says that ACDC is rock solid now, that's
> significant; since in looking over all the choices before I went to
> Album 2,0, ACDC was still my second choice. Is it still bloated? It
> seemed it was trying to do everything in the world, and becomes too
> complex.
> What are your thoughts, Raymond and Bob?
> Rick
> PS- when you say ACDC is rocksolid, did you get the whole package,
> with all the extra stuff or just the core image management program?

I have it fully installed, and yes...it is rock solid.
As you will note from my other posts, I am certainly not shy about blowing
the horn when they screw up, either. I think you can take my posts
seriously because although I'm a fan, I WILL identify its flaws. As I've
said... Tread cautiously until you've tried the demo with new versions, and
REALLY fiddle with it. It's been 3 full major versions since they released
a good one on the first try. I'm hoping version 7 is solid off the bat,
because according to the ACD guy on this forum, it will address some of my
wish list items--though he's mum about which. On the other hand...they've
been overly optimistic before...

Anyway... Yes. Version 6...the FULL SALAMI is very very good.
That is, of course, assuming you're not trying to squeeze it into an old
choppy computer system...

-Mark M

Don't forget the 6.06 update if you're using v6. Great package for the $.

Cheers, Jason (remove ... to reply)
Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com

Mark M wrote:

> I have it fully installed, and yes...it is rock solid.
> As you will note from my other posts, I am certainly not shy about blowing
> the horn when they screw up, either. I think you can take my posts
> seriously because although I'm a fan, I WILL identify its flaws. As I've
> said... Tread cautiously until you've tried the demo with new versions, and
> REALLY fiddle with it. It's been 3 full major versions since they released
> a good one on the first try. I'm hoping version 7 is solid off the bat,
> because according to the ACD guy on this forum, it will address some of my
> wish list items--though he's mum about which. On the other hand...they've
> been overly optimistic before...
>
> Anyway... Yes. Version 6...the FULL SALAMI is very very good.
> That is, of course, assuming you're not trying to squeeze it into an old
> choppy computer system...
>
> -Mark M
>
>

All I can say is, fair enough. I really do want to tell everyone what's
new and fixed, etc., but I can't leak information... other than what
I've already implied.

I can't refute anything your saying, so I'll go with the flow, and await
your thoughts on the new version when it gets released. (I know, I
know... soon.)


Thanks,

--
James Addison
http://www.pjsoft.ca