Do you know of any commercial software which is not mentioned onWikipedia?

Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

~BD~ wrote:
Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

Yes.

Any software which is not "noteworthy", is not placed on Wikipedia.
They have a criterion, to prevent Wikipedia from being used
purely for advertising.

There was one piece of commercial software, where an article was
written about it, and then the staff removed it. And once they
block something, it doesn't come back.

The software I tried to use yesterday, is not on there. I could
not use the software because it said "you need a license", even
though the download page had *no* indicators of business
relationship. Usually software for purchase or trial, indicates
somewhere on the page (near the download link), what to expect.

Fortunately, the download was not large. I found two pieces of
free software to substitute for the commercial one, which provided
some of the evidence I needed.

Paul

On 04/11/2019 19:41, Paul wrote:
~BD~ wrote:
Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a
commercial purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be
proprietary software, but now a number of free and open-source
software applications are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf
software programs, such as games or those sold in computer specialty
stores or even music stores and grocery stores, are some examples of
commercial software."

Yes.

Any software which is not "noteworthy", is not placed on Wikipedia.
They have a criterion, to prevent Wikipedia from being used
purely for advertising.

There was one piece of commercial software, where an article was
written about it, and then the staff removed it. And once they
block something, it doesn't come back.

Interesting. Thanks for that.

The software I tried to use yesterday, is not on there. I could
not use the software because it said "you need a license", even
though the download page had *no* indicators of business
relationship. Usually software for purchase or trial, indicates
somewhere on the page (near the download link), what to expect.

Fortunately, the download was not large. I found two pieces of
free software to substitute for the commercial one, which provided
some of the evidence I needed.

Sorry to hear about your recent experience, Paul.

With specific regard to Carbon Copy Cloner .....

Many consider CCC to be "noteworthy"!

Does the 'Bombich' product do a better job than this one?

https://www.cleverfiles.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_Drill_Basic

How come DD has a Wikipedia page and CCC does not? puzzled

I like to get to the "Official Webpage" from the bottom of pages on
Wikipedia. More reliable than a Google search I feel. I'm unable to do
that for CCC. :-(

~BD~ wrote:
On 04/11/2019 19:41, Paul wrote:
~BD~ wrote:
Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a
commercial purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be
proprietary software, but now a number of free and open-source
software applications are licensed or sold to end users.
Off-the-shelf software programs, such as games or those sold in
computer specialty stores or even music stores and grocery stores,
are some examples of commercial software."

Yes.

Any software which is not "noteworthy", is not placed on Wikipedia.
They have a criterion, to prevent Wikipedia from being used
purely for advertising.

There was one piece of commercial software, where an article was
written about it, and then the staff removed it. And once they
block something, it doesn't come back.

Interesting. Thanks for that.

The software I tried to use yesterday, is not on there. I could
not use the software because it said "you need a license", even
though the download page had *no* indicators of business
relationship. Usually software for purchase or trial, indicates
somewhere on the page (near the download link), what to expect.

Fortunately, the download was not large. I found two pieces of
free software to substitute for the commercial one, which provided
some of the evidence I needed.

Sorry to hear about your recent experience, Paul.

With specific regard to Carbon Copy Cloner .....

Many consider CCC to be "noteworthy"!

Does the 'Bombich' product do a better job than this one?

https://www.cleverfiles.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_Drill_Basic

How come DD has a Wikipedia page and CCC does not? puzzled

I like to get to the "Official Webpage" from the bottom of pages on
Wikipedia. More reliable than a Google search I feel. I'm unable to do
that for CCC. :-(

And do those programs even do the same thing ???

CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work. Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced. Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

Take a look at this page, for an idea just how inconsistent
Wikipedia is about backup programs. They include "Ghost",
which is noteworthy only because it was one of the first programs
available for the purpose. But it needs to be booted both
for backup and for restore, which means it disrupts your
workflow for every backup. (Some people would do this
at night, to avoid the disruption, but it's pretty difficult
to "schedule a reboot into something foreign" with a computer.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...oning_software

That is ****-poor coverage of backup programs. There are probably
thirty programs for Windows now, virtually all of which use VSS.
You can put the name of a non-noteworthy item in such lists and
not expand it or provide more information. That should be allowed,
because it's not really much of an advertisement.

And "dd" (Disk Dump) is famous, not because it's particularly
fancy, but because just about every OS has a port of it.
It's "your friend, when nobody seems to care". If you're
on a desert island and need to make a backup or an image
of a hard drive, it's likely to be on the computer or
easily available. For example, on Linux, I don't need
to do "sudo apt install dd", because that executable
is *always* included, whereas various other useful stuff
I depend on, is not.

If McGyver repairs something with bubble gum and battery acid,
well, "dd" is the bubble gum.

I have three old Macs, and a couple of them were backed up
with Retrospect (which in 2019, would be ancient software).
Retrospect was noteworthy for its support of "tape drives".
The version I had, was one of the first to do "disk to disk"
backups. I doubt the version today, would have any of the
original code in it (the original developers would long
since have departed too). It's hard to say what country
the company is physically in now, because the business
unit is regularly bought and sold.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrospect_%28software%29

Paul

On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:46:56 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

My software is not mentioned on Wikipedia despite it being the best!

Steve

--
http://www.npsnn.com

On 05/11/2019 10:29, Paul wrote:
~BD~ wrote:
On 04/11/2019 19:41, Paul wrote:
~BD~ wrote:
Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a
commercial purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be
proprietary software, but now a number of free and open-source
software applications are licensed or sold to end users.
Off-the-shelf software programs, such as games or those sold in
computer specialty stores or even music stores and grocery stores,
are some examples of commercial software."

Yes.

Any software which is not "noteworthy", is not placed on Wikipedia.
They have a criterion, to prevent Wikipedia from being used
purely for advertising.

There was one piece of commercial software, where an article was
written about it, and then the staff removed it. And once they
block something, it doesn't come back.

Interesting. Thanks for that.

The software I tried to use yesterday, is not on there. I could
not use the software because it said "you need a license", even
though the download page had *no* indicators of business
relationship. Usually software for purchase or trial, indicates
somewhere on the page (near the download link), what to expect.

Fortunately, the download was not large. I found two pieces of
free software to substitute for the commercial one, which provided
some of the evidence I needed.

Sorry to hear about your recent experience, Paul.

With specific regard to Carbon Copy Cloner .....

Many consider CCC to be "noteworthy"!

Does the 'Bombich' product do a better job than this one?

https://www.cleverfiles.com

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_Drill_Basic

How come DD has a Wikipedia page and CCC does not? puzzled

I like to get to the "Official Webpage" from the bottom of pages on
Wikipedia. More reliable than a Google search I feel. I'm unable to do
that for CCC.Â* :-(

And do those programs even do the same thing ???

No, they don't.

CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work. Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced. Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

Understood.

Take a look at this page, for an idea just how inconsistent
Wikipedia is about backup programs. They include "Ghost",
which is noteworthy only because it was one of the first programs
available for the purpose. But it needs to be booted both
for backup and for restore, which means it disrupts your
workflow for every backup. (Some people would do this
at night, to avoid the disruption, but it's pretty difficult
to "schedule a reboot into something foreign" with a computer.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...oning_software

Thanks for that list, Paul.

That is ****-poor coverage of backup programs. There are probably
thirty programs for Windows now, virtually all of which use VSS.
You can put the name of a non-noteworthy item in such lists and
not expand it or provide more information. That should be allowed,
because it's not really much of an advertisement.

Do *YOU* find it odd that Carbon Copy Cloner didn't make to THAT listing
either?

And "dd" (Disk Dump) is famous, not because it's particularly
fancy, but because just about every OS has a port of it.
It's "your friend, when nobody seems to care". If you're
on a desert island and need to make a backup or an image
of a hard drive, it's likely to be on the computer or
easily available. For example, on Linux, I don't need
to do "sudo apt install dd", because that executable
is *always* included, whereas various other useful stuff
I depend on, is not.

If McGyver repairs something with bubble gum and battery acid,
well, "dd" is the bubble gum.

:-)

I have three old Macs, and a couple of them were backed up
with Retrospect (which in 2019, would be ancient software).
Retrospect was noteworthy for its support of "tape drives".
The version I had, was one of the first to do "disk to disk"
backups. I doubt the version today, would have any of the
original code in it (the original developers would long
since have departed too). It's hard to say what country
the company is physically in now, because the business
unit is regularly bought and sold.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrospect_%28software%29

Thanks for your views, Paul :-)

In article , Paul
wrote:


CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work.

where does it claim that???

it definitely does *not* require booting to do its work.

Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced.

it can back up live, either user invoked or scheduled, including
automatically waking the computer to do so and then sleeping it
afterward.

Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

depending on what needs to be restored, it can be restored to the boot
drive.

Paul wrote:
[...]

I have three old Macs, and a couple of them were backed up
with Retrospect (which in 2019, would be ancient software).
Retrospect was noteworthy for its support of "tape drives".
The version I had, was one of the first to do "disk to disk"
backups. I doubt the version today, would have any of the
original code in it (the original developers would long
since have departed too). It's hard to say what country
the company is physically in now, because the business
unit is regularly bought and sold.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retrospect_%28software%29

Ah, Retrospect, fond memories!

Used Retrospect Express' Disaster Recovery backup (and made the CD) in
2003 as my first system-level (not just file-level) backup. (Needed it
because I did not have any XP install/recovery media.)

Late 2007, the HDD croaked and I could use Retrospect Express'
Disaster Recovery procedure (and CD) to get my system running on a
replacement HDD. Used Retrospect for some time untill it became
out-of-date (without any new updates [1]) and then switched to Macrium
Reflect Free.

[1] I had a free version which came with my gigantic 80GB Maxtor USB
HDD.

On 05 Nov 2019, Paul wrote
(in article ):

CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work. Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced. Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

errr... no. CCC does NOT require booting to do it’s work. I have CCC
running on this very system, and it did a complete clone, live, no need to
boot, quite some time ago and runs an update to the clone every day at 02:00.
It generates a complete, bootable, clone, and updates it to current standard.
It even creates the invisible Apple emergency partition while creating the
clone. Once a week I attach another drive and do a nice new fresh bootable
clone to that drive, while the base system is live. I _know_ that the regular
backup _and_ the once-a-week backup can boot, because I’ve done it from
them. CCC simply WILL do a full backup while live. SuperDuper! also works on
a live system.

In alt.comp.os.windows-10, on Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:46:56 +0000, ~BD~
wrote:

Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

I know this: Wikipedia has listings for many things which are not
listed on the appropritate "disambiguation" page. They often don't
remember to update that, it seems. I only find the pages by using
google.



"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

On 06/11/2019 02:27, Wolffan wrote:
On 05 Nov 2019, Paul wrote
(in article ):

CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work. Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced. Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

errr... no. CCC does NOT require booting to do it’s work. I have CCC
running on this very system, and it did a complete clone, live, no need to
boot, quite some time ago and runs an update to the clone every day at 02:00.
It generates a complete, bootable, clone, and updates it to current standard.
It even creates the invisible Apple emergency partition while creating the
clone. Once a week I attach another drive and do a nice new fresh bootable
clone to that drive, while the base system is live. I _know_ that the regular
backup _and_ the once-a-week backup can boot, because I’ve done it from
them. CCC simply WILL do a full backup while live. SuperDuper! also works on
a live system.

As a well informed customer, Wolffan, can you tell us *WHY* there is no
Wikipedia information about CCC?

Have you checked your Internet connection to determine what information
CCC is sending to and from your computer? No? Then I suggest you do so!

As an aside, here's one of my recent contributions to ASC ...,

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/250812376

I really was there trying my best to help folk!

Have a grand day! :-)

Oh Btw! There's no Wiki entry for SuperDuper! either! How crazy is that?
Such cloning software is often mentioned on the ASC, along with
EtreCheck. I'm sure naive Apple computer users are easy prey!

On 05/11/2019 10:29, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:46:56 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

My software is not mentioned on Wikipedia despite it being the best!

I found THIS, Steve! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_network_software

That led me he- https://gmdhsoftware.com/neural-network-software

THAT product claims that it's the best! ;-)

On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 09:07:57 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

As an aside, here's one of my recent contributions to ASC ...,

Message-ID:

Is that the second or third time you've been *BANNED* from
that private forum for stalking and other cybercrimes?
Just curious.....
I'll put an OT up because Apple forums are OT in the
newsgroups you cross-stalked to.
[]'s

http://tekrider.net/pages/david-brooks-stalker.php

58 confirmed #FAKE_NYMS, most used in cybercrimes!
Google "David Brooks Devon"
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On 06 Nov 2019, BD~ wrote
(in article ):

On 06/11/2019 02:27, Wolffan wrote:
On 05 Nov 2019, Paul wrote
(in article ):

CCC fails the "noteworthy" test, because it claims to require
"booting" to do its work. Noteworthy products are ones, that
for the backup phase, can do it while the OS is running, so
the user is not inconvenienced. Naturally, on a restore, you
do need to boot some media other than the OS disk drive, on
the assumption the OS disk drive needs to be overwritten
by the restore.

errr... no. CCC does NOT require booting to do it’s work. I have CCC
running on this very system, and it did a complete clone, live, no need to
boot, quite some time ago and runs an update to the clone every day at
02:00.
It generates a complete, bootable, clone, and updates it to current
standard.
It even creates the invisible Apple emergency partition while creating the
clone. Once a week I attach another drive and do a nice new fresh bootable
clone to that drive, while the base system is live. I _know_ that the
regular
backup _and_ the once-a-week backup can boot, because I’ve done it from
them. CCC simply WILL do a full backup while live. SuperDuper! also works on
a live system.

As a well informed customer, Wolffan, can you tell us *WHY* there is no
Wikipedia information about CCC?

because no-one’s written a Wiki page for it, idiot.


Have you checked your Internet connection to determine what information
CCC is sending to and from your computer? No? Then I suggest you do so!

you’re an idiot.


As an aside, here's one of my recent contributions to ASC ...,
you’re banned from there... unless, of course, you lied in that other
thread. Oh. Wait. It’s _you_. Liar.



https://discussions.apple.com/thread/250812376

I really was there trying my best to help folk!

Have a grand day! :-)

Oh Btw! There's no Wiki entry for SuperDuper! either! How crazy is that?
Such cloning software is often mentioned on the ASC, along with
EtreCheck. I'm sure naive Apple computer users are easy prey!

no-one but you cares.

On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 10:03:04 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

On 05/11/2019 10:29, Stephen Wolstenholme wrote:
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 13:46:56 +0000, ~BD~ wrote:

Do *YOU* know of any commercial software which is *NOT* mentioned on
Wikipedia?

"Commercial software is any software or program that is designed and
developed for licensing or sale to end users or that serves a commercial
purpose. Commercial software was once considered to be proprietary
software, but now a number of free and open-source software applications
are licensed or sold to end users. Off-the-shelf software programs, such
as games or those sold in computer specialty stores or even music stores
and grocery stores, are some examples of commercial software."

My software is not mentioned on Wikipedia despite it being the best!

I found THIS, Steve! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_network_software

That led me he- https://gmdhsoftware.com/neural-network-software

THAT product claims that it's the best! ;-)

That's another "best"! I've not tried it so I can't comment.

Steve
--
http://www.npsnn.com