Windows 2000 Support

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Process Lasso v5.0.0.40

Posted on 11:17 by Unknown
Yes, v5.0.0.39 lasted about 12 hours ;o. During my maintenance I had adjusted some code to use a newer version of a function related to checking if a process was suspended. Sadly, this code had a typo (no 'NOT' in an expression), causing a bug that caused all processes to be listed as 'suspended'. This was highly frustrating to see this, but it is now fixed in v5.0.0.40. It just goes to prove, once again, that ANY change, no matter how minor requires regression testing.

I have some distractions coming up next week that won't allow for extensive work for a period of a few days. However, before then, I hope to get a few things done. There are a few little quirks I want to fix in the existing build, and there's also a second demo I want to release. I've had it in mind for a long time. I'll reveal more soon.

Thanks to all those who continue to support Process Lasso. I've heard a lot of complaints about the nags lately, so I decreased the frequency of ones that randomly show up when you open the main window. They are still there, but very rare now. People should remember, most 'freeware' these days stoops to bundling with toolbars. I don't think the nags are that annoying, you can click right by them. They don't have a timer, no pause. It isn't that bad. If it *is* that bad, you can always buy a license and help support development. After all, here at Bitsum I'm not just working on Process Lasso, I'm constantly creating little freeware tools like the new RegMerge utility to safely import or compare REG files. This freeware work, in addition to the constant work on Process Lasso, is made possible by those who purchase licenses of Process Lasso or PECompact, or make donations.

This capitalist world we live in seems to reward those who will stoop to any level to make a buck. Freeware authors are selling their soul everywhere, including toolbars in their software. If people can not accept that software development requires financial support, then this trend will continue. I personally believe that users should boycott all those who bundle toolbars or other apps. Even if you can deselect it at install time, this policy is simply atrocious. When you download a piece of software, you are wanting THAT software, not that software and 10 little friends to go with it.

I'm no saint, and far from perfect, but even if you can't support companies like Bitsum who refuse to participate in this toolbar bundle insanity, at least don't criticize us for daring to have a non-timed nag in our software that you can click right past. If a single click is that bothersome, buy a license ;).

I know, I know ... the thought of paying for software seems outrageous. If you feel I charge too much, you tell me what price you would pay. My experience thus far has shown that those willing to buy a license will pay a *fair* price. Those not willing to pay for a license will not pay a single dollar. Is this correct? If there's some price I could set to get a lot more people to buy a license, I'd certainly do it. If every user bought it for just $5, I'd be doing great.... if I set the price to $5, would YOU buy it?

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • WARNING: Cracks for Process Lasso may modify HOSTS file
    WARNING:  Cracks for Process Lasso have been seen to modify your system HOSTS file so that you can no longer access  bitsum.com  and/or  bit...
  • Process Lasso v3.65.3 beta released
    I've released the first new beta that is 100% UNICODE. I've regression tested almost all the software, though there may still be som...
  • Process Lasso v5.0.0.28
    This build continues maintenance, fixing several items and also making a nice improvement to the graph's display. Further, the last sele...
  • v5.0.0.18: Fix auto updater in XP
    During testing a few hours ago I noticed the auto-update was failing in some XP installations. Specifically, it would appear to stall at the...
  • BETA: Vista startup configuration
    Ok, I've got this fully correct now I think. In some cases in previous builds you could end up with both registry and Task Scheduler sta...
  • Process Lasso v5.0.0.48
    Changes: [.48]Change.GUI: Do not show 'Activate Now' menu item after activation [.48]Change.GUI: Adjusted logging thread CPU and I/O...
  • v5.0.0.17 final - Minor fixes
    This build fixes a reported issue with the watchdog rules (re: not default affinities, priorities, power schemes, but rather the terminate/r...
  • v5.0.0.21: Fix failure of web links within Process Lasso on some systems
    I've had reports of sporadic failure of the web links within Process Lasso. I've analyzed this situation for a while today and found...
  • One bit of bad news, one bit of good news
    One disappointing thing is that I've decided to cancel the change history shown in the update dialog, at least for v4.1. I may add it in...
  • Oh the frustration with this corporate crapware!!
    I now get uninstall feedback, as I solicit it (for better or worse). Once read, I can never go back, lol. Fortunately, most of it is actuall...

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (1)
    • ►  March (1)
  • ►  2012 (6)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ▼  2011 (166)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (2)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ▼  August (12)
      • v5.0.0.44 released
      • Process Lasso v5.0.0.42
      • v5.0.0.41 released
      • Dynamic sized graph tooltips
      • Update
      • CNET Download.com adds 'Download Installer' with b...
      • Process Lasso v5.0.0.40
      • Process Lasso v5.0.0.39
      • Minor maintenance release this week
      • Exciting new works on the horizon
      • Process Lasso v5.0.0.38
      • Running Process Lasso w/o Terminal Services enabled?
    • ►  July (14)
    • ►  June (17)
    • ►  May (19)
    • ►  April (13)
    • ►  March (27)
    • ►  February (31)
    • ►  January (20)
  • ►  2010 (203)
    • ►  December (23)
    • ►  November (34)
    • ►  October (38)
    • ►  September (17)
    • ►  August (19)
    • ►  July (19)
    • ►  June (11)
    • ►  May (16)
    • ►  April (8)
    • ►  March (6)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2009 (43)
    • ►  December (6)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (10)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (9)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (4)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile