emkay's dashboard

emkay started following the idea "Auto-hide" in atebits.

emkay started following the idea "Hide dock icon" in atebits.

emkay started following the idea "tweetie only in menubar" in atebits.

emkay started following the idea "Tweetie should let me hide the dock Icon" in atebits.

emkay started following the idea "dock/status bar icon toggles please" in atebits.

emkay replied on July 22, 2009 20:03 to the question "Macs, Manager and Menus!" in Sharpcast:

well I didnt mean remove as in peeling-it-off-the-wrapping...

emkay replied on July 21, 2009 19:11 to the idea "SugarSync should allow Mac users to remove the icon from the Dock" in Sharpcast:

Dockless was actually a useful hint. A painless way to remove the dock icon. And everything's still accessible through the menu bar.

emkay replied on July 21, 2009 11:01 to the idea "SugarSync should allow Mac users to remove the icon from the Dock" in Sharpcast:

hats off to any company that decides to go getsatisfaction.
but this means you have to be commited to communication & transparency else it will quick turnout your shooting your own foot.

I wouldn't really bother if I hadn't already a paid account. I went for it because I liked the company's responsivness and the potential of the client. But currently both seem to be stuck in beta stage(?)
It's a joke that an OS that comes with the all the basics on board (shell, rsync, ...) seems to be the one with the least working client(s). Yes, not just sugarsync.

emkay started following the question "Does Sharpcast retain a license of my files?" in Sharpcast.

emkay replied on July 21, 2009 09:10 to the idea "SugarSync should allow Mac users to remove the icon from the Dock" in Sharpcast:

getting rude won't help.
as disappointing as it may be ...

emkay replied on July 21, 2009 07:22 to the question "Macs, Manager and Menus!" in Sharpcast:

this sounds a bit ... dunno.
like you're not over ambitious to remove the beta tag any time soon do you?
it's a shame. it looks like a decent service and all but a half done client just spoils it. And an explanation like this doesn't really help either when there are numerous competitors out there that manage to provide a client that runs in some kind of daemon mode. As others have mentioned before: it's a background app after all.

emkay started following the idea "SugarSync should end the Mac Beta and release a production Mac OS X client." in Sharpcast.

emkay started following the idea "Fully support Bundle files on Mac osx" in Sharpcast.

emkay started following the idea "SugarSync should allow Mac users to remove the icon from the Dock" in Sharpcast.

emkay started following the question "Macs, Manager and Menus!" in Sharpcast.

emkay replied on June 20, 2009 08:47 to the question ".DS_Store problems" in ExpanDrive:

this might come handy:
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1629
(prevent .DS_Store file creation over network connections)

emkay replied on June 17, 2009 18:17 to the question "Why should I pay $20 to upgrade to ExpanDrive 2.0?" in ExpanDrive:

tbh I'm also disappointed.
a 20,- upgrade and no noticable changes.
It may be a complete re-write but hey, the only change I see (from a user pov, judging on the 2.0 demo) is 20,- less in my pocket for the same funcionality.
Imho a bad example of upgrade policy that doesn't really encourage anyone to actually pay for applications. You never know when/or for what reason your license "gets discontinued".
It's a smashing app and I love it but I'll stick with 1.x for the time being...