The Good
* Straightforward and fairly easy to use.
* Can import bookmarks from Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, Chrome, HTML file, and Del.icio.us.
* Can export bookmarks to Internet Explorer, Firefox, Opera, Chrome, HTML file, Del.icio.us.
* Can grab URLs, and add them, from all active browsers.
* Allows you to create multiple different databases/profiles.
* Has a built in search tool.
* Can check for, and remove, dead links and duplicates.
* Allows user to add website login information (if applicable), and comments for each bookmark.
* Can "auto check" for bookmark validity on a scheduled basis.

The Bad
* Grabbing URLs does not work with Opera (v10.00).
* Sometimes has trouble detecting when Firefox tabs are no longer open (when grabbing URLs).
* Fairly RAM intensive.
* Has a built in web browser but the browser does not have any sort of direct link (for adding bookmarks) to the bookmark portion of the program so what is the point of the browser?
* Lacking any sort of password protection feature.
* Can't find some features the developer claims to have included such as "creates thumbnail images of your favorite websites" or the "drop basket".
* No Help file (local or remote).

Free Alternatives
Linkman Lite
Xmarks
URL Gather

For final verdict, recommendations, and full review please click here.

Ashraf  –  14 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+114)

Перевести

#7 "you can duplicate all of these features with a free add-on or two." Fantastic so what you are saying is "another program does the same as this one"? Hmm, that doesn't really help anyone.

If you are going to mention "a free add-on of two", go as far as to actually name these addons and match them up to program features.

Users who haven't already committed the list of available firefox addons to memory will thank you.

BuBBy  –  14 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+74)

Перевести

Since this is a minor upgrade from the previous version, which didn't work correctly, I was only interested in checking the installation, compared to the previous version. I don't really care if the broken things were fixed, since this doesn't do anything that interests me. It adds a couple of empty registry entries and deletes the Internet Explorer Start Page. I block its Internet access because it defaults to checking bookmarks at intervals.

Fubar  –  14 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+44)

Перевести

Its not often that I disagree with Ashrafs opinion but I do this time. He gives 3 instances of "Bad Behaviour". #1 During installation, Advanced URL Catalog has an option already checked where it changes your homepage to the developer's homepage: Of course you can opt-out of it, but there is absolute no need to have that kind of thing in the first place. #2. On the developer's website, he/she lists a link to download his/her software "from Download.com", but the link does not lead to Download.com but rather to the developer's own download section. #3. The developer includes links to his/her website in the default profile/database. You can always delete them but still the developer really shouldn't be infiltrating your bookmarks like that." Ashraf then gives the program a rating of GOOD. For the first instance of bad behaviour alone I would not install this program - what else is it doing? Also some less savvy users may not know how to change back to their home page.

compu2  –  14 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+38)

Перевести

Advanced URL Catalog may work fine for many folks, but I got scared away...

To start with, the developers' web site -- not usually a big concern for me -- appears to be a fill-in-the-blank affair, with many blanks left empty. Downloads are hosted on CNET. Software without a site doesn't bother me. I don't normally worry about poor English or sites without any real developer info, but the lack of effort not bothering to remove empty pages or host *any* downloads does.

At the very least there's one thing about .NET that can be a BIG pain... if/when an app screws it up, you have to uninstall & reinstall, which is VERY time consuming given the size of the .NET downloads & number of patches, re-boots etc. It's a rare, last resort sort of thing, but IMHO reason enough to be especially careful about installing .NET apps. IMHO, Advanced URL Catalog looks a bit *iffy*...

Installation starts off a bit odd with the same msi file in 2 places -- not a problem but not the way things are done either. Advanced URL Catalog's installation includes 4 Microsoft .dll files in 8 Windows' WinSxS sub-folders -- that's OK, but including them again in Windows' System32 folder is not... Google led me to a page on MSDN where they talk about this exact *work-a-round*, & how you should compile your app correctly to avoid it. The bulk of its ~37 MB in the program's folder is made up of files from Developer Express Inc., which is a company selling apps & code to speed up software development. Nothing *wrong* with that, but it's mostly used by in-house IT -- not experienced coders... I can't remember the last time I saw something like this used in a commercial app. All in all, thanks -- but no thanks.

mike  –  14 years ago  –  Комментарий оказался полезным? да | нет (+35)

Перевести