1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What you gonna do, when you get offered with a 2-leg cow?

Discussion in 'TCC/LE Support' started by AnrDaemon, Aug 24, 2010.

  1. AnrDaemon

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    1
    Code:
    C:\Programs\TCC>SET _DATELONG=%%@MAKEDATE[%%@DATE[%%[_DATE]],4]
    
    C:\Programs\TCC>echo %_DATELONG
    TCC: (Sys) Invalid function.
     "%@MAKEDATE[11193,4]"
    
    C:\Programs\TCC>
    So does @DATECONVERT, @AGEDATE... just curious, why @DATE, @DAY etc. wasn't removed as well?
     
  2. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,021
    Likes Received:
    84
    TCC/LE was split from the TCC source tree at version 7. So it doesn't have any of the newer variable functions or a few of the more obscure ones.

    TCC/LE is intended as a replacement for CMD.EXE, not for the full TCC.
     
  3. AnrDaemon

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    1
    Erm, sorry? I have this variable definition for 4NT 4.0 which is replacing my shell for... what, ten years?
    And calling obvious supplement to the present functionality an "obscure one"... sorry, but i don't get it.

    I was thinking about using more recent, unicode shell that are also affordable for me (I don't want to make credit card for just one transaction), but the place at which you sliced it is just... unhealthy. At this rate, i could just rewrite all my scripts in bash or MS PoweShell, since they would be all need major rewrite with such abundance of castrated functionality in TCC/LE.
     
  4. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,021
    Likes Received:
    84
    As I said, TCC/LE is *not* a replacement for 4NT (or TCC); it's a
    replacement for CMD.EXE -- which doesn't have *any* variable functions.

    4NT users normally upgrade to Take Command / TCC. If they decide they do
    not need the full TCC functionality (we've had a few), the free TCC/LE is an
    option. But you cannot realistically expect a free product to have the same
    feature set as the commercial version.


    If your time isn't of any significant value, that's certainly an option.

    Rex Conn
    JP Software
     
  5. AnrDaemon

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2010
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    1
    Many *NIX distributions.

    I don't press on absence of _*PID access, which is handy for debugging, as I have every script running with enabled logging to "%DATE-%PID(%PPID)" file, but I can live without it, as it's legacy functionality from times I was actually working with it (means, get paid for it, and that's when I've been given a 4NT key by my superiors), but extiction of simple date manipulations is beyond my understanding.

    Anyway, I think i've made my point clear enough. And I don't see a reson for continued discussion.
     
  6. Speedie6

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    So, that is still true? I was just guessing that your new version 12 was split from the TCC 12 source.
     
  7. Speedie6

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sure, there are some products that work with the free software model. They have to have a large enough base to where you can get enough revenue from support. Or written by hobbiests. Or, a combination thereof.

    Good luck on getting a free copy of Windows from Microsoft.
     
  8. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,021
    Likes Received:
    84
    It's still true.

    My inclination is to discontinue TCC/LE altogether, as it generates a continuous stream of complaints (frequently quite nasty) that (1) I didn't include the full TCC feature set, and (2) I don't provide unlimited free support. I certainly don't have any desire to continue it beyond v12.

    Still waiting for the first "thanks", but not holding my breath. :-)
     
  9. Speedie6

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, thanks for TCC/LE.
     
  10. CaesarR

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2010
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:21:16 -0500, Speedie6
    <> wrote Re RE: [Support-t-2278] Re: What you
    gonna do, when you get offered with a 2-leg cow?:


    If you like TCC/LE, you'll REALLY like the full TCC.
     
  11. Charles Dye

    Charles Dye Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    3,352
    Likes Received:
    39
    ... Thank you for TCC/LE. It's an excellent scripting engine for file-management tasks. If TCC/LE never sees another major-version update, it's still worth double the purchase price. Maybe more.


    (Brain fart: If you ever want another way to present your code, perhaps you could recycle the file-management, environment and registry stuff as a Windows Script Host engine...?)
     
  12. Speedie6

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, I've been a user since 4DOS 2.0 or so. Maybe 3, don't remember exactly. I sometimes install TCC/LE on a machine that isn't mine, but I'm using for a bit.

    Although I'm a long long time user, I really only use a very tiny amount of the product. I honestly rarely use anything that isn't in the LE edition.
     
  13. Jim Cook

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    604
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps I haven't expressed how much I like TCC and TCC/LE. I've tried at
    times to thank you, Rex, and JPSoft for having amazing response times,
    attention to customer needs, and a fantastic set of products.

    I have recommended the paid versions to people, and also have installed the
    /LE versions on various machines. I find the /LE versions to be useful, and
    honestly a little frustrating. The frustration, however, is because I
    invariably end up wanting to use things that I've become accustomed to in
    the full version and always feel a little crippled by /LE, which I think is
    _exactly_ the point. I have often said "well, if we had the full version
    here, we could do the job with trivial built-in functions."

    Thank you for the fantastic products and also for the /LE "sampler." I use
    TCMD every day in my professional capacity, and nearly every day that I use
    a computer at all.

    --
    Jim Cook
    2010 Sundays: 4/4, 6/6, 8/8, 10/10, 12/12 and 5/9, 9/5, 7/11, 11/7.
    Next year they're Monday.
     
  14. charmead

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    I love your products, including tcc/le. I've been buying from jpsoft for a long time, I just looked, the oldest thing I can find that I still have is a file called jpbatch.reg from Jan 98, so I've been using 4nt in some form for a long time.

    It's one of the best scripting products I've ever found and continue to use, even though I use it for my own uses and some simple apps for friends using tcc/le.

    I Thank you.
     
  15. rconn

    rconn Administrator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2008
    Messages:
    10,021
    Likes Received:
    84
    Not actually true. The primary reason for TCC/LE was for existing TCC / TCMD users who wanted to install it on other machines to run simple scripts, without putting so much into it that it would cripple the full version sales. The thought that some TCC/LE users might upgrade to the full version was an added bonus, though I never expected significant numbers. I did naively think that it might generate some positive good will.

    However, the end result was that far more users wanted to *downgrade* to the free version (and complain bitterly that I hadn't made the full version free), than have ever wanted to upgrade from TCC/LE to the full version. (There may have been a few of the latter, but I'm unaware of them.)

    So overall, I'd have to call it a failure at getting people to upgrade, and a minor success for the existing full TCC users who want to install it on other systems. In terms of effort vs. results for JP Software, it's pretty much been a complete waste of my time, and I have *no* incentive to take it any further. The only reason I didn't kill it in 12.0 was because of the TCMD/LE users.
     
  16. ywliu

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, first of all, a belated "thank you" for TCC/LE.

    I purchased 4DOS/4NT long time ago probably around 1995. I confess I have been using the very very old 4NT with Windows XP until I found out TCC/LE not too long ago. So , sounds like I am one of the "downgrading" users; or at least an unwilling-to-pay-for-extras user.

    As an ordinary user, scripting under Windows is not what I really need. TCC/LE to me is a free upgrade of 4NT. Probably many users are like me, and some started asking for more free lunch.

    I can fully understand your frustration and respect and support your decision to kill TCC/LE (if you have made) . And I do appreciate your work and efforts put into TCC/LE, whether it is for a different reason or an up-selling strategy.

    ywliu
     
  17. Mel Davis

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am one of the ones who chose to upgrade from TCC/LE to the TCMD. That was around March of last year and, now, I've just upgraded from version 11 to version 12. Primarily, I use TCMD to simplify software development. It is a "fantastic* product.

    Several times, in earlier years, I used 4DOS or 4NT and enjoyed it; but I delayed upgrading TCMD. I realize now it was because I did not understand the TCMD software model. I was looking for a power user's command shell . . . but TCMD had all that "wimpy" explorer stuff wrapping it. I could not see buying TCMD when all I wanted was TCC without all the GUI. I suspect that many of TCC/LE users may be reluctant to purchase for similar reasons.

    I had to try the time-limited TCMD several times before I got the hang of it. After I set up shortcuts to hide/show all the views and toolbars to satisfy my nerdy aesthetic, I *really* began to like it.

    (Side Note: I would love to have an option to toggle on/off *all* the gui surrounding that fabulous command line interpreter.)

    I wanted you to know that it was because of 4DOS/4NT that I continued to come back to your website to give TCMD a try. And I, belatedly, wanted to say thank you!

    Mel
     
  18. samintz

    samintz Scott Mintz

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    11
    You can run TCC stand-alone. You don't have to run it inside of TCMD.

    -Scott

    Mel Davis <> wrote on 01/13/2011 09:28:04 PM:


     
  19. Jerry Jankura

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm kind of a different duck. For years, I continued with the upgrade cycle.

    But then, a funny thing happened ...... I purchased an Apple MacBook Pro and began using OS X as my primary operating system. Yes, I created a boot camp partition and installed XP to run the few Windows based programs I still needed and then added Parallels so I could run both Windows & OS X software simultaneously.

    Now, with OS X being my primary OS, TCCLE provides all of the functionality I need. So, I'm gratefully using it on my computer and am not making a fuss because it doesn't have all of the functionality of the "pay per seat" products that JPSoftware offers. From my viewpoint, a big thanks to Rich Conn is in order for making it available.

    Jerry Jankura
    So many toys.... So little time...
    Sent from my iPad


    On Jan 13, 2011, at 9:28 PM, Mel Davis <> wrote:


     
  20. samintz

    samintz Scott Mintz

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    1,201
    Likes Received:
    11
    He he. As good as the product is, I'd be surprised if Rex is "Rich".

    -Scott

    Jerry Jankura <> wrote on 01/13/2011 09:45:39 PM:


     
  21. Gorlash

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow... I think that's my summons...
     
  22. mfarah

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2009
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    5
    That's exactly what I use TCC/LE for. When I have to fix stuff on other people's computers (my mom's, mi sister's, etc.), it's really comfortable knowing that I don't have to use CMD.EXE.


    There will come a time, though, that I'll complain for not having a "portable" version of TCC that I can install on a pendrive (along with other utilities, like Process Explorer, a decent text editor, et.). ;-)

    Thank you, Rex.
     
  23. Steve Fabian

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    3,520
    Likes Received:
    4
    ---- Original Message ----
    From: mfarah
    | ...
    | There will come a time, though, that I'll complain for not having a
    | "portable" version of TCC that I can install on a pendrive (along
    | with other utilities, like Process Explorer, a decent text editor,
    | et.). ;-)

    Well, that's built into the full version already, and has been available for the last several versions.
    --
    Steve
     
  24. drrob1

    drrob1 Guest

    I looked in the help and .pdf file and could not find "portable". I am
    running tcmd 12. What should I be looking for?




     
  25. drrob1

    drrob1 Guest

    I looked in the help and .pdf file and could not find "portable". I am
    running tcmd 12. What should I be looking for?




     
  26. Gorlash

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2010
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Actually, if you install tcc/le to your hard disk, then just copy the entire tccle directory to a usb stick, it works just fine. For a given environment, you might need to update your path to reach other non-tccle utilities, but tccle itself works just fine!

    That's about as portable as one can get...
     
  27. Charles Dye

    Charles Dye Super Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2008
    Messages:
    3,352
    Likes Received:
    39
    I'm not certain that that feature actually works any more. It seems that TCC writes registration info to a .KEY file, but doesn't read it from there...?
     
  28. epement

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2008
    Messages:
    67
    Likes Received:
    2
    Rex, I for one want to give you a hearty THANK YOU for making TCC/LE available to general users at no cost, and for your persistence in allowing this version to continue.

    I genuinely appreciate this contribution to dedicated command-line users like me. Thanks so much!!

    Eric Pement
     
  29. Jerry Jankura

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Rex:

    I thought I sent a "thanks" via this forum a few months ago, except that I misspelled your name as "Rich."

    So, here's a big THANKS to you!

    When I was employed and worked with Windows pretty much exclusively, my employer purchased several copies of TakeCommand. Now that I've retired and moved over to Apple products, I find that I use Windows on my MacBook Pro for very few carry over favorite Windows programs. The free "lite" version works quite well for me.

    I'm also sorry that several brain-dead folks who lack class take you to task for limiting functionality and support. I'm betting that several more of us are happily using TCC-Lite and find it to meet our needs quite well.

    Jerry Jankura
    So many toys.... So little time...
    Sent from my iPad


    On Mar 22, 2011, at 11:15 AM, epement <> wrote:


     

Share This Page