Using WatchX is like assembling a pig from a kit — slow, confusing, and greasy. (Where does this long drippy thing go? If I stick it here, will the flow of bodily wastes be reversed? Would that be a good thing?) WaX is apparently designed to record changes to your hard disk, but really, doesn’t that sound about as exciting as a bowl of cold oatmeal?
WaX’s poorly conceived conglomeration of widgets, a.k.a. the interface, merely serves to lightly coat the nasty engine lurking underneath. As I write this review, WaX is still scanning my disk, as it has been for the last hour. WaX be all “Is this fast enough Jan, IS THIS FAST ENOUGH?” and I be all “NO.” There is no end in sight. After scanning one folder for ten minutes, WaX then started on my Applications folder, where it reports there are 66,916 files to scan. Right now it’s scanning so slow, it would have to speed up to stop.
Although my curiosity regarding the eventual outcome is bubbling over, I fear the scan may not finish in time. Mysteriously, the the “Record system state” function completed rather quickly, while “Watch changes” stretches on, almost into eternity, much like the image of Steve “Porous” Ballmer’s sweaty nipples, that is forever burnt into my memory.
The unbaked and doughy engine, mated in an unholy alliance with an adulterate beast of a carbonadoed interface, is deserving of death by watery pumpion, but I’ll let it slide with a 8.0. The foul deformity that is WaX still hasn’t completed its runagate scan, which contributes greatly to its sucktasticness.
Posted by jan at March 11, 2003 03:28 PM | TrackBackWait a minute... What's all this then? Where'd this "jan" bloke (bird?) show up from? Who's this now? What 'ave we 'ere? First, it's ladd, now it's jan, what's next? Lan? Jadd? Every sentence written in the interrogative form? I'll not stand for it, you hear?
Posted by: designbot on March 11, 2003 05:47 PMI've been here... lurking... like a slug in the corner, writing about half of the reviews.
Check the "posted by" line, you might learn something!
Posted by: Jan on March 11, 2003 06:25 PMReaders who are pasty-faced pedants should get their own websites.
May I suggest PerversionTrackerWritingDoesNotAlwaysPleaseMe.com?
Nice Achewood reference.
Posted by: Tripps on March 11, 2003 10:52 PMTripps beat me to it. This place is always surprising me: first with the Liz Phair, now with the drunk Roast Beef action. Next there's gonna be some obscure Truffault reference.
Posted by: Todd on March 11, 2003 11:59 PMi'm sorry ladd and jan. i didn't mean to heckle. i was trying to give constructive criticism.
Posted by: tom on March 12, 2003 12:14 AMI like chex mix.
Posted by: Lurker on March 12, 2003 08:56 AMI shoot my gun and WatchX be dancin'!
Posted by: Jan on March 12, 2003 10:29 AMwhat, only one animal reference in this review? well, at least you still have the whole renaissance festival/dragoncon speak going strong.
live long and prosper.
Posted by: Bill on March 12, 2003 11:30 AMI swear to god, some of the phrases used in these reviews are just too hilarious. This is good stuff.
You're creating a whole new lexicon. A sexy lexicon. A lesbian icon.
That first paragraph...Thank you for writing that. Perceiving that in your brain. God I needed a hard, hard laugh like that!
Posted by: Jeff Halmos on March 13, 2003 12:03 AMhttp://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/13021
Posted by: on March 14, 2003 10:56 AM