Talk:PC Tools (software)

CP Desktop

I also need to speculate, that CP Desktop for Windows has not been beaten by anything else up to today, ~13 years later (especially its file manager). However it consumed lots of memory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.12.27 (talk • contribs) 12 August 2006

Please note that as a general rule, talk pages are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. Personal (unsourced) opinions do not belong on Wikipedia. -- intgr 03:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

PC Tools company

This should be separated into 2 articles, because CP PC Tools and PC Tools company PC Tools only share a name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.21.44.59 (talk • contribs) 8 September 2006

Done! rohith 17:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

PC Tools windows software developer

Someone just did a CSD request on the recently split off company article. If it is deleted, we should protect/be vigilant against recreation of content here on this article. 70.55.88.134 03:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yep, I'll be watching... Big Brother is watching!! lol.. rohith 17:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

How about earlier PC Tools utilities?

I remember some copy products, including an accessory card that ran the floppy drive and copied copy protected software. They also had a tool for capturing the memory footprint of an otherwise copy protected program and then making an EXE file from that so you could just ruin that EXE afterwards. Since the EXE "believed" copy protection had already been checked, it just ran from there! Also, my experience of PC Backup was in credible - it would just run and run and wait while you swapped in the next floppy, it would check it and either say, "No, this disk is already used, try another", or it would format a blank disk, or just wait for the next disk - very smart and very quick and very reliable ... back in the floppy backup days. I still use their MI Memory Information program in DOS and their Diagnostics program is quite good at identifying and testing serial and parallel ports (a lost art, eh?) using loop-back plugs. I was a beta tester for v6 and v7 and we got dozens of update disks daily which were overwhelming. I just about got the next beta installed and another set of floppies arrived in the mail - geesh! I believe Microsoft used their anti virus for a while, right? Peterblaise 11:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Some of the products you describe, Peterblaise, are already listed and discussed in the Products section of the Central Point Software entry (Central_Point_Software#Products). (Whether they appeared there when you posted your comment, some 7 and 1/2 years ago, I've no idea.) These include a utility program called "Copy II PC", a hardware add-in expansion card called the "Copy II PC Deluxe Board", and a combination of the "Option Board" hardware with "TransCopy" software. Since these products were not marketed under the name "PC Tools", or included as part of PC Tools for DOS (let alone PC Tools for Windows!), they do not need to be included here.

(The discussion of PC Backup and Central Point Backup mentions "optional use of the Central Point Option Board for 33% faster disk writing", but it appears from this that the Option Board was sold separately from PC Tools. I assume that the Option Board came with the TransCopy software, but could also be used with the Backup component of PC Tools. Which may have included or been based upon TransCopy.)

PC Backup and Central Point Anti-Virus are both listed now (whether they were listed when you posted your suggestion or not), but the Memory Information and Diagnostics programs for DOS that you mention are not. Unless of course they became part of the SysInfo component of PC Tools, which is included on the page.

(I remember almost nothing about any memory analysis or system diagnostics that may have been included in PC Tools for Windows, which is the only Central Point product that *I* ever had the immense pleasure of using (both version 1.0 and version 2.0). I vaguely remember a component called "SysInfo" or "System Consultant", or something like that, but I do not recall it providing any memory analysis at all; I used other utilities (or DOS commands) for that. All I remember was that it provided Windows configuration suggestions (WIN.INI, SYSTEM.INI). If it provided configuration suggestions for DOS as well (CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT), I think I probably ignored them — again, because I already had all the advice I needed in that department from other products, such as Helix Software's NetRoom.)

2001:5B0:24FF:3CF0:0:0:0:31 (talk) 23:52, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Which "PC Tools" should take priority?

There are two main PC Tools -- there is PC Tools, the current company, and there was Central Point's PC Tools, the software product.

I don't think the correct one in regard to its relevance today currently has precedence.

Central Point PC Tools

• Was acquired by Symantec and stopped being produced ~13 years ago.
• It was basically a DOS application and although there are a lot of us the grew up on DOS most of todays' users started with Windows 95+ and would never have used it.
• It was a great product but how many people today would still run it, compared to the number of people using PC Tools products?

PC Tools

• Is a current active company, producing products today.
• It is regularly mentioned in all sorts of media; magazines, TV, radio, newspapers and particularly online.
• If someone heard about PC Tools today and wanted more information it would be highly likely it was PC Tools the company not something that stopped over a decade ago.
• PC Tools the company have the registered US trademark for PC Tools US registered trademark number 3271662
• PC Tools is part of the Google Pack and would be installs on heaps of PCs
• Just their antispyware program has been downloaded over 100 million times[1] that's probably 10x more from one product than CP PC Tools in its entire lifespan.

Suggestion

Move the current PC Tools to Central Point PC Tools with a reference from the PC Tools page; move PC Tools (Windows software suite) to PC Tools.

The PC Tools page would then need to be expanded as it's a limited stub at the moment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Securitydude (talk • contribs)

There's also the PC Tools (magazine) article, so I think this warrants a disambiguation page instead. I have created one at PC Tools. -- intgr ^#%@! 23:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

"There are two main PC Tools -- there is PC Tools, the current company, and there was Central Point's PC Tools, the software product."

Both "PC Tools" ended up being acquired by Symantec. Symantec acquired the company PC Tools in 2008 (PC Tools (company): Acquisition by Symantec), just as it had previously acquired Central Point Software — and with it, the original PC Tools product — in 1994.

Yet the foregoing entries by Securitydude and Intgr were both posted on August 25, 2007 — over a year before Symantec's acquisition of PC Tools the company (and 7 days shy of a year before Symantec even announced its intention to acquire PC Tools)!

The disambiguation page created by Intgr has already fully taken care of the problem raised by Securitydude. Wikipedia now has separate entries for each "PC Tools" (plus the third that Intgr mentioned), so no further corrective action is necessary. But the historical irony that emerged a year after Securitydude and Intgr made their posts is a delightful twist to the story.

2001:5B0:24FF:3CF0:0:0:0:32 (talk) 08:02, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

PC Tools for DOS vs. PC Tools for Windows

As this article presently stands (June 22, 2014), it discusses PC Tools for DOS but makes no explicit mention of PC Tools for Windows. Seeing as PC Tools for Windows was a big hit when it was introduced, and version 2.0 — which came out less than a year later — was a substantial improvement on an already-unique and distinctive product, some explicit mention and discussion of the Windows version of PC Tools and its history would appear to be warranted.

(I could take a stab at composing such a section myself, but I would rather defer to others who know more than I.)

Striking points probably worth mentioning include:

• PC Tools for Windows provided a complete replacement for the standard Windows desktop (i.e., Program Manager).

• PC Tools for Windows included a File Manager that was far more capable than that included in Windows 3.0 and 3.1, or even the Windows Explorer of Windows 95.

• PC Tools for Windows had the then-remarkable ability to safely defragment a hard drive from within Windows, without requiring the user to exit Windows into DOS!

(DiskFix could also perform some file system repairs from within Windows; others required that Windows be shut down first. Or maybe it was that it could examine the file system to see if any repairs were needed while Windows was running, but it could only repair the file system with Windows exited and closed down. I forget.)

• PC Tools for Windows was the first version of PC Tools to be rated solidly ahead of its Norton counterpart(s) (Norton Utilities, Norton Antivirus, Norton Desktop for Windows . . . weren't they all bundled together for a time to compete with PC Tools for Windows?) in comparative reviews published in magazines.

If memory serves, one comparative review I saw at the time called it a virtual tie as between the then-latest DOS versions of Symantec's and Central Point's respective utility suites, with Norton having a slight edge in five functional categories and PC Tools narrowly winning in five other categories; the review in question (in PC World?) gave PC Tools the edge overall, but only by the narrowest of margins. But then in a comparison of Windows products, the vastly greater scope of PC Tools' interface enhancements, and the ability of PC Tools' various utilities to function even while Windows was running, gave PC Tools for Windows an overwhelming edge over its Norton counterpart(s).

I see now that the desktop replacement is already mentioned in the article as it presently stands, but only as a bundle of important features listed all-together within a single bullet-item at the end of a very long bullet-list of features. Many of these features are features of the DOS version only; the bullet-list goes back and forth between features that are in fact DOS-only and features that happen to be common to both versions, without ever indicating (except in the bullet-item for Central Point Desktop) which version of PC Tools for Windows the features belong to, or even mentioning the Windows version by name!

(Because features of both versions are listed together without distinguishing the two versions, or even mentioning the Windows version, two separate bullet-items — the first and the last — each mention a file manager!)

(Within this single bullet-item, the PCTW File Manager is incorrectly listed as part of the Central Point Desktop; they were separate and distinct features of PC Tools for Windows. Indeed, even using the Central Point Desktop, one could still launch the regular Windows File Manager instead of — or in addition to — the PCTW File Manager if one wanted to. Likewise, in the incredibly unlikely event that one chose to make Program Manager instead of the Central Point Desktop one's designated Windows shell, one could still launch the PCTW File Manager from within Program Manager, and use it instead of the Windows File Manager.

Heck, though few Windows users knew this, you could even designate File Manager (either the Windows or the PC Tools for Windows version) as your Windows shell! Just change the "Shell=" entry in either Win.ini or System.ini . . . I forget which.

But in any event, the File Manager that came with PC Tools for Windows was not part of the Central Point Desktop, but instead was a separate, additional program included with the package. One program among many, of which the Central Point Desktop was another.)

I believe that PC Tools for Windows should be mentioned by name, and discussed in a separate section. It is closely enough related to the many DOS versions of PC Tools not to rate a separate Wikipedia article, but it was a distinct product with many distinct and important features — features that distinguished it both from the DOS versions of PC Tools and from any of its Windows rivals. Some of these features were simply Windows versions of their DOS (PC Tools 9.0) counterparts, but many had no DOS counterparts. It definitely rates a separate discussion in a separate section under the existing page.

2001:5B0:24FF:3CF0:0:0:0:30 (talk) 14:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Any features obtained from XTree?

XTree, which Central Point acquired in 1993, had many of the same features and capabilities (file and picture viewing, ZIP viewing, Undelete) that were included in PC Tools (i.e., the DOS version), PC Tools for Windows, and their respective File Managers. Were any of these features based on or obtained from XTree? Even if Central Point's/PC Tools' DOS and Windows File Managers were originally developed in-house, were any of their features added from XTree after the acquisition? If so, that would be worth noting.

(And if not, then what — if anything — did Central Point actually get out of the XTree acquisition?)

2001:5B0:24FF:3CF0:0:0:0:32 (talk) 06:54, 25 June 2014 (UTC)