Text expander and clipboard enhancer tools

Posted by Franz Grieser
Dec 3, 2013 at 05:35 PM

Hi.

>Franz, you probably mix up PhraseExpress with another program.

No, I don’t. I even wrote a review about PhraseExpress in my magazine recommending it to my readers (that was before it showed the strange behaviour).
I exchanged emails with Gunnar Bartels several times (but not regarding the problem we’re talking about here, because I could not reproduce it - because of PE’s strange behaviour). I found him helpful - I even mentioned that in this forum .

>You find clear notifications including calls to action during each step.
>When clicking a call to action you will be guided directly to the
>program setting. It even points to the corresponding option in the user
>interface.
> >Please tell us how this could be done any clearer and easier to use?

I did not say the instructions in your videos were not clear. I even mentioned the videos in my review.

BUT the videos - at least at the time, I used PE - did NOT say anything about the strange behaviour.

>>Wait. Did I get it right?
>>I type an abbreviation. PE replaces it. I undo the replacement once.
>The
>>next time, I type the abbreviation, PE does not replace it (but it will
>>replace it the time after that).
>>Correct?
> >Correct.
> >
>>I don’t get why you do that?
> >Franz, I tried to explain it in the very posting above. here it is
>again:
> >>>The feature detects if you undo a text replacement. PhraseExpress then
>>>assumes that you didn’t want this text replacement in this particular
>>>situation and suppresses the text replacement the very next time you
>>>enter the associated abbreviation for one single time. Afterwards, it
>>>would execute the text replacement again.
> >In other words: If you undo a text replacement it is not too far out of
>any imagination that you did that undo for a purpose: Because you
>probably didn’t wanted the text replacement. We had no other idea why
>you would want undo the text replacement this way. That is why
>PhraseExpress ignore the abbreviation the very next time you retype the
>abbreviation.

I type the abbreviation, PE expands it. THIS time I do not want that, so I undo the expansion.
Next time, I type the abbreviation - chances are high that I want it expanded. After all, that’s the reason why I defined the abbreviation-expansion combination.
If PE suddenly does stop doing what it was purchased for - that’s annoying.
Even more annoying is: That the third time PE changes behaviour again.

Don’t you understand that a user wants software to work this way: When the user does A, he wants the software to reliably do B. He doesn’t want it to do C and then the next time again B. How do you expect your users to rely on the software, if it does strange things (“by design”)?