RE: Agent Ransack vs. Copernic Desktop

Subject: RE: Agent Ransack vs. Copernic Desktop
From: Dan Goldstein <DGoldstein -at- cytomedix -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L (techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com)" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 08:17:08 -0500

I used Copernic for a while in the Aughts, and I think Ransack's better. It works on network drives just fine, and it hasn't missed any files yet.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Wyland
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2013 3:33 PM
To: Techwr-l
Subject: Agent Ransack vs. Copernic Desktop

Any thoughts on which is better? I have the paid version of Copernic, which allows me to index network drives as well as local drives. The searching seems to work well, but I have occasional doubts about files I *
*should** be able to find but seemingly can't.

New! Doc-to-Help 2013 features the industry's first HTML5 editor for authoring.

Learn more:


You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-leave -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Looking for articles on Technical Communications? Head over to our online magazine at

Looking for the archived Techwr-l email discussions? Search our public email archives @

Agent Ransack vs. Copernic Desktop: From: Michael Wyland

Previous by Author: RE: So now we are content engineers?
Next by Author: RE: [TechWhirl Forums] Authors who cannot write
Previous by Thread: Re: Agent Ransack vs. Copernic Desktop
Next by Thread: [TechWhirl Forums] Authors who cannot write

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads