 it. After opening, the thing churned for a while, looking for all the documents on my Mac. Still not impressive. It probably took 20-30 minutes before all the documents appeared with their thumbnails. This got me a little more interested. Then, I began playing with applying tags to my documents. There are currently 65 tags in my system and Yep lets me combine them in any way that I feel is suitable. I can then begin clicking tags to filter the results down. What follows is an attempt to show some of the power of this program. Hell, it’s entirely possible that I’m wrong about some functionality. It is not an exhaustive discussion of every feature. For that, RTFM…
The top row of icons lets you control how documents are displayed, as well as what other info about the documents is displayed.
This is the bookmark bar. Each entry is a bookmark that reflects a search criteria. Displayed above are the defaults. They can further be organized into folders. Dragging a file to a bookmark that is location based will put it in the desired location. In my case, I regularly use the Untagged option. Since I painstakingly went through the process of tagging all my documents, selecting Untagged will show me only the newest arrivals on my Mac. Every day or two, I look at the untagged documents and tag them. This is has helped me to maintain control of my documents and to easily find anything I’m looking for. I don’t care where the document went since all untagged docs will display. By default, the documents are stored in a Filed Documents folder and then further filed under Year/Month/Day, with each of those taking you a level deeper in the folder structure. As we will see later, if you don’t like this, it is easily and quickly remedied.
Apparently, this bad boy is referred to as the “crumb trail.” This bar lets you tighten up your filtering by selecting a certain type, certain location, certain tags… The button to the right that says LIVE allows you to set whether the display is actively updated or fixed. The search field allows you to search among only those documents that are currently displayed, based on your filtering. You can select whether you are searching based on the file name or file contents. Searching based on content is impressively quick.
The tag column along the left side allows you to click on the tag(s) you want to filter by. Clicking on a tag will add it to the filtering bar above. Hovering over a tag will tell you how many documents have been assigned that tag. At the bottom of the column there is another field that allows you to filter among the tags currently displayed.
The right column displays detailed information about the current document. You can move the file to a different location, you can reveal the file in Finder, you can display the Finder info. The power of this (to me) is the ability to select a group of files and then move them where I want them. To be honest, I’m not that keen on the default filing scheme but I really don’t care. I can filter on “eBook” and then select all the files and move them to the eBook folder. Extremely easy and fast. Much easier than screwing with the Finder.
Finally, there is this feller:
Travel is a standard part of my job. Travel means expense reports. If you’re smart, you always scan your receipts before sending them into corporate. Scanning and creating new documents is a breeze with Yep. Before finding Yep, I used the HP software to scan my receipts. It was problematic at best. When I decided to upgrade to Snow Leopard, I learned that those bastards at HP didn’t feel like updating the software for my All-In-One. No problema, thanks to Yep; I have a better interface and can immediately tag the receipt file and determine where it goes. Eat that HP!
This review was brief but my hope is that it gives a sense for the power and utility of this program. To my surprise, I cannot imagine functioning without it at this point. For work, I have to use an XP machine. Every day I find myself longing for Yep. Ironic Software also has a Finder alternative called Leap. It looks amazing. My hope is that it will become part of a bundle someday. That bundle will be an instant buy. Find them on the web at:. I have no financial interest in the company and they don’t know I exist… For me, this software rates a 4 out of 4.
This review was created (as a test) with two other bundle apps: Voila and MacJournal. Perhaps I’ll review them at a later date.You can listen to an mp3 in the “goodies” section. Arm, yes. I think I smelled some King Crimson in there, too.
King Crimson, yes. But mostly, it reminds me of Mr. Bungle. Have to listen to it some more though.
Nice to see some people talks about us so far from us!!!!
It’s a really good music and movie player!
The tunes that are currently in the goodies section (not translated yet!) are from our new album (Nagah Mahdi) that will be released in January 2006, distributed by Musea Records!
The final mix is now downloadable from this section, but not the masterised one… Anyway, you should be able to find this album by you really soon.
OK, thank you for telling about us!
OK, enjoy the whole thing, and see ya soon!
PS : The first album is freely downloable (free art license), so don’t hesitate. The sound is not good as on the new one, but anyway….
You are reading Sebkha-Chott which was posted on Thursday, December 1st, 2005 at 12:01 pm by Barry's Imaginary Publisher. This entry is filed under Frank Zappa, Music, Zappa Audio/Video.
Recent environmental and ecological awareness, and the willingness of producers (with verse knowledge on cover cropping) to share their experiences with other producers has started a resurgence in cover crop use in beef cattle operations. A series of workshops on cover cropping put on by PCBFA has shown that the advantages of integrating cover cropping systems into the forage based production systems of beef cattle operations are numerous. Cover crops protect water quality by reducing losses of nutrients, pesticides, and sediment. Cover crops can increase nutrient efficiency through reduced soil erosion (less soil organic matter and soil nutrients losses in the topsoil). Cover crops are scavengers of residual nitrogen (N), converting N to proteins (enzymes, hormones, amino acids). Improved forage yield and quality are some of the other benefits of cover cropping. This report attempts to highlight the collaborating producer’s efforts on testing a series of cover crop species that can be used in cover crop cocktail mixtures for silage for backgrounding or for swath grazing.
Cover crop test plots consisting of several monocultures and cocktail mixtures were seeded by the collaborating producer. The crops used for the test plots are listed below (Table 1).
The plots were harvested for forage DM yield estimation on August 15. Dried forage samples were analyzed for forage quality by Central Testing Laboratory, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
A mixture of triticale/hairy vetch had the most forage DM yield (3703 lbs/ac), followed by monoculture purple top turnips (whole plant, 3200 lbs/ac) and then a mixture of barley/hairy vetch (2777 lbs/acre) (Figure 1). Monoculture sorghum sudan grass had the least DM (2159 lbs/ac).
Protein - The forage protein was highest for barley/hairy vetch mixture (19%) and least for triticale/hairy vetch mixture (9%) (Figure 2). All monocultures and mixtures examined in the present study were able to meet the protein requirements of a dry gestating cow, which needs 7 and 9% respectively in mid and late pregnancy. For a nursing (lactating) cow that needs 11% protein, only monoculture sorghum sudan grass and a mixture of triticale/hairy vetch fell short of meeting the requirement of 11% by this category of cow. For growing and finishing calves, which require 12-13% protein, only monoculture sorghum sudan grass and a mixture of triticale/hairy vetch fell short of meeting the 12-13% protein needed by these calves.
Energy - The forage energy (total digestible nutrients, TDN) was generally >60% TDN (except for the mixture of camelina/hairy vetch) (Figure 3). All monocultures and mixtures tested here had enough %TDN for a dry gestating cow, but only the bottom 3 mixtures (in Figure 3) fell short of meeting the 65% TDN needed by a lactating cow (see Figure 3). Growing and finishing calves require 65-70% TDN, and looking at Figure 3, only the bottom 3 mixtures fell short of meeting the % TDN requirements of these calves.
Looking at the ME values in the present study (Table 2), only the mixture of Camelina/Hairy vetch fell short of meeting the daily ME requirements of 2.23 to 2.54 mcal/kg of a mature beef cow.
Macro minerals - The forage Ca, Mg and K contents were highest for purple top turnips. Tillage radish appeared to have the most forage P (0.29% P) and Na (