papin,
If you look at their list of clients you will see a huge amount of government work.
This explains how they can ask such a ridiculous price.
Very interesting example of this occurs in the film Snowden, 3 million versus 4 billion for a less effective program.

clairvaux,
There is a decent help file in the installation folder.

Mario,
The program was offered on a different site on Nov 6, as version 5.0. Under the Help menu | About option, it shows that the version is 5.00.457.

Robert, thanks. That's the version I have. Just wanted to know if was worthwhile to update or not.
Anyway, that would be too late now.
mario

XP-Man, may i ask why you still use XP in soon-going-to-end 2016? To my notice, XP and W10 are the ones who often encounter problems during app installation.

hardgirl,
Can't remember the last time I had problems with an installation in XP, Windows 10 on the other hand judging by this site is really dreadful for installation problems.

I do have Windows 7 on one of my four hard drives and I really do not enjoy using it and even though it has minimal use it is forever reporting problems which it then has to resolve.

I use XP because I'm really comfortable with it, kind of the same as my old battered shoes, comfort.

XP-Man,
i use XP-S3 without any problem by installing and using the software.

XP-Man, you can install almost every windows software on xp, except ones that need dot net 4 and above, and some c++ programs compiled in visual studio 2015. And sooner or later you wouldn't be able to install anything, well, maybe would be able to install, but not use.

Mr. Mafi,
Thank you for the information, it is as I suspected my six-year-old install of XP playing up.

ew,
When I write a program it is easy for me to check which version of Windows it is, and if my program can NOT run in that version then it informs the user and it will not install.

Newer versions of Windows often introduce new functions which early versions cannot handle therefore these programs will not run.

By far my favourite programming language is Delphi, when I write a program in it, it makes calls to the OS for the functions to be carried out and obviously this can only occur if the OS supports it.

ew,

1. You can install DOTNET 4.0 on XP -- that is, if you really need it...
2. If you can't install a program on XP, you probably don't need it
3. XP SP3 supports VS 2015 (redistributable)

XP-Man,

You might consider doing another installation of 7. After I changed my old 320 GB/5400rpm HD to a bigger and faster 1TB/7200rpm disk, I ended up with a basic 7-x32-Home installation: no SP1, updates not working (I never ever got a security issue on my PC, though). Then, I patched it to get 4 GB usable RAM... No problem whatsoever, nothing to resolve! The real advantage of 7 over XP is that 7 doesn't crash.

XP-Man, oh, Dephi is great, i have it installed on XP virtual machine. But now I'd better program in .NET, on Windows 10.

papin, i'm having no problems with windows 10, why should i consider another installation of 7. XP is a slowly sinking boat, it just a matter of time when will it sank, no offense. I had been using XP for quite a while, then I had been using 7, now, I don't want to use them anymore, I had enough of them both.

papin,
True it does repair itself very effectively and has never crashed.

My real problem is I find the interface much more difficult to read than in XP, need my eyes retesting and my antique reading glasses renewing.

As I said in my earlier comment my install is six years old and I know where everything lives and what the programs on it can do, I find that familiarity very useful.

So I'm going to trudge along with XP until I move to Linux.

ew,

I shouldn't have replied to 2 different persons in same post.

papin, my bad..I should've noticed.

XP-Man,

It is very easy to adjust the ergonomics of 7 so that all characters on screen are big enough for poor old sight like my father's (80 yo.).

As for my box, you couldn't tell the difference with XP, thanks to ClassicStartMenu and a contrasted theme (not Aero but a rather classic grey/blue theme). Plus a hack to have the good old XP Quick Launch bar instead of the stupid 7's one...

XP-Man,
Thank you, thank you, thank you! While I did buy a machine with 7 on it, I am never buying another Windows machine, EVER! Microsoft can spy on someone else who can't figure out the difference between a pc and a tablet. I too will be going to Linux as soon as they stop supporting 7... probably Ubuntu.

XP-Man,
I can understand your attachment to XP, as it was a great OS. And even though I loved banging on it for almost 15 years, and continued to use it well past its expiration date, I've finally abandoned it in favor of more modern OS versions, specifically 64 bit, which makes computing life a hellova lot easier (although I still run XP on my oldest machine, which can't run anything else, except maybe Linux). If you don't like Windows 10 perhaps you'd at least consider going for Windows 7, also a great OS. I can assure you, it has many more conveniences, and greater stability, than XP.

In any case, my main point was not to criticize your Win XP usage, but to respond to your Windows 10 comment: although certainly not without its problems and quirks, I now have '10 running on three machines, and I want to state for the record I have never had a problem installing software, either from GOTD or elsewhere (and believe me--I install A LOT of software). FWIW, the most trouble I've had was to initially get an older firewall program up and running, and in the end it was only a matter of running it in compatibility mode, not a big deal.

I can state--with all due respect-- that any time a report has been posted here involving an alleged problem between a GOTD offering and Windows 10, it is almost without any doubt in my mind, a PEBCAC.

Robert Garofalo,
Not sure precisely what PEBCAC means not believe I know the gist of your last paragraphs comment.
You would think that the number of comments complaining about Kaspersky antivirus, Windows 10 and the GAOD setup not being compatible would be common knowledge to the users of this site. But no, on a daily basis we see the same complaints regarding this problem.
Another one that gets me is complaints about registration for the simple reason they haven't read the README file!
At least life’s not boring|!

Robert Garofalo,

I use XP, but not because I don't know any better, or not have the later OSes; I do have those as well, but I use XP because that is where most of the programs I use are installed, many that cannot be transferred to later OSes. I like Windows 7, and Windows 10 has a lot of nice advantages, however in spite of having them, I mostly continue to use XP.

I have several computers with Windows XP, 7, 10, and a few variants of Linux, but most of my time is spent on the XP OS, and sometimes that makes people want to ask why, or give me their knowledgeable recommendation, ... because in their mind, I obviously need it. Don't I know that XP is out of date, a danger, a calamity waiting to happen, or a 'sinking ship,' but by who's judgement. Don't jump on that bandwagon if you are not the most technical person you have ever come across. It is pointless unless you know exactly why someone is using XP. Many that do use XP, also use later OSes as well.

When I see comments asking why someone is still using XP, I know they are not considering how that person uses their computer. Instead, that the question is often coming from someone that perceives the world and computer usage as they do; most likely they do not use the computer as I do. Therefore, I do understand why they ask, and it gives me an opportunity to explain why I still boot up an XP computer.

I have used every Microsoft OS since DOS 1.0, and used Digital Research's CP/M before that, which through evolutions to 86-DOS by Seattle Computer Products, became IBM's PC-DOS (by Microsoft). Around the same time, I used Xenix. Before that, a lot of mainframe work (IBM, Univac, Dataproducts, and a few others), but I started very young, so I still have a long ways to go. I have beta tested most of the Microsoft OSes, except I did not spend a lot of time on 8 or 8.1. I do speak from some level of expertise, so if I am still using an XP computer, then there has to be a pretty good reason why. Well, there is!

If I were using the computer to browse the web, and check e-mails, and that be pretty much it, then sure, there is no great reason to use XP over later versions of the operating system. Likewise, even if I copy photos from my camera, manage, even play around with some graphics programs, do a little word processing, manipulate some spreadsheets, or use any number of common consumer programs.

I do not fall into that category in the least, and the same goes for many of the folks that still use XP.

Sure I check e-mails, but I rarely need to browse the web. I check this site regularly of course, and a few others, and then I am done. I am now ready to get to work, and that means using the many programs I have purchased and installed that I need in order to do my work.

Keep in mind that the XP OS was around for a very long time before the next evolution came along. That means that those using the Personal Computer for a lot of development purposes, modeling, high end graphics, video, and other intensive processor needs, had plenty of time to invest in a lot of software over the XP OS active era. I did exactly that.

Many of those software licenses do not allow transfer to a different computer or OS (by license agreement, which, as a developer, I honor), and the price for some of these programs are a lot more than the ones we typically see on this website offerings. The programs I use work fine on the XP OS they are installed on, so I have no need to have them work on any other OS.

My XP computer hardware is very modern, Intel SSD, ASUS Extreme DDR4 Motherboard, fast Intel i7 CPU, plenty of RAM (16G), an 8G DDR5 Graphics Card, and many Terabytes of disk space. I am not playing games, and most of the time I am not doing video work, using Autocad, or anything that is really taxing on the system. Most of the time I am editing source code, compiling, debugging, and generally things that do not require a very powerful machine. At other times, I do work with very large graphics files, and do some intensive video processing, although those tasks are being relegated more and more to the Linux and Window 7/10 computers. You may think it is almost a waste to have such a powerful computer running XP, but when I need to do a defrag, I appreciate the speed.

Any programs I install on XP, are not installed on my workhorse XP machine initially. I rarely ever can even take advantage of a new program on my workhorse computer. When I do try something new out for the XP OS, I first install them in a sandbox on a different computer. After I feel comfortable with it, and decide it would a nice addition to the workhorse computer, then I might move it over.

I have not booted up my Windows 95/98/Me computers for over a year now, but if I needed to test something out, I have them. I also have an IBM 8088 (used for MiDi on a Korg keyboard), and my Osborne 1 computer flip down computer still booted up the last time I tried. I do regret getting rid of the Zenith Z-100 and the Heathkit board w/hex keypad. Those were the days.

I don't reject later Microsoft OSes, merely that I don't need them for what I do most of my work on. I like XP just fine. I like Win 7 just fine; sorry, I cannot say the same for those after Win 7, at least not yet. There will come a time when Windows 7 through Windows 10 too will be the old ones, and by then the issue will not likely be the same, because in all likelihood, the physical Personal Computers will be no more. Instead, a Cloud access to a computer somewhere else in the world, will take its place. Otherwise, I would probably have some software on them that I cannot use on the latest OS. If that were to be the case, I would still be using some older computers and some of the latest. I expect someone would need to ask why am I still using Windows 1000, and the response would be the same except for the version numbers of the OSes.

XP-Man, I've got at least one copy of XP still in a box I'll trade you for Win7,if I can find it....I'm something of a pack-rat,unfortunately....Glad to see you pop-up on the comments section occasionally...!!!

XP-Man,
Check to see what that icon's properties is for the shortcut.

It should show that the shortcut is "C:\Program Files\Common Files\Sagekey Software\Start_Task_Manager.exe" /excl /runtime /profile "Task Manager 20-20" /wrkgrp "C:\Program Files\Task Manager 20-20\Tmgroup.mdw" "C:\Program Files\Task Manager 20-20\Task Manager.mde" /cmd screensize

and it should show that the Startup folder is "C:\Program Files\Task Manager 20-20"

The program needs the parameters to start properly. If you attempt to execute the Start_Task_Manager.exe part alone, you should get a "StartAccess" error dialog showing "Invalid command line."

The program shortcut uses an installer from Sagekey Software, which is why the shortcut leads to that folder. There is no other connection to Sagekey Software, other than using their installer (a lot of other software uses the same Sagekey Software installer).

When you click on the Task Manager 20-20 icon, you should get a prompt to logon with SiteAdmin as the user and blank for the password. Clicking OK starts the program. That small Logon dialog could have been hidden behind some other window (happens when you Alt-Tab or click some other program in the background at about the same time as when you click the Task Manager 20-20 icon), but if you do not have windows opened automatically after a reboot, the Logon dialog has nothing to be behind. In that case, then the quirk during the install may be the culprit.

Notice that the shortcut above uses "Program Files" and not "Program Files (x86)" in each of the references.

The shortcut length is 248 characters. For users that have a 64-bit OS, the shortcut will have "Program Files (x86)" in each location that "Program Files" is in the one for 32-bit OS users. "Program Files (x86)" makes the shortcut length go over 256 characters, and therefore, the 'screensize' part is cropped at the end to be only 'scr':
C:\Program Files (x86)\Common Files\Sagekey Software\Start_Task_Manager.exe” /excl /runtime /profile “Task Manager 20-20” /wrkgrp “C:\Program Files (x86)\Task Manager 20-20\Tmgroup.mdw” “C:\Program Files (x86)\Task Manager 20-20\Task Manager.mde” /cmd scr

I'm not sure how important the parameter "screensize" is to the program when starting.

Since the program was an older program, I installed it on an XP Pro 32-bit OS. I did not try installing the program on a 64-bit OS. This is an example of one advantage to having an XP 32-bit OS around.

Yes XP-Man,
We see the same exact complaints every day..."It won't install...the installer is corrupted....won't download....something wrong with the file...it won't install..."
You'd think that someone would notice the pattern, that they have some common element causing them a problem, and it's NOT the GOTD file, and it's NOT the particular version of Windows they happen to run!