Mac PC iOS Free Exclusive Free eBooks

Daily Bits Email

The email you entered is already receiving Daily Bits Emails!

Mac

Kinook Software, Inc. All Deals Productivity Software PIM Software

Ultra Recall

All of Your Data, On Demand!

$99

Buy Now

I Want This

402

v6.2 for PC Download Trial

Platforms: Windows 11, 10, 8.1, 8, 7, Vista, XP, Server 2003 thru 2022

Website Virus Scan Languages

Ultra Recall, Productivity Software Screenshot

Productivity Software, Ultra Recall Screenshot

Ultra Recall is a personal information and document management app that gives you the power to manage all of your data, regardless of its source or location, in one centralized spot. With Ultra Recall, you never need to remember which application holds your data -- all of it is instantly available on demand, no matter where it's located.

What kinds of data are we talking about? How about all of your Microsoft Office files, all of your Outlook messages, appointments, contacts, and notes, any email program that supports the .eml format, websites bookmarked in all of the major internet browsers, and every file on your hard disk, including ZIP archives? Even images, text, online documents, and clipboard data can be fully organized into an on-demand database with Ultra Recall! Populating Ultra Recall is ultra-easy - just drag and drop, copy and paste, or enter your information manually.

When it's time to retrieve all of the information that you need on a topic, just enter your search term into the Quick or Advanced Search, and Ultra Recall will display all of your matching items. Quick Search retrieves a list of matching items in a flash, or use the more detailed Advanced Search to pull information out of the database with surgical precision using logical operators! Each of your data items comes with an attributes list that tells you everything you need to know about that file.

Finding your data is just the first step. Everything that you need to view, organize, and work with your data is neatly contained in Ultra Recall. Use the integrated web browser to view your bookmarked sites, or the rich text editor to open text files. Images display in the image viewer, and the native email message viewer, contact editor, and form viewer round out the arsenal of convenient features. Of course, you can always elect to open web pages and documents in their associated application, but with such robust integration, you may never need to leave the program!

The Conversation

Features

The Fine Print

Testimonials

Expand All Email Updates Load 641 Older Comments

Egon User Best personal information manager (Windows, and Apple included) I know, and I know many. Very stable, a database with 50,000 or more real items (with real content, not just a title and some 5, 6 words or something each, but totaling 2 gb or even more) is no problem.

Very powerful full text search, incl. correct diacritics management (important for non-English users; so any of your ésomething is correctly found, incl. the Ésomething occurrences at phrase begin in case), and incl. fine-grained scope management to not be flooded with unwanted results (Boolean and/or/not also available, of course, and as many stored searches as you want, all of them with their individual specifics, for example individual sort order (for example by specific attributes ("columns"), or with specific attributes shown or then not, etc., etc).

Extremely powerful and perfectly reliable cloning, of anything you desire to appear in more than just one location (or even in multiple locations) in the tree, be it a single item, or whole sub-trees (just as an example, projects in their native context, for one, but also listed in "Current Projects", or similar, and then, additionally, more fine-grained, further clones, of just specific items within those projects, for ToDo's like "look up re some specific question", for example), and any further editing, etc. in anyone of those "clones", will duly be replicated to the other occurrences.

Dozens of "favorites" (=bookmarks) available per database (see screenshot); hoisting (some project in its own tab while you work on it, = no need to multiply databases); tab management; AES-256 encryption available (and certainly a good idea if you have installed your UR database(s) on your notebook, for mobile use (i5 or similar recommended, 8gb largely sufficient since UR does not load but the needed parts of the database(s)).

Very powerful import and export (both perfectly stable/reliable, and power users have lots of possibilities to further control both, by editing individual templates.

Very responsive developer, multiple optimizations under the hood, in a steady flow of minor updates between the (rare) paid upgrades, and forum with real help (from the very active developer again).

Power user here, having bought UR here 2 years ago, and maintaining a total of almost 400,000 items (almost 10 gb; 80 p.c. of them imported into UR then, without any fault) in just a few UR databases.

You can't do wrong, buying here today.

Mar 7 at 2:05am Copy Link

lisba f No Unicode!

Mar 7 at 2:35am Copy Link

Todd User I agree 100% with Egon.

I use UR daily along with another popular Personal Information Manager. The other PIM is buggy and frequently crashes on me. UR has never failed me in the 10+ years I've been running it. It simply works.

The learning curve is a bit steep, but that's because it is highly customizable and can do nearly everything you desire.

I recommend it without hesitation.

Mar 7 at 4:56am Copy Link

HJ B 1. Assume I have a computer with several internal and external hard drives that are always active. Is it my option as to whether there is one master index or a separate index for each hard drive?

2. If I can create a separate index for each hard drive, can I, nevertheless search all of the hard drives at the same time, i.e., with a single inquiry?

3. Assume I have some additional hard external hard drive that I only connect to the computer when I want to use the data on them. Can they have their own index on them that is only activated when that hard drive is activated?

4. Can this program create an index that includes data that is in my cloud, such as Dropbox, apple and Microsoft cloud systems?

5. I assume that there comes a point that an index may be so large that the program’s efficiency may be significantly impaired and that this may depend upon the amount of available disk space and the ram and cpu power of the computer. Assuming a windows 11 computer with 32 gig of memory and only half of the storage space used, are there some rules of thumb as to keeping the size of the database efficient?

Mar 7 at 6:55am Copy Link

Kelly Hamblin I am using version 5.4. I looked on Kinook's website to see what has changed but couldn't find that information. Can someone point me to the right url or tell me where to find a changelog?

Mar 7 at 8:34am Copy Link

Egon User Kelly, the updated one is really difficult to find indeed, since the "last post" indication is totally misleading: always see the very first (i.e. last) entry here: https://www.kinook.com/Fo...y.php?f=27 (which is regularly updated, last update about a fortnite ago).

On the other hand, "sw updating by bits" just spares you some bucks, but costs the developers in question a multiple of what you save, and you can easily imagine how demotivating that would be. ;-)

HJB, I had missed that feature in my little catalog above; in fact, the index is by database, and you can either "link" or "import" external documents, like .pdf, to UR, and then (even with just "linking"), they are included within that UR database's full text search (if the pdf text is available to external programs to begin with).

Dedicated full text search engines are obviously much more expensive, but if you observe the practical SQLite limits (UR databases with up to 2 or 3, not 10 gb, you might be successful with what you intend though - obviously, the stuff you want to link should come from several areas, so that you can maintain several databases for the different FTS, without running into the "where have I put what?" problem, and in a typical UR database, most of the data is "content", not "index", so you might regularly try index functionality when your database, = predominantly the index, in your case, grows).

Sharing your possible experiences with your intended atypical UR use, within the UR forum, would be welcome, obviously.

Mar 7 at 10:06am Copy Link

Kelly Hamblin @ Egon Uset: Thank you so much for your kind help.

Mar 7 at 1:50pm Copy Link

Pete User Pre-Sale Questions: ((1)) Do my many existing Word Docs, PDFs and saved .HTML files that are on my 8 TB of hard disk space get a "reference" or "link" from the program? Or, does Ultra Recall copy my info? Do I have control about what is copied or imported into Ultra Recall?
((2)) I need to know how much disk space will be used up by Ultra Recall? How do I calculate how much disk space is used?
((3)) Can I select ONLY certain drives and folders to be indexed?
((4)) I already have my selected files (docx, pdf, xlsx...) indexed by the Indexer that's part of Windows. Do my Windows indexes get re-used? Or, does UltraRecall make it's own indexes?
((5)) Please answer HJ Bs questions above, even though I don't need all the features he lists, I would still like to know. Thanks.

Mar 7 at 2:44pm Copy Link

Kyle A 1) You can choose when importing whether to store or link to the content.

https://kinook.com/UltraR...ntents.htm

2) The UR program itself takes about 25MB of space. The size of database files you create depend on what you put into them.

https://www.kinook.com/Fo....php?t=731

https://www.kinook.com/Fo....php?t=709

3) UR is not really meant to index your entire hard drive, but you can sync folders into UR.

https://kinook.com/UltraR...ronize.htm

4) UR does not use any Windows index, and it does parse text content from files that are imported, into its own search index (within the .urd file).

https://kinook.com/UltraR...search.htm

https://kinook.com/UltraR...mation.htm

#1: In the evaluation version, there is a limit to the number of items you can add to a database.

#2: Yes, purchasing unlocks all the features of the application. It's not a separate installation.

Kinook Software, Inc. - Mar 7 at 8:31pm Copy Link

Nico Westerdale Great News! Kinook Software, Inc. has agreed to extend this deal for another day - Enjoy!

BitsDuJour Admin - Mar 8 at 12:11am Copy Link

Egon User Since HJB asked his current questions here in 2015 already, just worded otherwise, the question arises how he would have maintained / searched his obviously very extensive document corpus the 7.5 years in-between (and the question if a Windows program can = is entitled to access the Apple cloud, well...), and others may have some misconceptions, too, and since UR will not have been on bits today for the very last time, it could certainly help to explain the different paradigms, once and for all.

A) Search engines for specific file formats: X1 is rent, 79$ p.a. (their "Buy" button is for "buying" a subscription..., and people said it just indexed = made available for search just the first 10 MB of every Pdf, but the problem may have been duly addressed finally (?)), Copernic has been rent even before X1 joined them in this, but has now come up with a rent model from 20$ p.a. on which may be sufficient (!) for many users, or then they will perhaps need the 32.5$ p.a. model (for MS "365"), but obviously, Copernic have decided to make their rent models much more "accessible" now, so people who are "into" that paradigm, should first look into that program (they have a comparison table, in order to enable you to decide what you will need, and 20 / 32.50 p.a. seem to be very acceptable pricing). For individual use, dtSearch always is 249$ (incl. some minor updates I suppose), for the time being.

There are other competitors in that field; the aforementioned tools have in common to build a (= one) global index for all the folders / drives you want them to, BUT just for the file formats which are in their list, and if you have files in some other formats, they are off, i.e. left out, and you can do nothing about that - dtSearch don't even answer your kind enquiry for advice on that.

You will then have a search result list, and according to the tool you will have bought or rented, you either "get" to that position of the document in question, within its "native" app, or then not, and your click on the result will just open that document at the beginning, and you will then have to look up the "find" in there again, which may become very, very cumbersome over the months, so you should check the programs for that, before buying/renting, and they could even behave differently in that, for different file "formats". (For example, I have read in some forum that Lookeen, and which had started as a dedicated Outlook search tool, 50/100/140$ when I last looked their prices up, did NOT go to where you would have wanted, in OL, by clicking on the "hit" in Lookeen's search results, but that observation might be not applicable anymore (?)...) - So you have to really trial, within your real work situations, before making the "investment".

Again: Any non-listed file "format" will NOT be indexed / searchable from within those programs, and that applies for example for database contents - I currently don't know ANY such program (but might have overlooked one that does it) which would be to integrate even standard SQL databases into its index, and: no index, no search!

B) Non-indexing search tools, of which FileLocator (69$, incl. 1 year of updates) seems best (they also have a free version, with the same name, it's their trial after 14 (?) days; there also is FileSeek, much cheaper and regularly on bits, but much less robust from my experience (I use both programs)). Those tools just crawl any file / folder you tell them to crawl, for your current search, and that can take time, but if you know about the file format (by having opened such files with a binary editor, and having taken notes), and even enter the correct codes, you'll be able to find many things indeed you are unable to find with A) above; you also can buy such / quite similar tools for tenfold the price, with the term "forensic(s)" somewhere in their name...

FileLocator Pro belongs to B) from its origin, but has added some indexing functionality, but obviously (judging from the respective entries in the help file) that (and especially the maintenance / renewals of those indices (several ones here) - that's not the strongest part of that program; here again, you have the problem of having to look up twice in case, first FileLocator, to identify the file, then again a search, within the respective application, in order to finally "get" to the "hit".

With the concept of A) and B), you work the traditional way, mostly in MS Word, Excel, etc, and you search by search tool, to identify the document which holds the information in question. But you produce multiple documents, so this is typical office / administration use, and hopefully, you name, and/or file, your (own) documents in a way as to distinguish them from those documents which contain "external" content (mostly PDFs, in most cases).

In this paradigm (or work setup if you prefer), your search tool(s) will become you main work tool, aside from your text processor, your spreadsheet tool, and perhaps MS PowerPoint, and that's it, for most; if you work in a corporate environment, there will also be some database, for tabular data, and with its own search / filter routines.

My advice here: look into Copernic's 20/32.50$ rentals (being aware though that they could multiply those prices anytime), combine with FileLocator free - I do NOT think though that you could replace that setup with just buying FileLocator instead: technically, you could indeed, but read about FL's index management, and you will understand my reservation...

C) Text / content database, plus some files for export / for communication purposes with customers, clients, publishers...

Here, you do your main "text production" within = into your text database, of which the three "big" ones, Windows-wise, are more or less regularly on bits: UR, RightNote, MyInfo, MyBase... (check the respective robustness, and the respective cloning functionality... and you will probably convene you should have bought UR today instead...)

(And there also is TheBrain, at 219$, but any upgrades for the same price then (!, or then by subscription: obviously, they want to dissuade prospects from buying, instead of renting), with its weird "graphical" concept, which just needlessly complicates things, and which is pleasant to the eye (their so-called "free" version is utterly worthless: you will discover that the moment your trial reverts to "free", so you would be very badly advised to invest much time in that trial...) in trial = as far as you just will have to maintain some elements... and some dishonest "reviews" pretend you "need" (and implicitely: you'd need to pay its price) it for transclusion = cloning, see my post above which proves the contrary...)

As said, you main text / output production will be within the text database, and at the same time, you will want to import / link as much as possible external information into that text database, in order to take advantage of your database's full text search; in UR, you either import, which means the file will be replicated within UR, and its full text will be indexed, or you just "link", where again the text will be indexed and thus becomes available for its search results table, but for looking up those "hits", you will then need to open the documents in question, within their "native" application.

Then, though, most users will not have 8 TBs (if I remember well) of

Mar 8 at 1:06am Copy Link

Egon User (Wasn't ready, clicked on Return inadvertently. Am editing... So:)

Since HJB asked his current questions here in 2015 already, just worded otherwise, the question arises how he would have maintained / searched his obviously very extensive document corpus the 7.5 years in-between (and the question if a Windows program can = is entitled to access the Apple cloud, well...), and others may have some misconceptions, too, and since UR will not have been on bits today for the very last time, it could certainly help to explain the different paradigms, once and for all.

A) Search engines for specific file formats: X1 is rent, 79$ p.a. (their "Buy" button is for "buying" a subscription..., and people said it just indexed = made available for search just the first 10 MB of every Pdf, but the problem may have been duly addressed finally (?)), Copernic has been rent even before X1 joined them in this, but has now come up with a rent model from 20$ p.a. on which may be sufficient (!) for many users, or then they will perhaps need the 32.5$ p.a. model (for MS "365"), but obviously, Copernic have decided to make their rent models much more "accessible" now, so people who are "into" that paradigm, should first look into that program (they have a comparison table, in order to enable you to decide what you will need, and 20 / 32.50 p.a. seem to be very acceptable pricing). For individual use, dtSearch always is 249$ (incl. some minor updates I suppose), for the time being.

There are other competitors in that field; the aforementioned tools have in common to build a (= one) global index for all the folders / drives you want them to, BUT just for the file formats which are in their list, and if you have files in some other formats, they are off, i.e. left out, and you can do nothing about that - dtSearch don't even answer your kind enquiry for advice on that.

You will then have a search result list, and according to the tool you will have bought or rented, you either "get" to that position of the document in question, within its "native" app, or then not, and your click on the result will just open that document at the beginning, and you will then have to look up the "find" in there again, which may become very, very cumbersome over the months, so you should check the programs for that, before buying/renting, and they could even behave differently in that, for different file "formats". (For example, I have read in some forum that Lookeen, and which had started as a dedicated Outlook search tool, 50/100/140$ when I last looked their prices up, did NOT go to where you would have wanted, in OL, by clicking on the "hit" in Lookeen's search results, but that observation might be not applicable anymore (?)...) - So you have to really trial, within your real work situations, before making the "investment".

Again: Any non-listed file "format" will NOT be indexed / searchable from within those programs, and that applies for example for database contents - I currently don't know ANY such program (but might have overlooked one that does it) which would be to integrate even standard SQL databases into its index, and: no index, no search!

B) Non-indexing search tools, of which FileLocator (69$, incl. 1 year of updates) seems best (they also have a free version, with the same name, it's their trial after 14 (?) days; there also is FileSeek, much cheaper and regularly on bits, but much less robust from my experience (I use both programs)). Those tools just crawl any file / folder you tell them to crawl, for your current search, and that can take time, but if you know about the file format (by having opened such files with a binary editor, and having taken notes), and even enter the correct codes, you'll be able to find many things indeed you are unable to find with A) above; you also can buy such / quite similar tools for tenfold the price, with the term "forensic(s)" somewhere in their name...

FileLocator Pro belongs to B) from its origin, but has added some indexing functionality, but obviously (judging from the respective entries in the help file) that (and especially the maintenance / renewals of those indices (several ones here) - that's not the strongest part of that program; here again, you have the problem of having to look up twice in case, first FileLocator, to identify the file, then again a search, within the respective application, in order to finally "get" to the "hit".

With the concept of A) and B), you work the traditional way, mostly in MS Word, Excel, etc, and you search by search tool, to identify the document which holds the information in question. But you produce multiple documents, so this is typical office / administration use, and hopefully, you name, and/or file, your (own) documents in a way as to distinguish them from those documents which contain "external" content (mostly PDFs, in most cases).

In this paradigm (or work setup if you prefer), your search tool(s) will become you main work tool, aside from your text processor, your spreadsheet tool, and perhaps MS PowerPoint, and that's it, for most; if you work in a corporate environment, there will also be some database, for tabular data, and with its own search / filter routines.

My advice here: look into Copernic's 20/32.50$ rentals (being aware though that they could multiply those prices anytime), combine with FileLocator free - I do NOT think though that you could replace that setup with just buying FileLocator instead: technically, you could indeed, but read about FL's index management, and you will understand my reservation...

C) Text / content database, plus some files for export / for communication purposes with customers, clients, publishers...

Here, you do your main "text production" within = into your text database, of which the three "big" ones, Windows-wise, are more or less regularly on bits: UR, RightNote, MyInfo, MyBase... (check the respective robustness, and the respective cloning functionality... and you will probably convene you should have bought UR today instead...)

(And there also is TheBrain, at 219$, but any upgrades for the same price then (!, or then by subscription: obviously, they want to dissuade prospects from buying, instead of renting), with its weird "graphical" concept, which just needlessly complicates things, and which is pleasant to the eye (their so-called "free" version is utterly worthless: you will discover that the moment your trial reverts to "free", so you would be very badly advised to invest much time in that trial...) in trial = as far as you just will have to maintain some elements... and some dishonest "reviews" pretend you "need" (and implicitely: you'd need to pay its price) it for transclusion = cloning, see my post above which proves the contrary...)

As said, you main text / output production will be within the text database, and at the same time, you will want to import / link as much as possible external information into that text database, in order to take advantage of your database's full text search; in UR, you either import, which means the file will be replicated within UR, and its full text will be indexed, or you just "link", where again the text will be indexed and thus becomes available for its search results table, but for looking up those "hits", you will then need to open the documents in question, within their "native" application.

Then, though, most users will not have HJB's 8 TBs (if I remember well) of pdf (or other external) data, since that's would be some quite incredible amount of text (!) then; bear in mind that NO (dedicated or not) search tool can also index illustrations, photos, etc., except for their respective meta data in case, so in his case - if he's serious then -, LINKING instead of importing, and then indexing (the respective texts) could be a perfectly viable use case in the end.

And remember, if UR can't index the (pdf or other MS Word or similar) text (because it may be "secured" by its respective author), those dedicated search tools can't either, and OCR isn't that reliable after all but might be a "solution" for very important documents.

I personally think it's insane to misuse a text database as a cheap search tool, when you continue to your your "writing", i.e. your text production, in multiple text processor files; rent Copernic at 20$ p.a., pray they won't multiply your rent too soon, and continue to work as you obviously like to work.

On the other hand, I'm POSITIVE that 95 or more out of 100 prospective text database users will NOT run into HJB's (pretended?) problems; as said, he asked in 2015, and it's almost 8 years now, so how did he organize his a) writing / output, b) searching / external input in-between?

And yes, UR's full text search CAN compete, within reason, with dedicated search tools, so almost NO UR user will have to set up some hybrid system, maintaining indices within UR and within Copernic, but even that is perfectly possible whenever need in those rare cases the need for that might arise.

For people who do their "output" within their text database (UR here), export is important, and as said, UR's multiple export possibilities are excellent, be it simple, quick rtf - or then, you could even use MS Word (and with its new format) "internally", i.e. as your default (!) UR text processor ; and as also mentioned above, there are (multiple, and even user-adjustable varieties of) html and XML export formats, ensuring any possible "output" needs, incl. export to HAT (help authoring tools) or DTP / preprint (FrameMaker, Madcap Flare, Quark, InDesign): with a little help from real experts then, for the necessary adjustments, and in quite other pricing regions what the rentals of those sofware then concerns.

HJB's questions might just have been meant as a provocation, in view of his obvious need to have found at least SOME solution to his monstruous text collections for the last almost 8 years... but the answers he's got (and wasn't probably even interested in) should reassure even power users with lots of pdfs, etc, to link, and I personally think that most powers users even could savely import (instead of just "linking") "everything".

Btw, I don't know how "easy" it would be to then, if really needed, replace the "import" by a "link", afterwards. That should be doable, since even with "import", the original files stay unharmed, of course, and if currently, that's not "as easy as it comes", the developer will certainly check, and amend that functionality, if a legit, honest, real UR users then asks for it.

And finally, yes, some people pretend that "file system PLUS text database", constituting a hybrid system anyway and should thus be avoided to begin with, but when you have, as I have, almost 400,000 records in that text database (= in UR in my case), perfectly ordered within, and by that perfect ordering such a text database offers - how could you imagine such perfect order being replicated into another 400,000 (mostly formatted text) files within my file system? Right: That would be unmanageable, all the more so since any ordering within (sic!) groups can't be done but in a very bad, weird, convoluted way in the file system: by an extra, sidecar file to anyone of those sub folders of any indentation level:...

And then, would your (even very expensive, in case, and indeed, you can spend "thousands" every year, for such an app...) search tool respect, follow the order of your files, from those sidecar files?

In a sophisticated (mainly) text data base (just to differenciate them from tabular data bases here) as UR, all this is no problem whatsoever, the terms to know are just "lineage" (as first sort criterion, and then "tree order" (as second sort criterion, and just for example; multiple other ways easily available and storable).

And that's another, non-negligeable advantage of UR (and other such data bases if they are as good, which remains to be proven first): You'll get all your search results in the order you need them... whilst your dedicated search tool, of almost any price, will very probably not be able to do so.

And, remember, dtSearch people don't even bother to answer some kind enquiry from some prospect willing to pay 249$ plus VAT if shown a way to overcome the above-mentioned limitation, whilst on the other hand, they do lots of blabla re "forensics" - how would they then do "forensics" if their tool isn't even able to search any non-standard file format? are they serious? -, so they will almost certainly give a heck about fine-grained sort order any really good data base (as UR here) is able to deliver...

And that's not even speaking of the "real access time" then: in UR, you will be "within" the "item" = record in a fraction of a second, the search term(s) being highlighted optionally, and thus, you can quickly browse multiple "hits"; "getting into it", from many a search tool, might take quite some seconds then...

There is no perfect software (or anything perfect else then) currently, but with at least knowing where your main requirements, you can do much better choices than by provocately asking for "the impossible", but while not having changed anything, in almost 8 years in-between, on you "current" "workflow", but which obviously should have been revised almost 8 years ago.

According to your individual situation, some people might be correctly advised, to staying with their current file system only based "workflow", others will be perfectly served by a hybrid system: text data base plus file system, plus, in some cases, even an additional search tool, and FileLocator free should indeed be part of any Windows' user's toolbox for example, whatever they deploy otherwise. As should be (Voidtool's) "Everything" (also free), but that would be another subject of discussion...

Mar 8 at 1:09am Copy Link

Todd User To add one more to Egon's extensive list:

XYPlorer is a file manager with an incredible search feature. It can search your entire hard drive for a single file very quickly. It also uses tagging, categories, highlighting, etc. to allow you to get to specific files even quicker.

AFAIK, it does not make or use indexes; it searches in real time, but is still incredibly quick and can search for text within a variety of file formats.

A lifetime one-time purchase of XYPlorer is US $69. BDJ offers it from time to time at a decent discount.

Mar 8 at 3:18am Copy Link

Leib Moscovitz One minor addendum to Egon User's posts: UR's excellent search options are particularly helpful if you want to search the files in an encrypted database by contents, as opposed to searching by date or filename, as content-based searches are not possible with various other encryption options (e.g., Nordlocker, Axcrypt, certain websites which offer encrypted online storage). Thus, using UR is especially useful for managing sensitive data (e.g., tax forms and other financial files).

Mar 8 at 4:51am Copy Link

Jacen There is only one language.

Mar 8 at 12:13pm Copy Link

Kyle A Most of the UI elements can be translated.

https://www.kinook.com/Fo...php?t=3872

And there are spelling dictionaries for other languages.

https://kinook.com/UltraR...nload.html

Kinook Software, Inc. - Mar 8 at 1:33pm Copy Link

Jacen OK
it is just a little pity that the have cannot install it directly in other languages.

Mar 8 at 3:43pm Copy Link