50 bucks for an ordinary website copier like this?

Are you kidding me, dudes?

* QwikCopy + ZOTERO
Firstly, how about perform web searches on Wikipedia or Amazon by simply highlighting a keyword, with a FREE browser add-on compatible with IE, Firefox and Chrome?

http://www.qwikcopy.com/index.php

Then use an amazing Freeware called "ZOTERO" to collect, organize, cite, and share your data with ease.
Can collect all your research sources (PDFs, images, audio and video files, snapshots of web pages etc...) into a single, searchable interface similar to iTunes playlists.
This software automatically senses & indexes the full-text content of your library, assigning TAGS over them as you add them in the library so as to search for any items using your own keywords.
And guess what? It can even automatically synchronize your research library across as many devices as you like, keeping your notes, files and bibliographic data silently updated.

http://www.zotero.org

Zotero Plugins for Word, LibreOffice, OpenOffice.org & NeoOffice (to create dynamic bibliographies, text citations, footnotes and reports in word docs):
http://www.zotero.org/support/word_processor_plugin_installation

See also:
http://www.kiwix.org/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.httrack.com
http://www.freshwebmaster.com/freshwebsuction.html
http://cyotek.com/cyotek-webcopy

==> FREE & ALWAYS UPDATABLE TOOLS <== 50 $???? LOL!!!!

Giovanni  –  9 years ago  –  Ritieni questo commento utile? sì | no (+170)

Traduci

The best complete site copier is the freeware
http://www.httrack.com/

I know and use it when needed for many years

Adif  –  9 years ago  –  Ritieni questo commento utile? sì | no (+132)

Traduci

A. Michael- When you 'save a page', you save just that one physical page, and the components that make up that one physical page (images, background graphics, etc) but not any content that links *from* that page. Take for example a page advertising a local band. It may have some photos, then 10 links to download some sample soundtracks. Your method of 'Save a page' would save the layout of the page, together with the images that make up that page, but it wouldn't save the sample soundtracks, or the photos that sit behind the link, "Gallery". Also, it wouldn't save any other pages, so if you clicked the link to "Contact Us", that would more than likely take you to the real site back on the live Internet.

This program makes a copy of *all* the pages and all the content that is available (within reason...) It will copy all images and follow links to download that content too. Obviously there are limits - I create a lot of sites in Wordpress which require several plugins (maps, photo galleries, etc) so these would not be replicated properly, but you would get the core layouts, enabling you to run the site 'offline'.

You mentioned the 'print page' feature. Many websites do not print well, as they are designed to fill a screen, not A4 or Letter sized paper. Also, they are not 'interactive'. if you had a printout of the front page, you wouldn't be able to click links to follow other pages. Some PDFs have clickable links in them, but they don't work 100% - especially memus or popout sections of websites. This program would allow menus to work and (depending on the site) most interactability (is that a word?!)

This program is useful for news sites or weather sites - 'archive' the site so you could go back in a year and view what happened on a certain date. It can also be automated if you were really keen...
The biggest problem with these sorts of programs is that they are like backup programs - you run them every day and don't need them, so you get bored, or forget to use them, until you need them, then its too late. Or you need them and realise it hasn't been running, so you've nothing to view. It can either be a lot of work for no gain or a program you only realise you need, when its too late.

Chris Locke  –  9 years ago  –  Ritieni questo commento utile? sì | no (+55)

Traduci

easy to install but it's really a tool best described as either a page copier or a page dissector, take your choice. As to the former, it does an okay job, probably no better or worse than what most browsers can do.

As to the latter, we have a slight problem. Although it can technically strip images from websites you designate (including, so I surmise, those that are password locked if you have the password), lightning fast is not a term I'd use to describe the process. For that matter, I wouldn't call it an exact process, either.

For example, I picked a website page with approximately 15 images. This page was one of several but I copied the URL so this program would know I wanted just that one page. Since it wasn't password protected I had no entries in that area.

Roughly a half hour later (yes, 30 minutes) it finally stopped loading images -- all one hundred or so. Seems it not only stripped the page I designated but it borrowed a few more from surrounding pages I didn't designate. Hmmm, got a little overzealous there, didn't we?

Mind you, this isn't a bad program and it's straight forward in operation, it's just a little on the twitchy side. Fortunately it's free today so grab it while you can and have fun.

arturo fuentes  –  9 years ago  –  Ritieni questo commento utile? sì | no (+48)

Traduci

website copying is different than webpage copying. and usually you can only grab a screen copy which is just what you see on the screen, not what you scroll down to, nor another page on the website you click to get to. this apparently will grab then entire site. they say that quite clearly in the description. what I wish to know since they mention IE which I refuse to use, do they support Opera, or does Opera support this program, whichever way it works. Thanx for any feedback. cheers,kat

kathy  –  9 years ago  –  Ritieni questo commento utile? sì | no (+45)

Traduci