Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
Cnet's Download.com and the installer scam
mouser:
After talking to a CNet editor, I'm a little more optimistic about CNet coming to their senses and realizing that they need to give author's a way to opt-out of this process for no charge.. Keep the pressure on folks.
In my opinion, if a software site offers a program for download, a link to the developer/author should be displayed prominently as one of the first links you see.
--- End quote ---
This really needs to be mandatory -- and not a link to some generic developer home page -- but a link to the PROGRAM home page. This is something that should not be optional. Any site not doing this is purposefully and unreasonably trying to make it hard for you to go get the latest original download and information about the program (probably in an ill-advised effort to avoid you "leaving" their site).
app103:
I have given them the rating they deserve: http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/download.com
Renegade:
This really needs to be mandatory -- and not a link to some generic developer home page -- but a link to the PROGRAM home page. This is something that should not be optional. Any site not doing this is purposefully and unreasonably trying to make it hard for you to go get the latest original download and information about the program (probably in an ill-advised effort to avoid you "leaving" their site).
-mouser (August 25, 2011, 08:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
I think that's kind of unrealistic. They want to keep you on their site so that there's a higher chance that you click an ad. If they "leak" visitors to developer sites, that's money down the drain.
Granted, I'd like to see that, both from a user and a developer perspective. I quite often want to visit the developer site for more information. Download sites typically have crap for basic info. As a developer, I like links to me~! :)
mouser:
I have to disagree with you there Renegade.
Not having a having a prominent link to the program homepage is unacceptable for a download site.
Steven Avery:
Hi Folks,
Snapfiles makes you go back one level to details, and then has a link to the publisher. I think that is sufficient. As long as I do not have to google around for the url.
FileForum is excellent on this. Right with download are two links, one to the publisher, one to the publisher-software.
(Based on a quick check.)
These are the two that I have most trusted over the years, yet you can still see some shlock elements. Fileforum with the Registry Booster ad on page 1, Snapfiles featuring StopZilla. However, they have good user reviews, and they are not ad-bloated. Almost always helpful, Snapfiles has less quantity.
Some others like Tucows and Major Geeks have been 2nd tier. Plus many other specialty sites, such as the freeware sites. It is true that CNet has been an important player, if they lose a lot of business, both publishers and user complaints, they will have to reconsider.
However, compared to say the Avira Uniblue and Ask Toolbar fiasco, this is a little more complex. Presumably a full opt-out of damage is easy and they are well established with numbers of titles. So they may decide to simply plow ahead. They are not known as a personable outfit.
Ok, I notice the full opt-out will still leave junk on your disk. So it is all pretty bad.
To the user it is simple: do not use CNET if at all possible (I had already done that when I noticed the shenanigans) and it is good to let them know you are gone.
To the publisher definitely:
1) register your complaint to CNet
2) take off any links to their download at your site
And .. make the decision to try to remove or not. I would not presume to recommend one or the other, since the decision between lost business and a bit of download hassle is close. If you do allow, a note that they are not your preferred download on your site would be helpful.
CNet will at least notice and consider, and hopefully make major changes.
Shalom,
Steven Avery
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version