ATTENTION: You are viewing a page formatted for mobile devices; to view the full web page, click HERE.

Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Complaint: Freemake

<< < (4/4)

y0himba:
That's just it though...the software is not being offered for 'free', the author is attempting to generate revenue with adware installs. So while it is free to use, it is not free, it generates revenue porided by the user.

Yes, authors of software should be compensated. If this company who has stolen FFmpeg without credit, has installed a background service without notifying the user and cannot explain why it transmits data 24/7, if tutelage need compensation then ask for donations or charge a fee.  Otherwise, promote this software as advertising supported. Whether or not the user installs it, it is still there in an attempt to support the software with installs and is advertised to me.

I also agree that the user needs to pay attention, however that is just a justification for unscrupulous companies/authors who take advantage of the sheep who allow it.

Josh:
That is just it though, the software IS FREE. Even with the adware, you DO NOT pay a dime as you CHOSE to install the adware. You are not being forced, and the program does not advertise by itself, the third party bundled items do, however. In fact, this program makes it very easy to opt-out of the advertising. The software becomes ad supported when YOU install the adware component to support the author. I do not know about the FFmpeg issue, but I do know that the background service was removed. My issue ties deeper into the whole adware area. You are FREE to use the program without adware. Your system does not get loaded with the adware until you CHOOSE to install it. If the program installs ad-supporting material without asking the user, or bundles it into the core UI, then it IS adware.

I do not see any issues with them promoting this as free because, in all reality, it is free. The user is still not paying a dime even with the adware installed. Once you are required to pay something to use the program, then it stops being freeware. How about we stop trying to make 200 categories to classify a program? This is why services like geek squad exist and continue to rape users of their money, because consumers are no longer able to determine what is what. This software is free and does not attempt to deceive in any way. You are clearly presented with the option to not install the revenue generating component.

You say "ask for donations or charge a fee" and that ties into my original post. How many users will actually PAY/DONATE and how many will just complain that the author is even attempting to ask for money and move to something else? The pay/donate model often does not work for products that start out as free. Notice, I did not say always, but often. Users feel they are entitled to use software for free nowadays, without any sense of the amount of work which goes into coding the products.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version