Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion
CNET Download Installer Changes
db90h:
It comes down to this, as you said:
There's more than one way to make money ...
--- End quote ---
The difference is I like the idea of providing a simple service for a fair price. This 'alternate method' of revenue generation, bundling, relies on deception. Further, the introduction of so many bundled apps to a PC is not a good thing. It harms society at large, and thus is unethical. The day may come when no user trusts to install any extra PC software, thanks to bundles.
For paying F/OSS authors, I'm all for that, but we discussed the problems with that above. Free/Open Source projects, by nature, have lots of contributors, and thus division of revenue is more than a little problematic. Bundles are more likely to kill F/OSS than nurture it. Read above for this, and why.
As for the other stuff, you are on a tangent, as we are talking about bundles and software. Not web sites. Not advertising. We are speaking of invasive software seeking to gain entry into PCs, such as the aforementioned Clean Water bundle, gotta love it.
Your spin is quite good though, but it is just that ;). You can't spin away bundles.
db90h:
Last edit made ;). Now I'm un-notifying, as this is distracting. I think it's all been said.
Renegade:
The difference is I like the idea of providing a simple service for a fair price. This 'alternate method' of revenue generation, bundling, relies on deception. Further, the introduction of so many bundled apps to a PC is not a good thing. It harms society at large, and thus is unethical. The day may come when no user trusts to install any extra PC software, thanks to bundles.
-db90h (December 15, 2011, 11:40 PM)
--- End quote ---
I just can't see the jump from "bundle" to "deception" or "malware".
For example:
http://www.winpcap.org/misc/links.htm
Wireshark uses WinPcap, and I don't think anyone would label that as malware or deceptive.
Bundling is just a method. It can either be upfront or it can be deceptive. But again, jumping from "some bundles are unethical" to "all bundles are unethical" is a pretty big jump.
Just because something is bundled doesn't make it malware. Microsoft Office comes with lots of applications bundled. I'd hardly call it malware. (Though sometimes I'm tempted~! ;D )
Being deceptive is another thing entirely. If the installer is labeled sufficiently, then there's no deception.
For paying F/OSS authors, I'm all for that, but we discussed the problems with that above. Free/Open Source projects, by nature, have lots of contributors, and thus division of revenue is more than a little problematic. Bundles are more likely to kill F/OSS than nurture it. Read above for this, and why.
-db90h (December 15, 2011, 11:40 PM)
--- End quote ---
Well, for collaborative projects, yeah, it's hard. Many aren't though. 7-Zip is 1 guy, Igor Pavlov.
I don't know Igor, but if he chose to bundle 7-Zip with some other software, I wouldn't begrudge him that freedom. If I didn't like it, I'm free to use something else. Igor has been nothing but generous with his software. I think it would be pretty ungrateful of me to point fingers at him if he did bundle his software in an honest manner.
As for the other stuff, you are on a tangent, as we are talking about bundles and software. Not web sites. Not advertising. We are speaking of invasive software seeking to gain entry into PCs, such as the aforementioned Clean Water bundle, gotta love it.
-db90h (December 15, 2011, 11:40 PM)
--- End quote ---
I thought the topic was about CNET, their installer fiasco/redemption, and revenue.
Ads are revenue. Tracking with cookies across different unrelated domains is invasive.
I don't really see much of a difference between a bundle and an ad on a web site. They're both methods to generate revenue. Both can be honest, and both have the potential to be deceptive.
Your spin is quite good though, but it is just that ;). You can't spin away bundles.
-db90h (December 15, 2011, 11:40 PM)
--- End quote ---
Well, I could spin things by saying you're making a big leap from bundle to malware, but it would just be... oh wait. It is a big leap~! :D
It's little different than saying that all software packaged with NSIS or Inno Setup are malware. It's a packaging method.
It's the same thing as "guns don't kill people, I do people kill people". ;D
I'm sure that there are bad guys out there doing bundles. But let's crucify the bad guys and not everyone.
Paul Keith:
I just can't see the jump from "bundle" to "deception" or "malware".-Renegade
--- End quote ---
I don't see why not. Even someone like me who came to the internet late knows about toolbar, adware and spyware bundling.
(P.S. I'm assuming you've read db9oh's posts against bundling before but if you haven't, err... that's kind of his perspective. He's talked about it a lot more in a DC thread elsewhere. The one about -ware something.)
Renegade:
I just can't see the jump from "bundle" to "deception" or "malware".-Renegade
--- End quote ---
I don't see why not. Even someone like me who came to the internet late knows about toolbar, adware and spyware bundling.
-Paul Keith (December 16, 2011, 01:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
Well, for one, it's simply bad logic - it's a hasty generalization.
I really don't know what else to say about it.
Bundling is a method of software distribution. Period. End of story.
There's nothing truly significant to be said about it beyond that. Anything further is only a matter of particulars for different ways of approaching that method.
I've given the example of Wireshark above. Is it malware?
Bundling happens very often in the hardware world. e.g. You buy some sound card or an optical drive or whatever, and you get several different programs all bundled together. Sometimes there's a launcher program, and sometimes there's a comprehensive installer.
Does it make sense to complain about, oh say, Lite-on putting Nero CD/DVD burning software in with their DVD burners? It's a pretty convenient thing to get burner software when you buy a burner.
CAN BUNDLING BE ABUSED!
YES!
Absolutely~!
However, the exact same logic that gets from "bundle" to "malware" leads to "the C programming language" to "malware". It's just silly.
C has been used for really bad stuff in the past. Really, truly nasty evil stuff. It's hard to fault C for that.
(P.S. I'm assuming you've read db9oh's posts against bundling before but if you haven't, err... that's kind of his perspective. He's talked about it a lot more in a DC thread elsewhere. The one about -ware something.)
-Paul Keith (December 16, 2011, 01:16 AM)
--- End quote ---
I've probably read whatever it is you're talking about, though I can't be certain.
Though I did make myself pretty clear:
Hehehe~! I think it would be harder for us to be more diametrically opposed on this topic~! :D
-Renegade (December 15, 2011, 10:49 PM)
--- End quote ---
;D
Meh... I suppose that it's a good thing to have people on such opposite ends of the spectrum. If we weren't tugging away in those directions, it might be more difficult to find a happy medium. :)
Compromise: Such an adjustment of conflicting interests as gives each adversary the satisfaction of thinking he has got what he ought not to have, and is deprived of nothing except what was justly his due. :P
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version