...this thread has been degenerating for a while.
-wraith808
Seems like it's back on track. Just my impression.
What I do worry about, however, is that OC won't remain benign forever. With VCs backing this endeavor, big things will be expected. VCs are notorious for wanting their investments to pay off without any undue delays or surprises. So while OC may actually (to give them the benefit of the doubt) have the best of intentions, their business partners may not.
-40hz
Yes. That is a very real concern. I really believe that they are being genuine and are really out to do good. But, as you point out, they may not have a choice later on. I hope that it does not come to that.
I'm comfortable with the level of tracking right now as it is only about the installer itself.
Regarding a screen like this:
The developer of this product has teamed with Open Candy to provide you with recommendations for a very small number of carefully selected and related software products you may also be interested in learning more about.
By teaming with Open Candy, the developers of the product you are installing are able to continue to offer it to you [free of charge|for substantially less money than it would cost otherwise.]
Open Candy will search your drive to see if you have one of its recommended products already installed. This allows us to offer you the most relevant suggestions for other software you may be interested in. No personally identifiable data will be transmitted to Open Candy as part of this process.
May the installation proceed with Open Candy? [Y|N]
I'm waffling. I like the idea. JavaJones pointed out that idea earlier. But I don't like complicating things.
Ok, let me put it to you like this... It takes a lot of effort, time and money to go out and get people to visit your site. It takes more time, money and effort to get them to download. You still have attrition at that point as some people download, but don't install. Then starting and finishing an installation is another source of attrition. Adding in screens to the installer adds to that start/finish attrition rate.
Depending on the software and business model, the above screen could work. But it won't work for all.
I did some math for Photo Resizer and have come up with a number for COMPLETED INSTALLATIONS. That's not web site visitors or downloads. It's purely for completed installations. Ready? Here it is... $0.01. That's what I could afford to pay. Maybe as much as $0.015. About a penny.
There's nowhere that I can purchase traffic that cheaply. It's simply not possible.
(This is very early on, and I do plan to add in some other revenue models, but at the moment, that's how things are.)
So, for that particular application, the final attrition rate is really important.
This is a cludge, and still too wordy, but isn't a dedicated screen.
Offering an opt-out there could be as simple as cancelling the installation. But some requirement to force an opt-in/opt-out would only have people screaming about how it must be opt-in or nothing, which kind of defeats the purpose, and now you have to say "yes" twice. Going down that road in the silliness sector, why not have a screen before that asks for the user's permission to ask a question. Then a screen to ask if it's ok to ask about advertising... At some point it needs to stop. Forcing opt-in at that stage would kill any potential for OC to be useful.
Practically, a "yes/no" at the beginning is like handing me a knife and expecting me to slit my throat, smiling all the way.
Actually, thinking again, here's what I think is better all the way around (stilly a cludgy job, but it demos things):
That would make it clear that the user should read the EULA, which contains the information in a better format along with links to more.
That might not be the best solution, but it's an option that at least minimizes the impact on the installer and user experience.
Recent Posts
)