Recent Posts

8426

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 06, 2011, 06:54 AM »

I'm sorry to say, that I am completely underwhelmed by the iPad experience so far.

The only really satisfying thing about it is that it makes me feel absolutely justified in despising all things Apple.

-nudone (April 06, 2011, 02:54 AM)

Well if you sell, I'd say sell fast.  I think the prices are up only because the iPad 2 isn't actually in hands yet.  That's the only way I could see someone paying $400USD+ for something that costs $499 new for the next gen.

And if you still haven't sold in a month or so and are interested, in doing so, let me know... I'm planning on buying my wife one about then.  I know I enjoy it, and she does too... and it is uniquely suited for her business needs as a photographer (displaying some of the RAW images to her clients to let them choose which ones they want printed on the spot).  The netbook she purchased for that reason is a bit too much in the wrong form factor, but the iPad works for that brilliantly.

8427

DC Gamer Club / Re: Giving away some Steam games. How should I decide the recipients?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 05:44 PM »

However, I would love to find some kind of hoop to make people jump through to get the games. 

-cthorpe (April 04, 2011, 11:10 PM)

Filling out the DC Giveaway form seems like jumping through a hoop to me.

-Deozaan (April 05, 2011, 05:42 PM)

Nah... that's stepping through a hoop

8428

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 04:27 PM »

the effort that's involved would be pretty substantial for little benefit

-wraith808 (April 05, 2011, 03:11 PM)

I think that's only true if you're looking at it from a purely technical perspective.

What makes OC a bellweather is its asking us to accept that a piece of software - provided by a third party and totally unrelated to the main app's function - should be allowed to scan and transmit data back to that third party without announcing itself or getting the user's permission before doing so.

Regardless of whether or not it's been happening in other places, this has not generally been considered acceptable behavior for a legitimate software product. Truth is, stealth and operating without permission has always been considered more in keeping with malware and quasi-maleware behaviors.

And with venture capital backing and several prominent software developers signing onto OC, I think we really need to see this as a company attempting to change the definition of what is considered acceptable. If it wasn't trying to do this, it wouldn't be causing some anti-malware products to flag its behaviors as suspicious.

Whether or not it's malicious, by the way it operates, OC shares cultural and technical similarities with software that is potentially dangerous.

And while so-called false positives may damage a product's reputation unfairly, we also need to consider that most anti-malware detection is based of behavioral analysis. And to have a legitimate product display such behaviors by design - and then insist the anti-malware detection methodology needs to be changed to accommodate it - creates an even bigger problem when it comes to continuing to be able detect truly malicious code that operates in a similar manner except for the payload.

I'll risk a clumsy analogy to illustrate my point:

<snip />

So while it may be a large effort for small gain, in the larger cultural and technical arena, having something work like OC introduces issues that could easily be avoided if it was implemented differently.

And that is something they are apparently refusing to do even though it shouldn't present much in the way of a technical challenge for them change their software.

Just my 2¢
 

-40hz (April 05, 2011, 04:09 PM)

I snipped out your example- I do get what you mean, so as my reply doesn't really speak to that...

1) As far as acceptable behavior, I think that though it might be through a different avenue, and through a different type of organization, this has been around for a while.  And while people might grumble and complain, there's never been a huge outcry against it. (see yahoo toolbar, et al).  I think the difference is that they are openly courting developers, while at the same time touting that they are not more of the same.  So people are trying to prove that they are.  I have to consciously every time I install iTunes, or when I used to use yahoo messenger, or several other apps remember to uncheck the installs for other items.  And this is considered worse?  And in each case, there was a bit of discussion (or sometimes not) and then it blows over.  There's been no censure of Apple by the masses for their actions, nor of yahoo, or google, or any of the others that do the exact same thing.  So to say that this is not acceptable behavior is just not true.

2) The fact that this shouldn't present much of a technical challenge is *also* not true.  Especially when you're courting developers that already have an installer, and creating an installer is a *lot* of work.  I've done it from scratch before, and there's a lot of things you take for granted that InstallShield or Wise give you for free.  When I say a lot of work for little gain, I don't mean in terms of mindshare or other intangibles- those are hard to sell to VCs.  I mean in justifiable ROI.  I'm not defending the position; I'm just seeing things how they are.

So I don't think it's a refusal as much as it is a feasibility thing versus how much of an investment that the changes that you're mentioning would really cost versus their perceived gain.

8429

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 03:13 PM »

Umm, how does OpenCandy work, again?

Do they provide their own entire installation framework, or is it "merely" a plugin DLL available for use with 3rd party installers like NSIS, InnoSetup, InstallShield et cetera?

If it's a plugin, then Wraith isn't entirely correct - the DLL won't be part of the installer.exe import table, and it will be loaded dynamically. Now, it's several years since I've played with installers, so it could very well be that the major installers load all contained 3rd party DLLs as soon as possible... but that sounds a bit stupid.

-f0dder (April 05, 2011, 03:08 PM)

I've had to incorporate 3p dlls with NSIS, InstallShield, and WISE, and in each case, the DLL was copied to the computer, which is installed, and then it was dynamically linked (of course), but it had to be loaded at the beginning of the installer.  I sort of mixed my metaphors so to speak with the dynamic links... but it's not load on demand which is what I meant.

8430

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 03:11 PM »

I'm going to go back to your definition of installation (you knew that was going to happen... didn't you? ).  At the time that this dialog would be accessed, the open candy dll would already be in memory.  There's no way around it.  The installers don't dynamically link the DLLs so that they only load them on demand.  They decompress the payload, put it in a temp directory, and run with the bootstrapper linked to the resources in that directory.

-wraith808 (April 05, 2011, 01:09 AM)

Yeah. This is where OC's real 'innovation' lies IMO.

And from my perspective, that's what makes it unacceptable.

I'd be happier if OC provided the partner developers with a full installer that the devs could load their application into rather than the other way around.

But I doubt that will ever happen for a variety of technical, legal, and business reasons.

-40hz (April 05, 2011, 02:18 PM)

I don't think that will happen (very much technical reasons here), but there is a possible compromise (though it might just be splitting hairs).  Have a bootstrap dll that is loaded into the installer space.  After the user OKs the use of OC, that bootstrap dll then loads the OC dll dynamically.  Of course (1) that bootstrap DLL would still be OC code, and (2) that's a lot of effort for very little gain (see splitting hairs).

* wraith808 shrugs

As I said above, there's a lot of little details that I think will never make this anything other than a huge divide between certain parties.  There's no way to satisfy the nay sayers than by not existing in a lot of cases (or practically that, since the effort that's involved would be pretty substantial for little benefit), and with the VCs involved, I don't think that's going to be practical for the company.

8431

DC Gamer Club / Re: Hoard

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 01:41 PM »

4 pack is still available at discount... if you want in renegade, that's two of us... we just need two more...

8432

General Software Discussion / Re: DLS: Mozilla publishes name and shame list of slow Firefox add-ons

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 10:59 AM »

Mine:
#04 (50%) Flashgot (*)
#09 (30%) Xmarks
#12 (21%) Adblock Plus
#17 (17%) Personas Rotator (*)
#19 (16%) All-in-One Sidebar
#26 (14%) Download Statusbar
#43 (04%) Read It later

This actually informed me of a cool extension (integrated gmail) though I probably won't install it.

As far as whether I'll get rid of any of them, looking at cost versus usefulness, the ones with the (*) beside them are in danger of being removed, I think.  The other ones, I'm willing to take the hit for.

8433

Find And Run Robot / Re: Launching win7 start menu items

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 10:13 AM »

^ On 64-bit windows, there's also the SysWOW directory... that might be the problem too...

8434

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 08:50 AM »

A little update- I was installing Applian FLV player on my new computer.  It uses Open Candy.  Or at least I *think* it does.  Looking in the EULA, it has something about OpenCandy.  But I wasn't presented with any option other than installing their own premium version... so I'm not sure *what* that was about...

-wraith808 (April 05, 2011, 01:14 AM)

Do you have the Freecorder toolbar?

-PhilB66 (April 05, 2011, 02:12 AM)

I don't even know what that is.  I don't have any toolbars in my browsers, though.  And nothing was installed other than the FLV player.

8435

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 01:14 AM »

A little update- I was installing Applian FLV player on my new computer.  It uses Open Candy.  Or at least I *think* it does.  Looking in the EULA, it has something about OpenCandy.  But I wasn't presented with any option other than installing their own premium version... so I'm not sure *what* that was about...

8436

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 05, 2011, 01:09 AM »

If it just popped up a screen that said something like:

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]

If the person then said "no", I'd be willing to accept a second screen asking you to reconsider, and explaining how OC benefits the customer and the developer.

At which point if they still said "no" it would proceed to the installation without first invoking OC.

If OC only did this, I'd have absolutely no problem at all with it. In fact, I'd probably be willing to consider it a better alternative than a lot of what's out there.

-40hz (April 04, 2011, 11:42 PM)

I'm going to go back to your definition of installation (you knew that was going to happen... didn't you? ).  At the time that this dialog would be accessed, the open candy dll would already be in memory.  There's no way around it.  The installers don't dynamically link the DLLs so that they only load them on demand.  They decompress the payload, put it in a temp directory, and run with the bootstrapper linked to the resources in that directory.

And as far as your questions to developers... what happens if the 'offending' code is in the application proper (banner ads, or just some kind of tracking...)  Or if the addition to the installer isn't marketing/advertising... but something else?

With a clearly defined moniker to apply to malicious software, and not applying that definition to any other software that doesn't cross the line, offending software can be clearly categorized.  And anything that has the particular properties of the definition can be added to that list.  But these definitions are nebulous at best.  There are some things that are clearly over the line.  But there's a gray area that over time can seriously damage a major part of the arsenal against true malware.  Think of how prevalent anti-virus once was on PCs, and how the use of it has been dropping over time amongst the savvy because of the bloat of anti-virus software, and false positives (and missed legitimate virii).

That's just my concern with the whole thing...

8437

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 11:41 PM »

Attacking the software/developers that use it fall under the same aegis - especially if they are coders on the site.  A little vitriol can really hurt a developer's livelihood for our own personal bias...

-wraith808 (April 04, 2011, 03:57 PM)

I think if you reread what I wrote, you will discover that I have not, at any point, 'attacked' (your word) either OC or the developers that use it - either here at DoCo - or out in the 'wild.'
<snip />

So for that, I do apologize.

 

-40hz (April 04, 2011, 10:53 PM)

I guess I misspoke (mistyped...?) with the attack word... that's a bit more inflammatory than I meant it.  I did mean the misquote, since the new quote seemed a lot more negative than the impression I got from Renegade's original post... and I meant it more in a cautionary manner.  As things like this go on, many people do it (I know I've been guilty of it).  I just didn't want to go down that road- DC is quite the civil environment, and this thread has been degenerating for a while.

In the end, I don't think anyone is going to be persuaded by a few words, but by their own thoughts, if at all.  And if your own thoughts are towards one end of the spectrum or the other, it is less likely that introspection is to happen.  So I look at threads like this more for information sharing and debate.  And I just wanted to keep it that way.

Sorry for any confusion I may have injected into the conversation. 

8438

DC Gamer Club / Re: Giving away some Steam games. How should I decide the recipients?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 11:30 PM »

I have a copy of Nation Red I can add to the pot

8439

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 06:52 PM »

^ OOOOH!  I.MUST.BUY.MORE! 

8440

DC Gamer Club / Re: Hoard

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 06:50 PM »

Let me know how it is.  With as many games as I have that are unplayed, I've stopped pre-ordering games LOL

8441

General Software Discussion / Re: DLS: Mozilla publishes name and shame list of slow Firefox add-ons

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 04:15 PM »

I take the same approach as app103. Sometimes I install but disable extensions for later use.

-housetier (April 04, 2011, 02:30 PM)

I just wish that FF approached extensions in the same way as chrome in regards to restarting the browser.  I would use disable more for extensions that I don't use that much, but I hate restarting the browser to do so.

8442

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 04:01 PM »

Is that 60 dollars? I had a look on eBay and they were over £120 - which makes me assume they aren't that easy to get in the UK.

-nudone (April 04, 2011, 02:56 PM)

Yes, that was $60 on the US ebay.  I think the price might be creeping up, since some people are spreading that they're unavailable with the iPad 2 out.  But it didn't seem like they were unavailable from the site...

8443

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 03:57 PM »

Besides, like Renegade pointed out, end users are clueless and stupid. So why bother trying to explain all the magical and complex logic behind how OC discovered an ad is no longer an ad? And how there's no way anybody could possibly consider OC as some form of adware. Some of OC's proponents have even cited an authority as absolute and unassailable as Wikipedia to back them up with a definition of 'adware' that works well for them.

-40hz (April 04, 2011, 02:13 PM)

Methinks that a bit too much sarcasm got in your reply that it went from sarcasm to twisting words and veers towards that slippery slope that leads to flaming and feelings getting hurt...   

If we keep names out of it and quote what people say instead of substituting meanings (I'm guilty of it too...) then we can keep off that slippery slope.  There's ways to debate, and then there are ways to argue.  I'd prefer to keep on the debate side of things.

After all, we're a pretty good group here, right?  And we're just discussing, as our own views don't require that everyone else view things the same way, right?

(Attacking the software/developers that use it fall under the same aegis - especially if they are coders on the site.  A little vitriol can really hurt a developer's livelihood for our own personal bias...)

And as far as the bygones... I say that old chestnut from Ronald Reagan... Trust, but Verify.  We can't truly know the ins and outs of *anyone's* motivations.  Actions speak louder than words, especially over time.  And if someone does make mistakes (for whatever reasons), does that disallow the possibility that course corrections can't be genuine?  That mistakes can't be mistakes?

Keep vigilant, but that doesn't mean that tinfoil hats should be the desired attire while doing so.

8444

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 01:34 PM »

Thanks, wraith. I'll keep the clamcase in mind - it might be something to use if I find I use the iPad regularly and need to type; otherwise, I'm not keen on the price.

-nudone (April 04, 2011, 12:08 PM)

I wasn't either... I got it off ebay for 60, which I thought was much more reasonable.

8445

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 04, 2011, 11:59 AM »

That said, I will try it as an ebook reader, maybe a quick browser and email checker. The ergonomics of the device lead me to think that I won't use it much - so, I'll still by using my netbook when typing is involved.

-nudone (April 04, 2011, 02:22 AM)

It works well with the clamcase I mentioned earlier.  I use it with that instead of a netbook; the weight with the keyboard is comparable, while the screen is larger and the form factor easier to heft.

8446

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 03, 2011, 09:34 PM »

^ Actually, from what Renegade said in his post, developers *do* have some control.  At least, that's the impression that I got from his post.  And from what I've seen of the statistics available, it doesn't track your software usage.

8447

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 03, 2011, 09:31 PM »

Don't fight it buddy!  It's a beautiful device.  We don't have to be so black and white with this stuff.  if the ipad fits your needs, get it.  if a desktop klunker fits your needs, get it.  We don't have to act so crazy about it!  I've been very happy with the ipad.

-superboyac (April 03, 2011, 09:13 PM)

My thoughts exactly.  With the iPad 2 coming out, I've been able to get some pretty good deals on accessories too.  My latest toy... the ClamCase.  That along with my BookBook I already had  and my Compass stand has me covered for all situations.

8448

Living Room / Re: Please kill me now - just bought an iPad off of eBay

« Last post by wraith808 on April 03, 2011, 06:57 PM »

I had no idea that they had a refurbs section, though, I've just checked it and it's completely empty, i.e. no UK refurbished Apple products at all.

It seems that iPads are the price they are on eBay as they are probably the quickest way of obtaining one at the moment.

-nudone (April 03, 2011, 05:38 PM)

I guess the stores are different. (and this is just a few... no 16GB WiFi left right now...)

8449

General Software Discussion / Re: How to make Firefox Not Open PDF Files

« Last post by wraith808 on April 03, 2011, 06:52 PM »

^ +1.  I use it for the same reason (and also the fact that dl'ing PDFs can take forever, during which you can't do anything if FF dl's it to view).

8450

General Software Discussion / Re: What the hell is OpenCandy?

« Last post by wraith808 on April 03, 2011, 05:18 PM »

^ I was just asking where he recommended it.  I didn't know where he was referring to.