Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

What the hell is OpenCandy?

<< < (32/99) > >>

Deozaan:
One of the problems with installers that bundle opt-out crapware is that even if someone who knows what they're doing installs good programs for their friend, Joe Blow, then when it comes time for Joe Blow to update their software (e.g. Java) to the latest version for security reasons, the upgrade installer will, by default, install some other crapware.

So it's a risk to update and it's a risk to not update.

cmpm:
I don't install 'Any Video Converter' because Nod32 blocks the connection when it finds opencandy in it.
I could tell Nod to 'ignore' but I agree with Nod, I don't want it either.

Also there has been references to things like 'dealto', and others, packaged with a completely different safe program, that get blocked. Not sure if those are opencandy, it's just stops at the first sign of trouble.

Along with Deozaan's post, OC is trouble period.

wraith808:
wraith, how is this not the same as installing hidden software? Many users click-thru installers. They will not pay attention and as such, this will result in an, often-times, unwanted application being installed. This is, to me, the same as hiding the installation since most users won't pay it two regards.
-Josh (February 26, 2011, 12:53 PM)
--- End quote ---

If you click thru installers, then you deserve what you get, truthfully.  I don't condone the practice, but you are responsible for your own safety in the end.  It's not hidden, it's clearly there.

Josh:
Are you going to tell that to the average home user? Most expect that when you install something, that you are only installing software released by that company. End-user education has not reached the point that a class is being given in school. It needs to be so, but it is not. So, how can you blame a user who really does not know any better? That's like saying that a driver is responsible when they go to a dealer to get an oil change and they another part that is supposedly "better" without telling you and this new part causes your engine to catch fire. The driver did not know that the part was installed even thou it was listed on the invoice. They did not ask for it, and chances are they did not want it.

wraith808:
Are you going to tell that to the average home user? Most expect that when you install something, that you are only installing software released by that company. End-user education has not reached the point that a class is being given in school. It needs to be so, but it is not. So, how can you blame a user who really does not know any better? That's like saying that a driver is responsible when they go to a dealer to get an oil change and they another part that is supposedly "better" without telling you and this new part causes your engine to catch fire. The driver did not know that the part was installed even thou it was listed on the invoice. They did not ask for it, and chances are they did not want it.
-Josh (February 26, 2011, 01:19 PM)
--- End quote ---

1. Classes are being given in school, and have been for quite a while, but that's neither here nor there.
2. The analogy is fallacious, because in your example, the user isn't doing the installation.  In this case, the user is doing the installation, is clicking *next* each time, and *does* have the chance to read.  A better example is contracts.  Do people read before signing?  No- because they want to get to the end, and get their shiny new car, credit card, etc.  But does this make them any less liable?  No.  You don't *have* to be taught anything in order to avoid this other than to read.  So read!  If it's not clearly stated, then I'll agree.  But as long as it's clearly stated, you should read.

Note: I am not condoning the practice.  I'm just saying that it's not hidden.  And clearly it's not, IMO.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page