Hi Susan,

I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm . Read
my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
with my suggestion.

I review mainly freeware apps, but every once in a while I recommend
good ad supported (not adware) programs, like Opera browser for
example. I think most of us would agree it's not adware like Spybot or
AdAware would detect and remove.

I feel the definition adware should not apply to applications that do
not load secondary unwanted and hidden programs. See this link for a
good definition of adware: http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/ .

I'm not trying to corrupt our ideas here, I am just suggesting another
definition.

Thanks,

Clif Notes - http://www.xanga.com/clif_notes
Dedicated to promoting freeware and free information

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
(E-Mail Removed) says...
> Hi Susan,
>
> I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
> I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
> types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm . Read
> my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
> with my suggestion.
>
> I review mainly freeware apps, but every once in a while I recommend
> good ad supported (not adware) programs, like Opera browser for
> example. I think most of us would agree it's not adware like Spybot or
> AdAware would detect and remove.
>
> I feel the definition adware should not apply to applications that do
> not load secondary unwanted and hidden programs. See this link for a
> good definition of adware: http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/ .
>
> I'm not trying to corrupt our ideas here, I am just suggesting another
> definition.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Clif Notes - http://www.xanga.com/clif_notes
> Dedicated to promoting freeware and free information
>
>
When Bob Dylan started using electric guitar the folk world didn't fall
apart despite purists shouting "Shame". And neither would the freeware
world if we followed your idea.

I think you're right. All I would say is that links need to make it
clear that programs are ad-supported. Then it's up to people to choose
for themselves.

On 14 Apr 2005 21:53:25 -0700, "Clif Notes"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Hi Susan,
>
>I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
>I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
>types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm . Read
>my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
>with my suggestion.

" I feel they left out an important category called "Ad Supported".
It's not the same as Adware. Ad Supported software will never be
targeted by Spybot S&D or Ad-Aware scanners, because it's all
upfront with no hidden catches."

You're confusing adware with spyware.

>I review mainly freeware apps, but every once in a while I recommend
>good ad supported (not adware) programs, like Opera browser for
>example. I think most of us would agree it's not adware like Spybot or
>AdAware would detect and remove.

Opera has never been said to be spyware.

>I feel the definition adware should not apply to applications that do
>not load secondary unwanted and hidden programs. See this link for a
>good definition of adware: http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/ .

"I define adware as: A secondary computer program (1) that is
installed as a result of a person using a primary, sought-out
program or Web site, or the Internet in general, and (2) that
generates revenue or other benefits for the promoter of the
secondary program "

Bad definition. That's "foistware" or choose your term. It also
generates revenue for the promoter of the primary program as well.
If the running (or even installing) of a program by design causes
ads, then it's ADWARE.

>I'm not trying to corrupt our ideas here, I am just suggesting another
>definition.

The dividing line is not whether a program delivers ads alone, or
uses secondary "helpers". Opera would be no different if they chose
to spin off their current advertising to a separate program.
But by your definition ...

The dividing line is adware/spyware. Both not freeware.

The article http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/
doesn't really help with this, it just describes tenacious filth
that some spyware companies will use to stay on the market.

Opera, and maybe other programs you know don't fit in that crowd,
but your definition, I find is useless.

I don't care if a program, or some "helpers" just deliver ads
without spying. It's still adware.

Why are you trying to add a more PC term?

Clif Notes wrote:

> Hi Susan,
>
> I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
> I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
> types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm .

Hello Cliff,

The alt.comp.freeware Ware Glossary is here:

http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/WareGlossary.php

(The pricelessware.org site is not being maintained. That glossary was
created by Garrett when he was webmaster.)

Read
> my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
> with my suggestion.

I suggest you link to the pricelesswarehome.org web site - it has the
*2005* Pricelessware list and *acf's* Ware Glossary.

> I review mainly freeware apps, but every once in a while I recommend
> good ad supported (not adware) programs, like Opera browser for
> example. I think most of us would agree it's not adware like Spybot or
> AdAware would detect and remove.
>
> I feel the definition adware should not apply to applications that do
> not load secondary unwanted and hidden programs. See this link for a
> good definition of adware: http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/ .
>
> I'm not trying to corrupt our ideas here, I am just suggesting another
> definition.

The acf Ware Glossary is reviewed annually. It's about that time. I'll
start the thread now so you can post your suggestions as part of that
discussion.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://google.ca/advanced_group_sear....comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)

"Clif Notes" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> Hi Susan,
>
> I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
> I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
> types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm . Read
> my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
> with my suggestion.
>
> I review mainly freeware apps, but every once in a while I recommend
> good ad supported (not adware) programs, like Opera browser for
> example. I think most of us would agree it's not adware like Spybot or
> AdAware would detect and remove.

I think the term adware was used originally to refer to any software that
displayed ads with the idea of providing the author with a source of
income.

Back then though the ads were of a static or rotating nature and unlike
even the 'benign' adware of today, does not attempt to connect to servers
for display of ads.

Most of them ended up as nagware advertising their own commerical
version, since very few advertisers thought it was worth while to buy a
place. But it's still is and was adware.

In comparison even Opera's relatively benign ads feels creepy since it
connects to adservers, who knows what it might come up with. And of
course there are worse stuff that is on the dividing line between adware
and spyware.

Is something spyware because it displays customised ads depending on the
url you are on? Even if it doesn't attempt to indentity specific
accounts?

Then there is Evil stuff that is hidden under layers of EULA, almost
impossible to remove, that send out realms of data about your browsing
habits.

And one step worse then that are the malware that record not only browser
habits but passwords eg keyloggers.

>
> I feel the definition adware should not apply to applications that do
> not load secondary unwanted and hidden programs. See this link for a
> good definition of adware: http://www.windowssecrets.com/050224/ .

Sorry, Adware are programs that display ads to provide a source of income
for the author. Ad supported software and Adware are exactly the same
thing.


> I'm not trying to corrupt our ideas here, I am just suggesting another
> definition.

I don't think it's a good idea.

Aaron <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
<news:Xns9639F3D4459A9unknown23@81.174.12.30>:

> Adware are programs that display ads to provide a source of income
> for the author. Ad supported software and Adware are exactly the
> same thing.

I agree completely. The fact that some adware is benign and some is
not is no reason to split the single definition into two. Anyone who
needs to make a distinction is pretty well-served by the English
language: "benign adware" and "malicious adware".

ISTM the attempt is to have mutually exclusive software categories; if
so, it's futile. Any given piece of software can be categorized in
different ways. E.g., some adware is spyware, but not all. Also, some
spyware is adware, but not all.

Also, ISTM that Lavasoft's Ad-Aware is (and always was) misnamed. It's
goal has never been to get rid of adware per se, just spyware. As it
happens, Ad-Aware was introduced at a time when almost all adware was
spyware and vice versa, and now they're stuck with the name Ad-Aware.
Their homepage now describes Ad-Aware as an "anti Trackware solution";
AFAICT, "Trackware" is just a synonym for "spyware".

--
»Q«

On 14 Apr 2005 21:53:25 -0700, "Clif Notes"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I know ACF and Pricelessware is totally devoted to Freeware. That said,
>I want to suggest the addition of a new definition of the software
>types at the page: http://pricelessware.org/thelist/glossary.htm . Read
>my review at http://snipurl.com/priceless_defs and see if you agree
>with my suggestion.

I'm thinking that your suggestion is just a matter of semantics.
Just because one is up front about what it is and the other not, does
not change the definition. Both software authors/companies are
receiving money due to the serving of ads. It doesn't matter how they
get to you, they are there.
My vote is to keep the current definition of adware.

tim

Susan Bugher <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in news:425fd77a_5
@newsfeed.slurp.net:

>
> The acf Ware Glossary is reviewed annually. It's about that time. I'll
> start the thread now so you can post your suggestions as part of that
> discussion.
>

no matter what the purists or die hards might say, a lot has changed in
this group in the last few years. change is inevitable.



--
Woodzy
http://www.rtdos.com

Thanks Susan.

Good points. I'll think about it awhile.