[PL] 2004 VOTE DISCUSSION: FILE UTILITIES

[Jim Scott]

|Jim Scott <[email protected]>:
|
|> (e-mail address removed) says...
|> |Max Quordlepleen wrote:
|> |
|> |> Well, I'm sorry, Tiger, but I've already stated my opinion, and that
|> |> ends the matter. I have spoken, and all that remains for you to do is
|> |> admit your total wrongness, promise never to disagree with me ever
|> |> again, and buy me a year's supply of Twinkies.
|> |
|> |I believe this demand is known as the Twinkie *offense*.
|> |
|> Er, what's a Twinkie?
|
|A U.S. sucrose-based edible, which has been causally connected with
|committing crimes.
|
Thank you.
You can carry on now )
--
Jim
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Tyneside - Top right of England
To email me directly:
miss out the X from my reply address
Visit http://freespace.virgin.net/mr.jimscott
---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[jason]

One of the contributing factors to the closeness of the voting on some
apps is the lack of discrimination used by some voters on their
ballots. There were a few responses that looked to me to be little
more than a repost of the entire nominations list. If those folks had
used some discretion and narrowed down their choices, instead of
voting for *every* newsreader, *every* email client, etc, there would
be a more clear cut differential in the voting totals in each
category.

Heh. I learned from last time around. Last year, for example, I voted for
two organizers - Keynote and Treepad - even though I liked Treepad better.
Come to find out Treepad almost didn't make it in. If I had voted ONLY for
Treepad, I could have made a difference. This year I voted for Treepad
only. When you learn how the votes are processed, you end up being very
discriminating, and voting for just one program in a category when you
might have chosen two before. I'm not sure if that's how the process is
supposed to work, but that's kind of the natural outcome.

 

[Susan Bugher]

Spacey: "Jeez, some people sure are using a Wal-Mart 18 wheeler truck
load of freeware!"

It sounds like a lot: 5345 votes cast by 100 people - but consider that
there are 12 program pages. 4-5 apps per person per page - not really
all that many IMO - especially for a group of freeware junkies.

Susan
--
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org
PL2003: http://www.pricelessware.org/2003/about2003PL.htm
PL2004 Review: http://www.pricelessware.org/2004/2004nominationsPL.php
alt.comp.freeware FAQ (short) - maintained by John F.
http://clients.net2000.com.au/~johnf/faq.html

 

[Tiger]

Agreed. The nag is there, but a file manager is the type of
program you keep open all the time, so little opportunity to see
the nag.


Disagree on this. The ad is just a tiny strip that takes up no
room at all. In fact I hadn't even noticed it till you pointed it
out.

So we're defining adware based on the size of the ad now?

 

[dszady]

I too first learned about Tracker just recently. At the time, it
didn't have an HTML viewer capability, so I didn't download it. I
don't know it that capability has been added yet, but that would
certainly make it unique.

If it had auto-refresh like 2xExplorer it would be universal.

 

[dszady]

Another clear winner. Dump the others.

Agreed

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

So we're defining adware based on the size of the ad now?

It slips by the adware label because it does not advertise third
party stuff. I consider the always-visible self-ad to be a nag; it
was one of the most annoying nags I ever saw, as when I was using
PowerDesk, I would occasionally accidentaly click it and be whisked
away to the site to buy the software. And I definitely think that
nagware should not be on the PL.

 

[dszady]

Ok, I changed my mind. Wipe 'em all out. No zips for you! ;-)

In all seriousness, I wouldn't keep more than 2 programs per
category. That's just me. Unfortunately, some categories, such
as "utilities" can be a bit broad, so keeping up to 4 for that one
seems fine to me.

A new sub-category "The Best of the Rest".

 

[dszady]

A U.S. sucrose-based edible, which has been causally connected
with committing crimes.

And having a longer shelf-life than dirt.

 

[Nicolaas Hawkins]

On 12 Dec 2003, dszady wrote

Er ... no, Max, that's beating him upside the head with one.

And having a longer shelf-life than dirt.

Along with being altogether less nourishing.

 

[jason]

jason wrote:
So we're defining adware based on the size of the ad now?

Nope. Was just disagreeing on the size of the ad.

 

[jason]

It slips by the adware label because it does not advertise third
party stuff. I consider the always-visible self-ad to be a nag; it
was one of the most annoying nags I ever saw, as when I was using
PowerDesk, I would occasionally accidentaly click it and be whisked
away to the site to buy the software. And I definitely think that
nagware should not be on the PL.

I never even noticed the ad till this discussion and I've never
accidentally clicked on it. I don't consider it nagware, and it certainly
doesn't meet the PW defintion for either adware or nagware.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

<
[regarding PowerDesk]

I never even noticed the ad till this discussion and I've never
accidentally clicked on it. I don't consider it nagware, and it
certainly doesn't meet the PW defintion for either adware or
nagware.

It's been a long time since I used it. But upthread from here, in
<Karen says it still
has the nag screens at open and close. They don't require clicking to
dismiss?

 

[jason]

jason wrote:

[regarding PowerDesk]

I never even noticed the ad till this discussion and I've never
accidentally clicked on it. I don't consider it nagware, and it
certainly doesn't meet the PW defintion for either adware or
nagware.

It's been a long time since I used it. But upthread from here, in
<Karen says it still
has the nag screens at open and close. They don't require clicking to
dismiss?

I'm not sure if I've ever gotten a nag/splash screen upon opening. I do
get a splash screen *ocasionally* when I close, but it's very rare...so
rare in fact that I can't remember if it's a nag screen or just a splash
screen. I've just been spending the past 15 minutes opening and closing
PowerDesk and not getting a screen of *any* kind, so I'll have to give it
some more time. It's apparently timed so it only displays after a long
period of time...like maybe after a few hours or so??

All I can say at this point is that whatever it does, it is not annoying,
so I've never paid any attention to it...and believe me, I'm one of the
easily-annoyed types who uses PTFB (Push That Freakin' Button) when
dealing with programs with nag screens!! But I agree it's important to
sort out what PowerDesk does so we can put the issue to rest.

To make a long story short, I'll have to let a few hours pass, try again,
and then get back to you.

 

[omega]

[Re: Powerdesk nag screen]

I'm not sure if I've ever gotten a nag/splash screen upon opening. I do
get a splash screen *ocasionally* when I close, but it's very rare...so
rare in fact that I can't remember if it's a nag screen or just a splash
screen. I've just been spending the past 15 minutes opening and closing
PowerDesk and not getting a screen of *any* kind, so I'll have to give it
some more time. It's apparently timed so it only displays after a long
period of time...like maybe after a few hours or so??

I launched it again a few times today, and the nag was gone. It sure
seems that /every/ time I've launched ver5 in the past, I got the nags.
I think they must plan nag-screen every X days or some similar. Then
someone like you who runs it, whatever, say 20 times a week - the nag
will feel infrequent. While someone like me who only launches it briefly
and at most a few times a month - getting then hit by the every-X-days
nag on all of those launches - the experience approaches the offensive.

I found where it's storing the "when to nag" information. In an ini in
its folder. I pulled out the ini from a recent backup, the one that would
have been in its folder when I first launched today.

PDEXPLO.INI-------------------------------------------

[Usage]
Count=66
Date=CQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPPPIUMLDM
SplashDate=EQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPBQIUMLDM
-------------------------------------------------------

Putting that in the Powerdesk folder, the result is the opening and closing
nags. Opening, it's to the effect of how many times you've run it, and at
that screen, you must choose "buy" or "cancel," in order to proceed on. The
close nag is an advertisement held on screen for a delay before closing
down. After that, it will overwrite that .ini, so followup launches during
the same day(s) will not have the nag.

....Nag won't recur until the next SplashDate=X.

 

[jason]

[Re: Powerdesk nag screen]

I'm not sure if I've ever gotten a nag/splash screen upon opening. I
do get a splash screen *ocasionally* when I close, but it's very
rare...so rare in fact that I can't remember if it's a nag screen or
just a splash screen. I've just been spending the past 15 minutes
opening and closing PowerDesk and not getting a screen of *any* kind,
so I'll have to give it some more time. It's apparently timed so it
only displays after a long period of time...like maybe after a few
hours or so??

I launched it again a few times today, and the nag was gone. It sure
seems that /every/ time I've launched ver5 in the past, I got the
nags. I think they must plan nag-screen every X days or some similar.
Then someone like you who runs it, whatever, say 20 times a week - the
nag will feel infrequent. While someone like me who only launches it
briefly and at most a few times a month - getting then hit by the
every-X-days nag on all of those launches - the experience approaches
the offensive.

I found where it's storing the "when to nag" information. In an ini in
its folder. I pulled out the ini from a recent backup, the one that
would have been in its folder when I first launched today.

PDEXPLO.INI-------------------------------------------

[Usage]
Count=66
Date=CQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPPPIUMLDM
SplashDate=EQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPBQIUMLDM
-------------------------------------------------------

Putting that in the Powerdesk folder, the result is the opening and
closing nags. Opening, it's to the effect of how many times you've run
it, and at that screen, you must choose "buy" or "cancel," in order to
proceed on. The close nag is an advertisement held on screen for a
delay before closing down. After that, it will overwrite that .ini, so
followup launches during the same day(s) will not have the nag.

...Nag won't recur until the next SplashDate=X.

Are you saying the opening nag is as frequent as the closing delay
screen? My sense had been that the opening nag is extremely rare...so
rare, in fact, I never would have thought it was nag... I remember it
more as a splash screen...while the closing delay screen is somewhat more
common. (I do believe what you are saying is true, it's just that it's
been so long since I've seen that screen -- and I use PowerDesk everyday
-- that my memory is playing tricks on me.)

At any rate, it's not an everyday thing, so like you said, a regular user
wouldn't even notice it, but I'd still be curious if the opening screen
appears as often as the closing screen.

 

[omega]

[Re: Powerdesk nag screen]

PDEXPLO.INI-------------------------------------------
[Usage]
Count=66
Date=CQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPPPIUMLDM
SplashDate=EQQPBPIGFSLHGKDUDKNNMOMPBQIUMLDM

-------------------------------------------------------

Putting that in the Powerdesk folder, the result is the opening and
closing nags. Opening, it's to the effect of how many times you've run
it, and at that screen, you must choose "buy" or "cancel," in order to
proceed on. The close nag is an advertisement held on screen for a
delay before closing down. After that, it will overwrite that .ini, so
followup launches during the same day(s) will not have the nag.

...Nag won't recur until the next SplashDate=X.

Are you saying the opening nag is as frequent as the closing delay
screen?

For me it is. Remember, I don't use the program. I've only launched it
periodically, out of curiosity. So their nag formula, it works out to
bombing me something close to every time.

My sense had been that the opening nag is extremely rare...so
rare, in fact, I never would have thought it was nag... I remember it
more as a splash screen...

Copy my .ini to your Powerdesk folder, if you're curious to see the screen.
You'll see where they force you to click you to click "buy" or "cancel"
to get in the door.

...while the closing delay screen is somewhat more common.

Running it tonight, after I wasn't yet due up for my next opening screen
nag, I did get that one of the close ads, right after launching an extra
instance of it. Btw, I believe the version 4.0 did not have the Buy or
Cancel to Proceed at open - that it's a "new feature" for v5.0.

(I do believe what you are saying is true, it's just that it's
been so long since I've seen that screen -- and I use PowerDesk everyday
-- that my memory is playing tricks on me.)

At any rate, it's not an everyday thing, so like you said, a regular user
wouldn't even notice it, but I'd still be curious if the opening screen
appears as often as the closing screen.

Since I got tonight an extra closing advertisement, and then your
experience, they must time the two separately...

However, I must disagree that a regular user "wouldn't notice it." Even
in a case where it feels relatively infrequent - because of the spread
on the number of uses vs the number of nags - can't get around the fact
of what that makes this product.

The file manager component of their utilities suite, I won't use it. Not
even now, learning that I won't be nagged & solicited every time, just
some times, there's no difference to me. If I had tolerance for nags,
whatever the frequency, then it could make more sense to just switch
over to routine use of unregistered sharewares.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

The file manager component of their utilities suite, I won't use
it. Not even now, learning that I won't be nagged & solicited
every time, just some times, there's no difference to me.

IMO, it's worse. If I'm nagged every startup, closing the nag window
becomes part of an unthinking routine. If it's intermittent, I have to
pay more attention to the nag when it appears.

Nice how they've made a hash of the nag trigger date in the ini file so
that one can't disable the nagging easily.

 

[jason]

However, I must disagree that a regular user "wouldn't notice it."
Even in a case where it feels relatively infrequent - because of the
spread on the number of uses vs the number of nags - can't get around
the fact of what that makes this product.

I think when I speak of a regular user, I'm meaning someone who keeps their
file manager open and rarely closes it, which is going to be the case if
PowerDesk is your file manager. So testing a file manager in isolation is
artificial, and not a true test of "normal" use.

I do think the PW definition of nagware needs tweaking so we can avoid these
kinds of issues from popping up. As it now stands, the definition speaks
only of nag screens, but doesn't mention whether these nags appear daily --
enough to be a real annoyance, or every 60 days -- enough so you'll never
even notice it.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

I think when I speak of a regular user, I'm meaning someone who
keeps their file manager open and rarely closes it, which is going
to be the case if PowerDesk is your file manager. So testing a
file manager in isolation is artificial, and not a true test of
"normal" use.

I don't use PowerDesk, but I only have my file manager open when I am
managing files; I don't leave it open.

I do think the PW definition of nagware needs tweaking so we can
avoid these kinds of issues from popping up. As it now stands,
the definition speaks only of nag screens, but doesn't mention
whether these nags appear daily -- enough to be a real annoyance,
or every 60 days -- enough so you'll never even notice it.

Do you really mean that you think PowerDesk is not nagware because
you don't personally find the its nag popups annoying? You keep
stating that no one would find them annoying, but even if that were
true, they are still nag windows.

I will agree that the definition needs a slight tweak, but not the
one you suggest. It says that the nag window appears "at program
startup", but nag windows whieh pop up at any time make an app
nagware.