Browsercraft Companion Suite for IE

[John Corliss]

John,

Thank you for responding to my post. Let me respond to your
additional points:




This is a good point. Our web site was created to support multiple
languages. By default, it redirects to www.browsercraft.com/english.
This is an easy change to add a "Enter Here" front page. Thanks.




Concerning embedding XML in HTML, this is exactly what other advanced
browsers are doing including Mozilla Firebird.

True true. And it does seem to be the wave of the future from what
I've read about XML. However, XML is going to be the major tool in
creating this "service based fee structure."

We provide the ability
for users to turn this feature off and describe the program
communication in detail in our privacy statement. I understand your
concern "moving to a service based fee structure".

Ray, I certainly wasn't accusing *you* of pushing this rental
strategy. My apologies if I came across that way.

Our software will
always be free to private individuals - we do not sell rental software
or subscriptions. We are only focused selling solutions to
corporations and government organizations.

Thanks, Ray. You almost make me wish I used IE instead of Mozilla. But
not quite. 80)>

Luckily for me, I can already do in Mozilla most of what you're
talking about.

 

[Ray]

Dick,

Let me respond to your additional questions.

I wrote:

1) We do not collect any personal information when you download and
use our software. NO REGISTRATION FORM is presented at anytime during
both the download process and installation. We do not collect our
user's email addresses.

You wrote in response:

Re 1: Nor any other user data (identifiable or not) during operation
of
this IE upgrade?

My response:

Good point - let me clarify. Also, I will recommend we provide
further details in our corporate privacy statement. All we monitor is
the IP address of the user downloading the software. This is a
built-in function of our web site (and most other websites). Unless
you subscribe to our user forum (not required) we do not capture ANY
additional information including name, email, phone etc.

I wrote:

5) We are working for complete Truste Certification (completion by
1/15/04).

You wrote in response:

Re 5: Don't know whether THAT is exactly a recommendation: Many
untrustworthy companies have such
a Truste seal approval... Perhaps it is better to let your
program's users speak (for instance here in acf).

My response:

A Truste certification is important. Truste will not certify an
organization ifit does not follow strict procedures for protecting
users privacy. They also monitor and police your website. If a user
has any complaints they can go directly to Trustee. Browsercraft can
be sued and fined if our privacy statement does not match our business
practices.

You also wrote:

Remarkable: You advise people to download anti-spyware software and
check their computer with it. Now, how about sniffing your program
for
let's say two months or so? Just to check and double check (and
perhaps
even triple check ).

Get me right, Ray, I am in no way offensive to your product or
company... I just want to know what I might expect... and I am one of
those guys who will sniff a program for as long as it takes to either
proof it's clean, or to proof that there is something fishy about
it...

Now, being American, you know the saying "there ain't such a thing as
a
free lunch", especially not from a commercial company... so I am
curious to learn what is in it for Browsercraft?

My response:

Please sniff our program anytime you wish. I am not sure what more we
can do. We run SpyBot S&D on our computers. It is a good program. We
recommend it to our users. As far as "what is in it for Browsercraft"
we offer great freeware to private individuals. If you are
non-commercial user, your free lunch is supported by organizations
willing to pay for our professional services and the distribution
rights to Browsercraft Companion Suite.

We are always open for suggestions and appreciate your comments.

Thanks again,

Ray
Browsercraft

 

[H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger]

Hi Ray,

This text has been cut down on several places.

Dick,

Let me respond to your additional questions.

I wrote:

1) We do not collect any personal information when you download and
use our software. NO REGISTRATION FORM is presented at anytime during
both the download process and installation. We do not collect our
user's email addresses.

You wrote in response:

Re 1: Nor any other user data (identifiable or not) during operation
of
this IE upgrade?

My response:

Good point - let me clarify. Also, I will recommend we provide
further details in our corporate privacy statement. All we monitor is
the IP address of the user downloading the software. This is a
built-in function of our web site (and most other websites). Unless
you subscribe to our user forum (not required) we do not capture ANY
additional information including name, email, phone etc.

You could have read from my signature that I am well aware of what data
a web server collects... I'm the web site owner and one of three web
masters! It's a built in function of all web servers as far as I know,
but those are technical details belonging to a web dev forum.

I wrote:

5) We are working for complete Truste Certification (completion by
1/15/04).

You wrote in response:

Re 5: Don't know whether THAT is exactly a recommendation: Many
untrustworthy companies have such
a Truste seal approval... Perhaps it is better to let your
program's users speak (for instance here in acf).

My response:

A Truste certification is important. Truste will not certify an
organization ifit does not follow strict procedures for protecting
users privacy. They also monitor and police your website. If a user
has any complaints they can go directly to Trustee. Browsercraft can
be sued and fined if our privacy statement does not match our business
practices.

Now, unless Truste has changed quite a bit in the last 12 months (could
be, but not very likely), and sites like the Microsoft one aren't
carrying any Truste seal anymore... I could say "OK, I am wrong"; but
ask around, especially in this NG (or in alt.privacy.spyware) how many
of the most untrustworthy companies / sites are using that very seal...
I do hope you have some time left to read the responses.

Now, being American, you know the saying "there ain't such a thing as
a
free lunch", especially not from a commercial company... so I am
curious to learn what is in it for Browsercraft?

My response:

Please sniff our program anytime you wish. I am not sure what more we
can do. We run SpyBot S&D on our computers. It is a good program. We
recommend it to our users. As far as "what is in it for Browsercraft"
we offer great freeware to private individuals. If you are
non-commercial user, your free lunch is supported by organizations
willing to pay for our professional services and the distribution
rights to Browsercraft Companion Suite.

Ray, I think these are questions you may have to answer a lot more
often. I went, prior to posting the previous message, up and down your
site twice, but couldn't find the answers to these questions. THAT is
the reason I posted them here. I believe you when you say that "it is a
good program", but then... even some of the spyware hosting programs
are "good programs" (if you would think away the spyware), so that in
itself is not a qualification. ACF's subscribers decided quite some
time ago that (spyware != freeware), reason that we sometimes may look
"nitpicking" or even "ungrateful"... keep in mind then that we are
trying to protect our most precious goods: our privacy and our security!

We are always open for suggestions and appreciate your comments.

From the above you could already distil a few: post more information on
your web site. Now, to be frankly one thing I found rather annoying: on
several pages there was a "Read more" link. I think it is in your
interest too that your possible private customer (tomorrow's business
customer?) has the information available as efficiently as possible...
having to browse to an introductory page, and then to the full page, is
not what I have in mind when I think of efficiency.

I will install your program later tonight, and will run a few checks on
it.... connections will be sniffed and analyzed

Thanks again,

You're welcome, thanks for replying

Dick

 

[H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger]

Hello Dick

"H.M.A. (Dick) Hazeleger" <dick@post_it_in_the_newsgroup.invalid>
wrote in
I'm not too sure about what's going on here but....


So in other words there is no evidence that it's spyware at all?
All the other points you raise about what's in it for browsercraft
would apply equally to many other freeware that are often posted
here, I don't see anything special about this software to be overly
suspicious. And your points about Etrust seem irrelevant.

As far as I can see, the only thing that offended some people was
that initially download was restricted to 1000 users (er..do we have
a name for that? Maybe limitedownware? ), which granted is annoying,
but from there to leap to the charge or suspicion of spyware seems
strange. If anything Ray has jumped the gun in starting this thread,
though your (Dick's) tone in my view is somwhat hostile (I could be
reading you wrong) to someone whose product is not even proven to be
spyware.

In fact,all i can see is one poster who mentioned it was just a
scheme to collect emails to send spam, but that doesn't make sense,
since in such a scheme, you wouldn't restrict downloads. Not to
mention that software that require you to register via email is often
posted here anyway and considered acceptable by many if not most.

I think Ray has gone out of his way to clarify that Browsercraft
isn't one of the bad guys (with the restriction of downloadeds
removed as a bonus!), and this is more than we can say for most of
the other software routinely posted here.

check their computer with it. Now, how about sniffing your program for
let's say two months or so? Just to check and double check (and
perhaps even triple check ).

I know you are on a crusade to force everyone to do packet sniffing,
but this isn't the time or the place.

Aaron,

Now, you plunge into something you weren't part of. I think that Ray
can follow my thoughts very well. Yes, he replied to these question,
and did so perfectly... no doubt about that! But (if you would have
read what I wrote, you'd have known) I went up and down their site
twice and didn't find answer to questions I had... Now is this
newsgroup all over sudden that strict that these questions cannot be
asked here? I don't think so!

I am not on a crusade to get everyone "sniffing", I can do that very
well myself. I know from previous experiences in this NG that for these
kind of requests you shouldn't ask here. I was just telling Ray what
*I* would do... and I have a right to do so, just as you have the right
to tell someone how to install a program, or give him or her tips on
using it.

BTW: My "remarkable" note was meant in a positive way!

Have a good week end
Dick

 

[Sietse Fliege]

Aaron,

Now, you plunge into something you weren't part of. I think that Ray
can follow my thoughts very well. Yes, he replied to these question,
and did so perfectly... no doubt about that! But (if you would have
read what I wrote, you'd have known) I went up and down their site
twice and didn't find answer to questions I had... Now is this
newsgroup all over sudden that strict that these questions cannot be
asked here? I don't think so!

I am not on a crusade to get everyone "sniffing", I can do that very
well myself. I know from previous experiences in this NG that for
these kind of requests you shouldn't ask here. I was just telling Ray
what
*I* would do... and I have a right to do so, just as you have the
right to tell someone how to install a program, or give him or her
tips on using it.

BTW: My "remarkable" note was meant in a positive way!

Have a good week end
Dick

Dick, I wonder if you did not "plunge into something you weren't part
of", yourself.

You can read the whole thread here:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=3fcddcba$0$56510$1b62eedf@news
..wanadoo.nl> (line may wrap)

It was me who started the thread, some weeks ago: I informed the group
about the program.
The rest of the thread really was only about someone (Hansen) taking me
for a spammer and others making jokes about that (all in good jest).
The point is that only Hansen ever mistakenly made a point about the
program possibly being malware and nobody took that for having any
substance.
I guess that the only reason why we are talking about Browsercraft
possibly being malware at the moment is because Hansen made a mistake
when judging my initial post.

Then, some weeks later Ray from Browsercraft discovered the thread.
Although there was not really a reason for it, he wrote in reply to the
accusation of Browsercraft being malware. (I guess I would have done the
same).

Then you jumped in, IMO treating Browsercraft as if there had ever been
substance in the malware accusations.

I agree with Aaron that something was wrong with your tone.
These are quotes from you:

"Now, how about sniffing your program for let's say two months or so?
Just to check and double check (and perhaps even triple check )."

"you know the saying "there ain't such a thing as a free lunch",
especially not from a commercial company... so I am curious to learn
what is in it for Browsercraft?"

This is usenet and many readers will have read this as if you felt you
had grounds to be particularly suspicious of Browsercraft, while in fact
the program does not distinct itself from many programs discussed in
this group (including that many programs could profit from presenting
better info on their websites.)

Some times I got the feeling that you were not so much discussing this
particular program, but rather was drawing attention to your own
anti-spyware activities.

 

[Sietse Fliege]

Aaron,

Now, you plunge into something you weren't part of. I think that Ray
can follow my thoughts very well. Yes, he replied to these question,
and did so perfectly... no doubt about that! But (if you would have
read what I wrote, you'd have known) I went up and down their site
twice and didn't find answer to questions I had... Now is this
newsgroup all over sudden that strict that these questions cannot be
asked here? I don't think so!

I am not on a crusade to get everyone "sniffing", I can do that very
well myself. I know from previous experiences in this NG that for
these kind of requests you shouldn't ask here. I was just telling Ray
what
*I* would do... and I have a right to do so, just as you have the
right to tell someone how to install a program, or give him or her
tips on using it.

BTW: My "remarkable" note was meant in a positive way!

Have a good week end
Dick

Dick, I wonder if you did not "plunge into something you weren't part
of", yourself.

You can read the whole thread here:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=3fcddcba$0$56510$1b62eedf@news
..wanadoo.nl> (line may wrap)

It was me who started the thread, some weeks ago: I informed the group
about the program.
The rest of the thread really was only about someone (Hansen) taking me
for a spammer and others making jokes about that (all in good jest).
The point is that only Hansen ever mistakenly made a point about the
program possibly being malware and nobody took that for having any
substance.
I guess that the only reason why we are talking about Browsercraft
possibly being malware at the moment is because Hansen made a mistake
when judging my initial post.

Then, some weeks later Ray from Browsercraft discovered the thread.
Although there was not really a reason for it, he wrote in reply to the
accusation of Browsercraft being malware. (I guess I would have done the
same).

Then you jumped in, IMO treating Browsercraft as if there had ever been
substance in the malware accusations.

I agree with Aaron that something was wrong with your tone.
These are quotes from you:

"Now, how about sniffing your program for let's say two months or so?
Just to check and double check (and perhaps even triple check )."

"you know the saying "there ain't such a thing as a free lunch",
especially not from a commercial company... so I am curious to learn
what is in it for Browsercraft?"

This is usenet and many readers will have read this, especially in this
context of Browsercraft being accused of possibly being malware, as if
you felt you had grounds to be particularly suspicious of Browsercraft,
while in fact the program does not distinct itself from many programs
discussed in this group (including that many programs could profit from
presentingbetter info on their websites.)

Some times I also got the feeling that you were not so much discussing
this particular program, but rather was drawing attention to your own
anti-spyware activities.

 

[Sietse Fliege]

Sorry for the double post.

You can read the whole thread here:

<http://groups.google.com/groups?&threadm=3fcddcba$0$56510$1b62eedf@news
..wanadoo.nl> (line may wrap)

I should have checked this link before posting.
I forgot that the subject line had been changed 2 times, and because of
that Google presents 3 seperate threads.
Complete (but not uptodate) thread in 3 parts:

<http://groups.google.com/groups?&as_ugroup=alt.comp.freeware&as_usubjec
t=Browsercraft%20Companion%20Suite> (watch line wrap)

 

[Ray]

John,

One final message. I updated our web page as you suggested. It no
longer automatically redirects traffic. Thanks.

In closing, most Mozilla users also have Internet Explorer loaded.
Even if you use IE on occasion, we have many unique features that
Firebird doesn't appear to have like dynamic web page editing and
markup, MHT/ZIP/JPG capture, and built-in chat. For version 1.2 we
are planning to expand our RSS support for bloggers and integrate
Microsoft Word and Excel. Give it a try.

Thanks again,

Ray
Browsercraft Support