Dead Simple Downloader by Blaiz Enterprises

  • Thread starter Thread starter Susan Bugher
  • Start date Start date
S

Susan Bugher

Speaking of downloaders. . . I don't believe this one has been
mentioned (I haven't tried it).

http://www.blaiz.net/

Dead Simple Downloader v2.00.4545

<q>
Easy paste and go downloader - reliable and robust - lightweight
architecture / low resource usage - 2%. Audio alert, multi-user support,
cloning, proxy, auto paste, timer delay, 12/24 time, definable
user-agent, automatic filename formatting, custom throttle, realtime
graphical bandwidth chart, history with stats, user name / passwords,
100K+ url download list. Multilingual interface - see our Select
Language. Integrated Help. New generation code base with User Management
/ Schemes v3.00.* - customise interface (cursors, scrollbars, font...),
settings. Schemes - customise colors - comes packed with 21 color schemes.
</q>

Freeware
http://www.blaiz.net/DSD.ZIP
(497 KB)

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
Sietse said:
Susan Bugher wrote:

There is an issue with the Blaiz freeware:
the programs (not the shortcuts) are installed within the Start Menu.
This behaviour has led a number of us to not use/recommend them.
Click to expand...

That appears to have changed (?) - a quote from the web site:

# No Installation
- All our software programs are no installation, completely
self-contained, requiring no setup or install. No updating or alteration
of any existing computer files, libraries or Windows' registry.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
Susan said:
That appears to have changed (?) - a quote from the web site:

# No Installation
- All our software programs are no installation, completely
self-contained, requiring no setup or install. No updating or
alteration of any existing computer files, libraries or Windows'
registry.
Click to expand...

That may be, Susan, but I doubt it. I still see:

"Dead Simple Downloader places itself on your Start button"

In the past exactly this formulation turned out to mean that the
programs themselves ended up in the Start Menu hierarchy.
I remember to have moved one of their standalone executables to
somewhere else, then run it, only to find that it copied itself to the
Start Menu, ran from there and removed itself from the original
location. The same happened when I tried two years later.
I would like to see that that now has changed, but need confirmation.
 
Sietse said:
That may be, Susan, but I doubt it. I still see:

"Dead Simple Downloader places itself on your Start button"

In the past exactly this formulation turned out to mean that the
programs themselves ended up in the Start Menu hierarchy.
I remember to have moved one of their standalone executables to
somewhere else, then run it, only to find that it copied itself to the
Start Menu, ran from there and removed itself from the original
location. The same happened when I tried two years later.
I would like to see that that now has changed, but need confirmation.
Click to expand...
Stay away!

It's exactly as Sietse said. This behaviour is at least abnormal.

Also, the UI is a trial to your eyes.

Greetings,
Demetris
 
Stay away!

It's exactly as Sietse said. This behaviour is at least abnormal.
Click to expand...

Thank you both. :) :) :)

It's all coming back to me - finally (I knew and forgot about this
weirdness). . . now comes the question of what to do re the ACF pages.
.. .

Several Blaiz Enterprises programs are listed on the ACF pages (and
Chimer was recently recommended in another thread). IMO the *misleading*
"no installation" claim on the Blaiz Enterprises' web pages warrants
adding "NR" warnings to the apps that are listed on the ACF pages. FYI
each of the program info pages has this note about the "NR" tag: "NR =
NOT RECOMMENDED (search Google's archive of ACF posts for more
information)" If anyone thinks this should be handled differently please
speak up.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
The email copied below appears to be a response to this thread. I'm
posting it here for review and comments by newgroup participants.

Susan

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

Subject: Removal of Blaiz Enterprises' Freeware
From: Blaiz Enterprises <snip>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 02:18:38 +1030
To: links <snip> pricelessware.org

Attention: "alt.comp.freeware" Webmaster/s,

For many years we have coded Windows software programs which are
lightweight, fast, small, no installation, with integrated "help" and
multilingual support, whilst having very few "bugs"/"fixes", provided
full feature details and in depth left panel "portal" explanations,
hints and tips, for absolutely free.

As most of these details have been overlooked, misunderstood and
misrepresented constantly via your news groups and website listings, we
now request that all references to our portal domains namely
http://www.blaiz.net
and
http://www.blaizfree.net
and ALL our freeware links please be removed from your website listings
- e.g. http://www.pricelesswarehome.org, http://www.pricelessware.org

Thanking you,

Technical Section
Blaiz Enterprises

Portal:................. http://www.blaiz.net
Internet Search Engine:. http://www.rawgrunt.com
Contact:................ http://www.blaiz.net/contact.html
 
The email copied below appears to be a response to this thread. I'm
posting it here for review and comments by newgroup participants.


Subject: Removal of Blaiz Enterprises' Freeware
From: Blaiz Enterprises <snip>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2006 02:18:38 +1030
To: links <snip> pricelessware.org
Click to expand...
Attention: "alt.comp.freeware" Webmaster/s,
Click to expand...
For many years we have coded Windows software programs which are
lightweight, fast, small, no installation, with integrated "help" and
multilingual support, whilst having very few "bugs"/"fixes", provided
full feature details and in depth left panel "portal" explanations,
hints and tips, for absolutely free.
Click to expand...
As most of these details have been overlooked, misunderstood and
misrepresented constantly via your news groups and website listings, we
now request that
Click to expand...

our freeware links please be removed from your website listings
Click to expand...

< snip >

(1) Removing references from the web sites will not stop people
mentioning their products here.

(2) If something is misrepresented then they should "set the record
straight".

(3) If they want their links removed then they should be.

(4) When people mention their products in future they should mention
this email and note their unwillingness to address the criticisms
made.

(5) Not mentioning their site, and links, will probably mean fewer
people purchase their payware products. If that is what they want
then they should be helped to make fewer sales.


Regards, John.
 
John said:
< snip >

(1) Removing references from the web sites will not stop people
mentioning their products here.

(2) If something is misrepresented then they should "set the record
straight".

(3) If they want their links removed then they should be.

(4) When people mention their products in future they should mention
this email and note their unwillingness to address the criticisms
made.

(5) Not mentioning their site, and links, will probably mean fewer
people purchase their payware products. If that is what they want
then they should be helped to make fewer sales.
Click to expand...
I agree...if a person requests that their web site not be linked,
then it would be common courtesy to honor that request....maybe a
mention of the program with no link....and an explanation why there
is none....that the web site owner has requested that no link be
posted....and a note that the program can be googled to locate the
site....

thank you for listening to my thoughts...sno
Regards, John.
Click to expand...

--
Seen it all, done it all, can't remember most of it

This tag line is generated by:

SLTG (Silly Little Tag Generator)
 
From: Blaiz Enterprises

As most of these details have been *_overlooked_*, *_misunderstood_*
and *_misrepresented_* constantly via your news groups and website
listings, we now request that ...
Click to expand...
<snip>

Their executables, when run, move themselves to the Start Menu Folder.
They (veign to) *_misunderstand_* how the Start Menu should be used.
This absurd behaviour puts their software in a class of their own.
On their website this behaviour really is *_misrepresented_* with:
"Program X places itself on your Start button".
They have *_overlooked_* that this might result in "Not recommended" .

As Google shows here: http://tinyurl.com/neh4u :
In May 2001 the issue was discussed (for the first time?) in a.c.f.
'Boomer' found three e-mail addresses and Blaiz Enterprises were
emailed. Reportedly no answer was received.
Perhaps they simply could not provide an acceptable explanation?
 
Its odd, sure, but I don't see how its a problem. Just means one less
shortcut.

And AFAICS its consistent with the claims made, with only one
exception: it cant be described as non-installing when run from a
CD/USB stick.

Thank you both. :) :) :)

It's all coming back to me - finally (I knew and forgot about this
weirdness). . . now comes the question of what to do re the ACF pages.
. .

Several Blaiz Enterprises programs are listed on the ACF pages (and
Chimer was recently recommended in another thread). IMO the *misleading*
"no installation" claim on the Blaiz Enterprises' web pages warrants
adding "NR" warnings to the apps that are listed on the ACF pages. FYI
each of the program info pages has this note about the "NR" tag: "NR =
NOT RECOMMENDED (search Google's archive of ACF posts for more
information)" If anyone thinks this should be handled differently please
speak up.

Susan
Click to expand...

I cant consider myself in any way expecting to influence ACF or PW. But
fwiw my take on it is that of all the problems I've encountered with
freeware, this must rate as one of the more minor. If it were upto me
I'd not consider this a reason to not recommend it, though I would add
a note for the benefit of anyone concerned about this behaviour.

I can understand the authors POV, though I dont agree with it.


NT
 
Sietse said:
<snip>

Their executables, when run, move themselves to the Start Menu Folder.
They (veign to) *_misunderstand_* how the Start Menu should be used.
This absurd behaviour puts their software in a class of their own.
On their website this behaviour really is *_misrepresented_* with:
"Program X places itself on your Start button".
They have *_overlooked_* that this might result in "Not recommended" .

As Google shows here: http://tinyurl.com/neh4u :
In May 2001 the issue was discussed (for the first time?) in a.c.f.
'Boomer' found three e-mail addresses and Blaiz Enterprises were
emailed. Reportedly no answer was received.
Perhaps they simply could not provide an acceptable explanation?
Click to expand...

Who knows why Blaiz hasn't bothered to correct or explain the behavior
of their proggies? Bottom line is they've had ample opportunity and
have passed it up.

Give them what they want - to an extent. That is, it can't hurt to omit
any url relating to Blaiz. It can only help to have an explanation as
to why.

-Craig
 
sno said:
I agree...if a person requests that their web site not be linked,
then it would be common courtesy to honor that request....maybe a
mention of the program with no link....and an explanation why there
is none....that the web site owner has requested that no link be
posted....and a note that the program can be googled to locate the
site....
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what we're doing now. Descriptions but no links. . .

Scroll down this page till you get to Blaiz Enterprizes:
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/P_ProgramIndex.php?sortby=Author
then check any of the apps descriptions:
http://www.pricelesswarehome.org/acf/P_ORGANIZERS.php#1055
etc. etc.

*Information* is the name of the game. IMO the *misleading* "no
installation" claim on the Blaiz Enterprises' web pages warrants "NR"
warnings on the ACF program *information* pages. IMO valid information
should NOT be excluded from the ACF pages becuse the authors don't want
the information publicized.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
Susan Bugher wrote:
Click to expand...
I cant consider myself in any way expecting to influence ACF or PW. But
fwiw my take on it is that of all the problems I've encountered with
freeware, this must rate as one of the more minor. If it were upto me
I'd not consider this a reason to not recommend it, though I would add
a note for the benefit of anyone concerned about this behaviour.
Click to expand...

The "NR" tag is a heads-up for the benefit of people who don't *know*
about strange behavior in an app (you have to be knowledgeable to decide
if you should be concerned).

Authors seldom mention Spyware, Adware, Nagware, registration keys that
expire etc. etc. etc. The ACF program information pages attempt to fill
in some of the information gaps.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
Its odd, sure, but I don't see how its a problem. Just means one less
shortcut.
Click to expand...

It's not a problem if you can relocate it. That it relocates itself
back to the start menu *is* a problem. I don't expect to find
anything but shortcuts in the <drive>:\Documents and
Settings\<name>\Start Menu tree. (Delete anything you like in there
and you aren't deleting any programs or data - that's just one example
of how it's a problem.)
 
Al said:
On 15 Mar 2006 19:24:13 -0800, (e-mail address removed) wrote:
Click to expand...
It's not a problem if you can relocate it. That it relocates itself
back to the start menu *is* a problem. I don't expect to find
anything but shortcuts in the <drive>:\Documents and
Settings\<name>\Start Menu tree. (Delete anything you like in there
and you aren't deleting any programs or data - that's just one example
of how it's a problem.)
Click to expand...

I guess we have different ideas of 'problem.' The .exe ending would
make it clear its not a shortcut, should you ever forget. AFAICS it
would function just as well from the start menu as program files or
anywhere else - just is not CD/USB no-install-ware.

Would it relocate itself if made read-only?


NT
 
I guess we have different ideas of 'problem.' The .exe ending would
make it clear its not a shortcut, should you ever forget. AFAICS it
would function just as well from the start menu as program files or
anywhere else - just is not CD/USB no-install-ware.

Would it relocate itself if made read-only?
Click to expand...

My description of the behaviour of the programs was not quite accurate
(the memory is going). But in essence I was accurate enough.
I now checked out their Text Effects, so here more accurately:
The downloaded Te.exe, when executed, creates a folder within the
StartMenu/Programs folder, called 'Blaiz Enterprises', with subfolders
and files. The actual program executable Text Effect.exe therein is in
fact a (renamed) exact copy of the downloaded Te.exe. So, when I move
the complete 'Blaiz Enterprises' folder to another location and run Text
Effect.exe it acts not as the program executable, but as the
installation file and recreates the folders and files within the
StartMenu folder.

Blaiz Enterprizes claims:
"All our software programs are no installation, completely
self-contained, requiring no setup or install. No updating or alteration
of any existing computer files, libraries or Windows' registry."
Now, if a program depends on a certain folders/files structure, that in
itself does not classify it as requiring install.
If however it depends on a specific location for that structure, say in
C:\Program Files, i.e. it can not be moved, then it no longer is a 'no
installation' program. Which of course in itself is not a reason to
classify as 'Not recommended'.
However, Blaiz Enterprizes claim of 'no install' is disinformation.
Still not quite enough reason to qualify as 'Not recommended', IMO.
However, the Blaiz programs absurdly depend on the Start Menu folder as
the location for their program folders.
That violation of the integrity of the system, combined with the
disinformation is reason enough for 'Not recommended', IMO.
 
Sietse said:
My description of the behaviour of the programs was not quite accurate
(the memory is going). But in essence I was accurate enough.
I now checked out their Text Effects, so here more accurately:
The downloaded Te.exe, when executed, creates a folder within the
StartMenu/Programs folder, called 'Blaiz Enterprises', with subfolders
and files. The actual program executable Text Effect.exe therein is in
fact a (renamed) exact copy of the downloaded Te.exe. So, when I move
the complete 'Blaiz Enterprises' folder to another location and run Text
Effect.exe it acts not as the program executable, but as the
installation file and recreates the folders and files within the
StartMenu folder.

Blaiz Enterprizes claims:
"All our software programs are no installation, completely
self-contained, requiring no setup or install. No updating or alteration
of any existing computer files, libraries or Windows' registry."
Now, if a program depends on a certain folders/files structure, that in
itself does not classify it as requiring install.
If however it depends on a specific location for that structure, say in
C:\Program Files, i.e. it can not be moved, then it no longer is a 'no
installation' program. Which of course in itself is not a reason to
classify as 'Not recommended'.
However, Blaiz Enterprizes claim of 'no install' is disinformation.
Still not quite enough reason to qualify as 'Not recommended', IMO.
However, the Blaiz programs absurdly depend on the Start Menu folder as
the location for their program folders.
That violation of the integrity of the system, combined with the
disinformation is reason enough for 'Not recommended', IMO.
Click to expand...

Thanks Sietse. Comments to date from newsgroup participants favor a
continuation of the listings on ACF's program information pages. Your
explanation of the behavior of these programs should be very helpful to
people who search the ACF archives for further information.

Susan
--
Posted to alt.comp.freeware
Search alt.comp.freeware (or read it online):
http://www.google.com/advanced_group_search?q=+group:alt.comp.freeware
Pricelessware & ACF: http://www.pricelesswarehome.org
Pricelessware: http://www.pricelessware.org (not maintained)
 
My description of the behaviour of the programs was not quite accurate
(the memory is going). But in essence I was accurate enough.
I now checked out their Text Effects, so here more accurately:
The downloaded Te.exe, when executed, creates a folder within the
StartMenu/Programs folder, called 'Blaiz Enterprises', with subfolders
and files. The actual program executable Text Effect.exe therein is in
fact a (renamed) exact copy of the downloaded Te.exe. So, when I move
the complete 'Blaiz Enterprises' folder to another location and run Text
Effect.exe it acts not as the program executable, but as the
installation file and recreates the folders and files within the
StartMenu folder.

Blaiz Enterprizes claims:
"All our software programs are no installation, completely
self-contained, requiring no setup or install. No updating or alteration
of any existing computer files, libraries or Windows' registry."
Now, if a program depends on a certain folders/files structure, that in
itself does not classify it as requiring install.
If however it depends on a specific location for that structure, say in
C:\Program Files, i.e. it can not be moved, then it no longer is a 'no
installation' program. Which of course in itself is not a reason to
classify as 'Not recommended'.
However, Blaiz Enterprizes claim of 'no install' is disinformation.
Still not quite enough reason to qualify as 'Not recommended', IMO.
However, the Blaiz programs absurdly depend on the Start Menu folder as
the location for their program folders.
That violation of the integrity of the system, combined with the
disinformation is reason enough for 'Not recommended', IMO.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the description. I plan to try it and see, but all this talk
sounds like a non problem to me, just need to be aware it will copy
itself to that location, and let it stay there rather than try to move
it. Theres plenty of software I do object to, but not something as
unproblematic as that.

I'll try setting it to read only, probably wont work but it might..


NT
 
Back
Top