Quoting your own writing "An ad is an ad" (The original paragraph is
furhter down this post!)...
So.... then what you're saying is that you think adware is okay and
that it should be considered to be freeware? That since you've become
desensitized to it, others must feel the same and just roll over?
*IF* unintrusive? Yes, but that point of view is not new, in that matter I
haven't been "desensitized", John. And, in the same token, I can ask you
whether everybody here should be condemning (unintrusive) adware, just
because you do so?
IMO *ALL* advertising sucks if it's shoved down my throat. I hate
advertising on television, in books, in newspapers, in magazines, in
the sky, on buildings, on the back of cars, on our clothing (for God's
sake!), on the radio, VIA telemarketing, on our food containers or in
any other form that gives us little choice but to be subjected to it!
Advertising is so pervasive and wasteful of our natural resources that
eventually it will contribute to the downfall of our society. In my
house I go so far as to put breakfast cereal, hand soap and
dishwashing liquid in non-labeled containers so that I don't have to
look at advertising. When I get a new issue of whatever computer
magazine I'm currently subscribed to, the first thing I do is to sit
down and go through it with a tile knife, removing all the card stock
advertising so that I can simply hold the freaking thing open and read
it. THAT'S how much I loath and detest advertising!
So, summarizing this into one short sentence: You hate all advertizing,
hmm... interesting!
ALL push advertising is by definition intrusive. It's placed and
designed so that it is difficult if not impossible to ignore. That is
what *I* call intrusive.
Well, the bottom right-hand corner of a screen hardly can bee seen as a
place where it cannot be ignored; I personally find AdAware's "Update to
the $ware version" much more intrusive, especially since it is printed
bold, and in a place where you may expect the "Check for updates" button or
link, but I accept that. Right, and now we're getting to the bottom of
this: Advertzing in programs (except the ones you accept, probably because
they are useful to you) is considered intrusive by *you*, and you don't
like it that a voice for the opposite way of thinking is raised...
No I don't. Absolutely not. I consider newspapers to be an outdated
and extremely environmentally destructive form of natural resource
abuse. I get my news online. My neighbor recently went on vacation and
asked me to pick up their newspaper so it wouldn't look as if they
weren't home. He told me that I could keep them. When he got back, I
gave them all to him, unread and still in their rubber bands.
Good for the environment I would say! Ah, and you don't see ads on those
web pages, not even the tiniest one?
I do, but I usually tape what I watch and fast forward through the
commercials.
I never claimed that I was 100% successful in avoiding advertising
(who in God's name COULD be?) and for you to insinuate that I did so
is less than honest.
Ah, are we playing the man instead of the ball now? *I* didn't insinuate
*anything*, John... it is what you read in what I post! I merely listed a
number of modern media (whether you call a newspaper outdated or not,
millions rely on them every day!) that will bring information of some kind
_and_ ads to us! Less than honest IMO is venting your opinion the way you
do, without an eye for the other side of the medal!
That's what it looks like to me.
I was afraid of that.
No, we will not. If you want to roll over and show them your soft
underbelly, then go for it.
WHAT soft underbelly, John? We are talking about Opanda, don't forget that!
The only information they got from me is my IP-address, os, and my
browser... Gee whiz... now they can rob me, or send me tons of spam, or do
other nasty things to me. John, stay with your feet on the ground... what
you are referring to (and I repeat that again for the n-th time) is privacy
invading adware (intrusive adware, or spyware), and is *not* related to the
way Opanda advertizes!
I however, will fight to my death on this issue. Let me point out that
one of the main ways for influencing thought and behavior patterns is
to simply undermine the ability of people to formulate concepts. The
first step in accomplishing this is to suppress descriptive
terminology. In this case, the method being used by advertisers is to
repress the concept of advertising being of either the "push" or
"requested" type. I.e. all advertising is simply referred to as
"advertising".
Which is your good right to do, but somehow this reminds me of the battle
against windmills by Don Quijote. Ahem John... now *you* are setting up a
policy... in an "alt" newsgroup? What is good for you, not always is good
for others; and if you make statements like you do, don't expect everyone
to follow you blindly (too many people follow others blindly)
If the day were ever to come that advertisers would stop employing
the moral values of organized crime, carney people or casino
employees, then they might wake up to the fact that not subjecting
people to advertising for products in which people have no interest
will serve their purpose much better. Currently though, the end result
of all the advertising that pervades our world is INFORMATION
OVERLOAD. Its onset has been so subtle and continuous that people
never think of the massive ammount of their lives they waste watching
advertising. One migh call this stupidity "sociological habituation".
The advertising industry feeds on this process and in so doing exibits
the moral ethics of the following:
1. the medical industry
2. the legal industry
3. the porn industry
4. murder for hire
First of all, John, not everyone employs those moral values,to condemn a
whole trade because of members (and I don't think its even the majority)
employs them is like shooting on a fly with a .50! The only "information
overload" I know of the the vast amount of really informational data that
comes to us every day; which is really huge!
Nice list, I miss reglious and political advertizing on it though, to which
I ealiy could reply by mentioning:
1. The Red Cross
2. Amnesty International
3. Greenpeace
4. Security for hire (computer related, or not)
I hope I make myself clear about my feelings on push advertising.
Oh, I understand *your* way of thinking, but can you understand and respect
mine (and possibly that of others here?)
What works better is when people like us, here in this newsgroup,
mention things that they object to about a program. When people don't
download and use it, the programmer is forced to reconsider their
decisions.
Or take a perfectly legitimate program from their site; "Well done, John!"
I would say in such a case. Also consider this, if anyone has the right to
write about the things they don't like (and every lurker, subscriber,
member of this group has, AFAIK); then others have the right to post
opposite points of view... That is also how Usenet works!
Dick, again I say the advertising in this program is there every time
you start the program! You can press the button to turn it off, but
the program doesn't remember that you did so from the last time. Not
only that, but when the advertising disappears, you're left with a
blank area the same size as the advertising.
John, I guess you use an ad-blocker of some kind when you visit a web site;
most ad-blockers leave the space on the web site empty, doesn't bother you
that way... unless we are now discussing "empty space, previously occupied
by an ad", which discussion I even won't go into!
Depends on how this is done. As I said, there's nothing wrong with a
menu item under the Help menu that can be selected and lead to the
promotion. However, forcing a user to view advertising by default
makes the program *adware*. A program used for this purpose is NOT
freeware.
Didn't you write "an ad is an ad"? Then why all over sudden compromizing?
If an ad is an ad as you write, then I would get rid of everything on my
system that has an ad in it of some kind, be it a graphical ad, a button, a
link, or whatever form someone may invent
I differ in opinion with you here, as I tried to explain in the above,
*and* my previous posts.
In this case and IMO, the "malware" is the program itself since it was
misrepresented as being freeware and is in fact, adware.
Oh, so now all over sudden a program that doesn't install spyware, doesn't
install a trojan, keylogger, or doesn't phone home, but has a fixed
advertizement is "malware" by your definitions? John, come on... you cannot
hold this definition in honesty. If that were the case I can mention some
more "malware"
The "malware activity" that takes place is the advertising.
Because it's not freeware. Period. If a program isn't freeware, then
it's not freeware. This group is named *alt.comp.FREEWARE* and is
supposed to be for the discussion of freeware. The bulk of the people
who frequent this group seem to back me about adware not being on
topic here.
STOP!!! Let's state one fact: It is not freeware by *your* definition!
Please allow others to think differently, this still *is* a fairly
unmoderated newsgroup!!!
Well, if "the silent majority" is being dragged into this discussion, then
for the same token I can claim that they back me, so far I haven't seen any
of the other regulars jump in and tell me that either you, or I, am
right... As a matter of fact... I think they are either bored by the
discussion, or they are very amused by it!
Well that's a no-brainer. However I will not back down on this issue
and I think you know it.
No-brainer, or not, it *is* a fact that we will continue to differ in
opinion here, John...
I know, that was your attitude two years ago as well; and from that
discussion long ago you should know that I won't back down on this either:
There are two sides on this medal, and I think the second side of it should
be made public as well, not just your side of it!
So, both static, unintrusive, ads containing programs at Opanda's site are
for me freeware (for those who didn't know... there is also a EXIF reader
program).
But let's take this a step further: Your signature says that you don't take
"spyware" (neither do I, let me state that clearly, to avoid
misunderstandings!), but I haven't seen you respond to keyloggers (the
ultimate spyware and intrusion upon people's privacy!) here? Nor have I
seen you condemning sites that list them (amongst other freeware), why
not???
Have a good day, and regards to you (and all readers)
Dick
