LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Perhaps, be true to a standard of decency?Originally Posted by TheAnimus
I mean, just because lots of others are making a living from dealing drugs doesn't mean I have to. And yeah, that's an extreme example, but you get my point.
I have a genealogy program. It cost me (IIRC) about £30. Not a huge amount, but it's been going for some years, and seems to be a success. No foistware. I have some "collectors" databases, for books, CDs, DVDs, etc. Cost me, oh, £50-£60 initially, and I'm due for an upgrade (chargeable) shortly. Again, no foistware, or not last time I downloaded/instalked, anyway. It's not just MS, Adobe, etc that seem to be successful at selling, and long-term at that, software.
Oh, and genealogy-wise, I actually bought two packages, a thing called Legacy (my preferred package) and the Ancestry.com one (name escapes me) though the latter was for database access more than the software.
And there are many other examples I could give, from Office to encrypting CDR drivers.
Clearly, not everyone will pay for software. Piracy is rife. Of course, many of those pirating software aren't going to pay for it, no matter what. If a foolproof way of preventing pirate versions of, say, Photoshop, were developed, I'd bet a VERY high proportion of those using pirate versions would use something else, rather than pay. Personally, I have pirate versions of current versions, but I actually use a somewhat older, legit and boxed, version. And have used legit versions since Photoshop 3, on switching from a legit version of Picture Publisher.
Software developers, big or small, can't assume anyone using their software, including pirate versions, is actually a "customer", but foisting, using deception, this garbage that many seek to do, is abusing genuine, paying customers in what appears to be an attempt to monetarise pirates.
As a paying customer, I really resent deceptive attempts to load garbage on my machine. I have no objection to any company offering what they consider to be a useful, companion product, provided they don't attempt to install it by default, and certainly not by deceptively hiding it or obfuscating what they're doing.
I have a somewhat purist approach to what software I load. It goes back, probably, to a test I did of Symantec's Winfax, in the very early days. I had a virgin Windows install, on a sacrificial goat system. I installed Winfax, then uninstalled it, immediately. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it made something like 1300 registry entries on installation, and removed about 500 of them on uninstallation. The net gain was about 800 registry entries for a package I didn't even start up, once. And that's not counting the detritus it left all over my system folders.
So .... I'm VERY fussy about what I install on my machines. Nothing goes on unless I've previously looked at it on a sacrificial goat, and decided, yes, I really do want and need that. They're not bogged down with loads of 'cute' applications, games, utilities, etc, unless I need them. I keep my systems as lean and mean as I can, within the realms of what's pragnatic. Maybe that's partly why I get the hump with foistware. Partly. But a major part of if is simply that it's so bleeping presumptuous. There is NO excuse I will accept, absolutely none whatsoever, for ANY software changing my default settings, like file associations, let alone internet home page or default search engine, with clearly and openly asking me first. And admittedly, not for a while now, a few companies have paid the price with a very negative analysis (and I mean in mainstream press and major PC titles) when they did it in a product I was reviewing for publication.
And personally, I blacklist companies that do that to me. My machine is MY machine, and I won't use software that sets out to abuse and deceive, because it tells me all I need to know about the ethics of that developer - they put their needs above honesty, or respecting their customers.
Yes, I'm sure it's a cut-throat market, and "competitors" do it, but I would strongly advocate any developer with any self-respect, and any concern for their reputation, to think VERY hard before going down that line. Good reputations are hard to acquire, but very easy to lose. Bad reputations, once acquired, can be very hard, maybe impossible, to get rid of. Foistware may offer short-term gain, but in my opinion, it WILL also breed a very large amount of ill-will, resentment and even outright anger towards developers that adopt such a dishonest and self-serving attitude towards customers.
Put it this way. There are shops I won't use because of bad customer service. One such is Tesco. Haven't used them for years. I buy everything, including petrol, elsewhere now. Why? I had a problem, raised it with the local shop, and got an attitude from a member of staff. I asked for a supervisor or manager. Then waited nearly an hour before one deigned to show up. That did not go down well. Then, after explaining the problem (a petrol pump failed to issue a receipt because the automatic machine ran out of paper) they would not issue a manual one, despite verifying the date, time, amount and card number (which I produced) of the transaction. So I complained to CS at Head Office, who promised to investigate and get back to me. Well, I'll consider using them again after they do get back to me. I'm on about 7 or 8 years, and counting. Now, clearly, the few grand a year I spend elsewhere isn't going to bankrupt Tesco, but that ONE incident resulted in almost all of my petrol buying going elsewhere ('cos not all of it was there to begin with, though most was) and similarly, what groceries I bought there now goes to Sainsbury, Morrisons or Asda. I have to drive past that Tesco to go to Asda. Though to be fair, about 90% now goes to Waitrose, simply on the basis of quality.
Anyway, back on topic, the attitude from Tesco lost them my custom, probably for the rest of my life, and over a financial cost of about £10 (lost VAT reclaim on about £50 of fuel), but really over their attitude to a customer. I bothered to change my buying habits for both petrol, and much of my daily groceries over it.
How much easier is it to blacklist a software developer, over foistware? Unless that developer has something that, first, I absolutely need, and second, there's no alternate product available, they lose my business and odds are, for years to come, I won't even consider looking at other products they produce.
Reply With Quote
