3 ms·

Like I said, review the software and get rid of the bad eggs. Not all of it will be bad, I'm sure, since not all of it is bad now. The incentive to leave some o

Like I said, review the software and get rid of the bad eggs. Not all of it will be bad, I'm sure, since not all of it is bad now. The incentive to leave some of the money on the table (the money from the bad people) is in not tanking your brand just to scrape in a few extra dollars.

jiggy2011 14y ago
The problem is that the end user is not the customer here, so the perception of their brand in the users eyes is nowhere near as important as the ROI they can deliver for the bundleware vendors. Think of it like the IRS, they don't increase the tax take by being nice to people.
- coderdude 14y ago
  So who cares about their image then? The original software vendor, probably. If they bundle crap with your install then take it up with them. If enough people did then they would probably stop using this company. So it all comes back to them eventually. Even if it's not in a negative PR way.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    That doesn't seem to have happened so far. It's difficult to find free Windows programs that don't come bundled with some crapware these days. As mentioned elsewhere a lot of these things are actually open source software products that have been rebundled, thus the reputation they are hurting is not their own. I expect it is partly also a result of Windows devs who start out trying to make money by selling a "pro" version of their software but then find that either enough people are happy with the free version and a good chunk of the remaining users just pirate the pro version anyway.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    "So who cares about their image then? The original software vendor, probably." They care about their bottom line over their image, or they wouldn't get in with the toolbars.
jfb 14y ago
If they increase the return of malware installs, their brand will be fine. And their investors will be happy.

3 ms·

Like I said, review the software and get rid of the bad eggs. Not all of it will be bad, I'm sure, since not all of it is bad now. The incentive to leave some o

by coderdude 14y ago

jiggy2011 14y ago
The problem is that the end user is not the customer here, so the perception of their brand in the users eyes is nowhere near as important as the ROI they can deliver for the bundleware vendors. Think of it like the IRS, they don't increase the tax take by being nice to people.
- coderdude 14y ago
  So who cares about their image then? The original software vendor, probably. If they bundle crap with your install then take it up with them. If enough people did then they would probably stop using this company. So it all comes back to them eventually. Even if it's not in a negative PR way.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    That doesn't seem to have happened so far. It's difficult to find free Windows programs that don't come bundled with some crapware these days. As mentioned elsewhere a lot of these things are actually open source software products that have been rebundled, thus the reputation they are hurting is not their own. I expect it is partly also a result of Windows devs who start out trying to make money by selling a "pro" version of their software but then find that either enough people are happy with the free version and a good chunk of the remaining users just pirate the pro version anyway.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    "So who cares about their image then? The original software vendor, probably." They care about their bottom line over their image, or they wouldn't get in with the toolbars.
jfb 14y ago
If they increase the return of malware installs, their brand will be fine. And their investors will be happy.