3 ms·

I've stopped using a Windows PC in 2004, and as far as I remember this was already pretty common at the time. I'm taking a shot in the dark here, but I remembe

by jvzr 14y ago

I've stopped using a Windows PC in 2004, and as far as I remember this was already pretty common at the time. I'm taking a shot in the dark here, but I remember Nero or similar software coming with such a crap too. We, geeks and nerds, quickly get into our habits to uncheck the checkboxes and all. But workaround have developed, such as needing to check a box to not install the bundled crapware.

laumars 14y ago
Going even further back: RealPlayer was synonymous this this kind of behaviour. Yet the Linux client never installed such crap. In my opinion, package managers are the single greatest innovation to happen to computer usability since the WIMP paradigm.
- talmand 14y ago
  So, a few examples have come forward but I don't see a trend that suggests that using Windows on a daily basis is just an ever annoying adventure in avoiding crapware. So far the examples provided I'm familiar with but for the most part avoided. Likely maybe because of the crapware but also just as likely I didn't want/need/like the software being mentioned.
  - laumars 14y ago
    You want more examples then? * iTunes installing several start up processes and Quicktime players * printer drivers CDs installing all manner of crapware * OEM bloatware * Winamp installer recommends all sorts of sponsored crap * Adobe's terrible update system (ok, not really what we're discussing here, but i resent having to reboot my entire OS just for an update to a PDF viewer) * and the amount of programs that install start up processes just to check for updates is depressing * Even Microsoft themselves are guilty of pushing crapware (eg Bing seach bars) in Windows update ....and that's just off the top of my head. I know this sounds terribly negative but it's fair to say that Windows' current method for allowing developer to run rampant with 3rd party installers is sub par by today's standards. And I think even Microsoft realise this because they're now switching to a package manager with online repositories with Win8. I just hope that their main focus isn't to fleece the developers like Apple do.
    - talmand 14y ago
      Granted, good examples. Other than programs that install memory resident apps for their own use (which isn't even part of this discussion), most of them do not affect day-to-day usage of Windows. On a side note, about that memory resident stuff. A quick look at the Activity Monitor on my Mac suggests similar stories. I have an iTunes Helper process running, don't use iTunes. A bunch of MS Office stuff, irony there. There's one for Spotify, which isn't running. Another for VMWare Fusion which is also not running. A large amount of processes that I have to assume that a number of them are typical system processes but not familiar with such things on a Mac I have no way to tell. Following your thought then I totally blame Apple for their lack of control over their third parties. But again, why exactly is this the fault of Windows and/or Microsoft? Are you saying that Microsoft should have had a heavier hand in terms of third-parties? Seems to me, considering history, they would have answered to the Justice Department for doing such a thing. Keep in mind that almost every single one of your examples come from third-party sources outside of Microsoft's control. Are you suggesting that it is impossible for nefarious entities to get crapware, bloatware, or other unwanted things into Linux or OS X through social engineering or shady practices? My Mac comes with all kinds of iSoftware that I don't want/need/use so can I call those bloatware? I'm still waiting for enough examples of crapware bothering people on a day-to-day basis that can support the statement that such behavior is the "Windows philosophy". Although, I grant to you that if you somehow managed to get all that stuff on your system at the same time then that would affect your day-to-day because of eventual performance issues. But then again, in most cases if people would bother to read what they click on then they'll avoid most of this stuff. It's the ones that install themselves without your knowledge are the truly offensive crap.

by jvzr 14y ago

laumars 14y ago

Going even further back: RealPlayer was synonymous this this kind of behaviour. Yet the Linux client never installed such crap. In my opinion, package managers are the single greatest innovation to happen to computer usability since the WIMP paradigm.

talmand 14y ago
So, a few examples have come forward but I don't see a trend that suggests that using Windows on a daily basis is just an ever annoying adventure in avoiding crapware. So far the examples provided I'm familiar with but for the most part avoided. Likely maybe because of the crapware but also just as likely I didn't want/need/like the software being mentioned.
- laumars 14y ago
  You want more examples then? * iTunes installing several start up processes and Quicktime players * printer drivers CDs installing all manner of crapware * OEM bloatware * Winamp installer recommends all sorts of sponsored crap * Adobe's terrible update system (ok, not really what we're discussing here, but i resent having to reboot my entire OS just for an update to a PDF viewer) * and the amount of programs that install start up processes just to check for updates is depressing * Even Microsoft themselves are guilty of pushing crapware (eg Bing seach bars) in Windows update ....and that's just off the top of my head. I know this sounds terribly negative but it's fair to say that Windows' current method for allowing developer to run rampant with 3rd party installers is sub par by today's standards. And I think even Microsoft realise this because they're now switching to a package manager with online repositories with Win8. I just hope that their main focus isn't to fleece the developers like Apple do.
  - talmand 14y ago
    Granted, good examples. Other than programs that install memory resident apps for their own use (which isn't even part of this discussion), most of them do not affect day-to-day usage of Windows. On a side note, about that memory resident stuff. A quick look at the Activity Monitor on my Mac suggests similar stories. I have an iTunes Helper process running, don't use iTunes. A bunch of MS Office stuff, irony there. There's one for Spotify, which isn't running. Another for VMWare Fusion which is also not running. A large amount of processes that I have to assume that a number of them are typical system processes but not familiar with such things on a Mac I have no way to tell. Following your thought then I totally blame Apple for their lack of control over their third parties. But again, why exactly is this the fault of Windows and/or Microsoft? Are you saying that Microsoft should have had a heavier hand in terms of third-parties? Seems to me, considering history, they would have answered to the Justice Department for doing such a thing. Keep in mind that almost every single one of your examples come from third-party sources outside of Microsoft's control. Are you suggesting that it is impossible for nefarious entities to get crapware, bloatware, or other unwanted things into Linux or OS X through social engineering or shady practices? My Mac comes with all kinds of iSoftware that I don't want/need/use so can I call those bloatware? I'm still waiting for enough examples of crapware bothering people on a day-to-day basis that can support the statement that such behavior is the "Windows philosophy". Although, I grant to you that if you somehow managed to get all that stuff on your system at the same time then that would affect your day-to-day because of eventual performance issues. But then again, in most cases if people would bother to read what they click on then they'll avoid most of this stuff. It's the ones that install themselves without your knowledge are the truly offensive crap.