Seriously, why do all of you people get so bent out of shape? I'm honestly asking here.
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again? Probably not.
If you don't like Real's business strategy, DON'T USE IT. I personally don't like the real player, never have, probably never will. I do, however, use Rhapsody and I think it's a fantastic service for the price. But that's off topic.
The real question is why Real (or any other company for that matter) perceived as a malicious company? They are being cast as villians for having stupid business practices? Last I checked they weren't out forcing you to install the product. If it sucks, it sucks, and that's Real's problem in terms of business strategy. It's not an insult to your person for god's sake.
Yea yea, it's invasive. Yea yea, it's annoying. I get it, and I happen to agree. So I don't use or buy the products that are annoying. I installed, didn't like it and uninstalled. Live and learn.
But but but, how come I can't use it on x platform? Well, if you really want to use it that badly, I suggest you go to real and pitch a business case to them for why they should spend the extra time and money developing for your platform. Just because you use it[the platform], doesn't mean the majority of the target demographic uses it. Son of a bitch, Real is out to make money? LYNCH THEM!
If the product isn't what you want, it means the marketing and development failed. It doesn't mean they are evil. Grow up.
Assuming you are honestly asking, and not just snivelling "It doesn't mean they are evil. Grow up.", here's your answer.
If I don't like a type of food, I avoid it. If I'm a doctor, and I find that many of my patients have eaten a certain type of food and gotten sick, I would advise them to avoid that food in the future. If the majority of patients that had eaten that food subsequently got sick, I might well "go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again".
You make a point, but it's hardly a fair comparison. Getting "sick" and "not liking something" are rather different. Personal preferences are one thing, side effects are another.
Yes, I understand that real installs what can be considered spyware. I hate it too. But I guess what it boils down to, is I'm just not sure where it's written that Real has a responsiblity to customers who installed free players. If you installed it, you did it of your own free will. Sure it's shady, but it's hardly maliciou
You downloaded that email out of your own free will. Surely it couldn't be considered the virus authors fault that you ran it and it completely messed up your system?...
I think it's fair that people should be able to expect certain qualities from software they download from a software firm. At the VERY least it should be easy to remove it. At least in the past, this hasn't been the case with Real's software.
Getting "sick" and "not liking something" are rather different. Personal preferences are one thing, side effects are another.
I'm not talking about not liking the tray icons or the desktop icons or what have you - I'm talking about real side effects, like broken MP3 playback, app crashes on startup, or system slowdown because of the memory-hogging background tasks. I would equate that sort of thing, in a computer, to a cold or flu in a human being.
I think all the personal angst stems from the fact that most of us grew up in the hacker subculture. Programs that install stuff on the sneak violate an unspoken code of ethics. Vendors that aggressively lock in with proprietary codecs and stuff are A Bad Thing(tm). We are used to going to open forums and *Flame On* writing long diatribes about how much they suxor and why. These are the bad guys. They always have been the bad guys. They are now desperately trying not to be the bad guys. Apple and Real have been battling about online media for ages ! They were the two original players.. quicktime and realplayer.
Glaser acts like this is the first time they have butted heads.. Oh we approached apple, we wanted to make a deal. Bah that was just a show for the media. That is like osama and bush sitting down for tea. This war is in its second decade, and don't you forget it.
But I Digress........So, in conclusion, it is because we like to go onto online forums and talk about evil software that violates hacker ethics.
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on
a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it
ever again? Probably not.
If you don't like Real's business strategy,
DON'T USE IT.
Overall, I agree with your point. However
(always a however, or I wouldn't have
responded)...
Many Slashdotters get to deal with not only the
consequences of their own software, but with
the choices of non-geek family and friends.
I have no problem saying, "I will never make the
mistake of installing another Real product on
my computer". I know better. I realize how
invasively their products behave, the poor
quality of their media formats (until they went
to basically pure MPEG-4 for everything), the
legendarily-pathetic streaming problems (what,
they never heard of "let me buffer the whole
damned thing while I get a snack, before
starting to play"?).
OTOH, every time I visit a friend or relative,
they want me to make Real go away. I ask why
they reinstalled it, and the answer inevitably
either involves "the kids did it" or "the
website told me I had to". So, not having
installed it myself, I still have to
deal with it. That irks me, just a tad.
Incidentally, sometimes even we geeks can make
mistakes. I (presume I) accidentally left a
checkbox ticked for RealOne as part of some
other program, and it took literally hours
to completely get rid of it (A tip, for
"removing" literally any self-protective
Windows program - Burn a Knoppix CD with an
NTFS-write enabled kernel, boot it, mount the
Windows partition in question, and rename the
directory of the offending program).
I will swallow my pride and admit I screwed up
in allowing it to install. But that
sort of irritation has lead to the anti-Real
zealotry you see in Slashdotters today... A
mere oversight during installing a seemingly
unrelated product, and I lost a few hours of
my all-too-rare free time.
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again? Probably not.
You do if you're the one who always has to perform the Heimlich maneuver on whoever chokes on that food. "All of us people get so bent out of shape" because many of us here play sysadmin for friends and family at times (or for ourselves, if younger siblings had used our computers), and fixing computers infected with older versions of RealPlayer was a real bitch. Sure, the new player
I understand the points, but honestly these examples are asinine.
1. They all included paid services. I'm willing to bet a dollar that all of the people who are complaining are doing so about the free version and are not paying customers. I'm pretty confident in that bet, because I seriously doubt any slashdot member will actually admit to having payed for Real software;)
2. They are all too liberal with the side effects that the real player actually has.
If I were a dietician and I didn't think a certain food was good for others, I probably would go on a crusade against it. My friend is a dietician and does exactly this (and I smile as I eat whatever she tells me not to).
I'm a computer engineer, and I spend time daydreaming about how computers could be better, and lamenting about the ways that they're not. Then I do a little work to try to bring them one step closer that goal (however I can).
If a company makes a bad program that's used by many people
The real question is why Real... perceived as a malicious company?
It wasn't long ago that you were promised a "free real player"... but to get it, you had to search out the tiny, virtually hidden little link on not one but several pages in a sequence to finally get to the "free" version that would not expire in several days and demand you pay.
Of course, the non-free (as in beer) version that expired quickly wasn't conspiciously labeled as such in the several places it was displayed... so most people, even knowledgable technical people, were usually tricked into downloading the trial version of the expensive player, having a reasonable believe that they were in fact installing the free one they had been promised.
Many sites that offered videos in Real's format resorted to giving detailed explaination of exactly where to find the free one and how to get past all the attempts to trick you into downloading the expiring trial. What did Real Networks do? They regularly changed the pages, in what appears to any rational observer a deliberate attempt to intentionally hide the truely free version and dupe anyone looking for it into downloading the one that isn't free.
Upon installing either the free or trial versions of Real's player, it wasn't long ago that they would randomly throw popup advertising on the screen. Perhaps there was a way to disable this, but it wasn't obvious.
During the installation process, Real would demand the user to give their email address. The purpose was only to sell these addresses to marketers. The typical install, which is what most users select, would subscribe you to lots of junk. The custom/expert/advanced install would have a list of marketing partners.
Slashdot even had coverage of Real's highly deceptive tactic of using a very long list of opt-in marketing, where the ones that initially appeared in the list were all unselected.... giving the user an appearance that the default was to opt-out. But MANY more appeared below the visible portion and were only seen if the user scrolled down. All those others, not shown without scrolling, where checked by default. That's a pretty sneaky trick.
But it doesn't stop there. It's keep running in the background, even if asked not to. They had a history of sending private info back to their server, even if told not to. They have a history of grabbing file associations when they reasonably shouldn't. The list goes on and on. If there's a sneaky, deceptive tactic to be used in free downloads, Real has done it.
Maybe that's changed now. But they have left a legacy of mistrust that is very well deserved.
Of course, the non-free (as in beer) version that expired quickly wasn't conspiciously labeled as such in the several places it was displayed... so most people, even knowledgable technical people, were usually tricked into downloading the trial version of the expensive player, having a reasonable believe that they were in fact installing the free one they had been promised.
Ok, fair enough. I don't quite remember if it was labeled as a trial or a free product or what. But can you really fault Real for t
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again? Probably not.
If I ate a food that made me sick, and made others sick, with no indication of why this might be so on the packaging, I'd warn others.
Then again, that only shows that your metaphor isn't very good. As I mentioned in another comment, I haven't followed the Real saga closely, but when software companies try to pull dirty tricks on their customers they deserve to be pummeled for it, publicl
The analogy is if you don't LIKE a particular food.
Every single one of the rebuttals has mentioned someone getting sick. That isn't the same thing.
You can barely even call it spyware since you agree to install it in the first place. The point of the analogy is when it comes right down to it, Real has shady business practices, but they are well within thier rights to practice business how they want. This means if you don't like it (and I hope you don't), don't support the products. In other words, Re
"By the time they had diminished from 50 to 8, the other dwarves began
to suspect "Hungry."
-- a Larson cartoon
Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again? Probably not.
If you don't like Real's business strategy, DON'T USE IT. I personally don't like the real player, never have, probably never will. I do, however, use Rhapsody and I think it's a fantastic service for the price. But that's off topic.
The real question is why Real (or any other company for that matter) perceived as a malicious company? They are being cast as villians for having stupid business practices? Last I checked they weren't out forcing you to install the product. If it sucks, it sucks, and that's Real's problem in terms of business strategy. It's not an insult to your person for god's sake.
Yea yea, it's invasive. Yea yea, it's annoying. I get it, and I happen to agree. So I don't use or buy the products that are annoying. I installed, didn't like it and uninstalled. Live and learn.
But but but, how come I can't use it on x platform? Well, if you really want to use it that badly, I suggest you go to real and pitch a business case to them for why they should spend the extra time and money developing for your platform. Just because you use it[the platform], doesn't mean the majority of the target demographic uses it. Son of a bitch, Real is out to make money? LYNCH THEM!
If the product isn't what you want, it means the marketing and development failed. It doesn't mean they are evil. Grow up.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:2, Insightful)
Assuming you are honestly asking, and not just snivelling "It doesn't mean they are evil. Grow up.", here's your answer.
If I don't like a type of food, I avoid it. If I'm a doctor, and I find that many of my patients have eaten a certain type of food and gotten sick, I would advise them to avoid that food in the future. If the majority of patients that had eaten that food subsequently got sick, I might well "go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again".
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
Yes, I understand that real installs what can be considered spyware. I hate it too. But I guess what it boils down to, is I'm just not sure where it's written that Real has a responsiblity to customers who installed free players. If you installed it, you did it of your own free will. Sure it's shady, but it's hardly maliciou
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
Do you feel the same way about viruses?
You downloaded that email out of your own free will. Surely it couldn't be considered the virus authors fault that you ran it and it completely messed up your system?...
I think it's fair that people should be able to expect certain qualities from software they download from a software firm. At the VERY least it should be easy to remove it. At least in the past, this hasn't been the case with Real's software.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1, Informative)
I'm not talking about not liking the tray icons or the desktop icons or what have you - I'm talking about real side effects, like broken MP3 playback, app crashes on startup, or system slowdown because of the memory-hogging background tasks. I would equate that sort of thing, in a computer, to a cold or flu in a human being.
Sure it's shady, but it's hardly malicious.
"Evil" isn
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:4, Interesting)
These are the bad guys. They always have been the bad guys. They are now desperately trying not to be the bad guys. Apple and Real have been battling about online media for ages ! They were the two original players
Glaser acts like this is the first time they have butted heads.. Oh we approached apple, we wanted to make a deal. Bah that was just a show for the media. That is like osama and bush sitting down for tea. This war is in its second decade, and don't you forget it.
But I Digress........So, in conclusion, it is because we like to go onto online forums and talk about evil software that violates hacker ethics.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't like Real's business strategy, DON'T USE IT.
Overall, I agree with your point. However (always a however, or I wouldn't have responded)...
Many Slashdotters get to deal with not only the consequences of their own software, but with the choices of non-geek family and friends.
I have no problem saying, "I will never make the mistake of installing another Real product on my computer". I know better. I realize how invasively their products behave, the poor quality of their media formats (until they went to basically pure MPEG-4 for everything), the legendarily-pathetic streaming problems (what, they never heard of "let me buffer the whole damned thing while I get a snack, before starting to play"?).
OTOH, every time I visit a friend or relative, they want me to make Real go away. I ask why they reinstalled it, and the answer inevitably either involves "the kids did it" or "the website told me I had to". So, not having installed it myself, I still have to deal with it. That irks me, just a tad.
Incidentally, sometimes even we geeks can make mistakes. I (presume I) accidentally left a checkbox ticked for RealOne as part of some other program, and it took literally hours to completely get rid of it (A tip, for "removing" literally any self-protective Windows program - Burn a Knoppix CD with an NTFS-write enabled kernel, boot it, mount the Windows partition in question, and rename the directory of the offending program).
I will swallow my pride and admit I screwed up in allowing it to install. But that sort of irritation has lead to the anti-Real zealotry you see in Slashdotters today... A mere oversight during installing a seemingly unrelated product, and I lost a few hours of my all-too-rare free time.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
If you don't like a type of food, do you go on a personal crusade to ensure no one ever eats it ever again? Probably not.
You do if you're the one who always has to perform the Heimlich maneuver on whoever chokes on that food. "All of us people get so bent out of shape" because many of us here play sysadmin for friends and family at times (or for ourselves, if younger siblings had used our computers), and fixing computers infected with older versions of RealPlayer was a real bitch. Sure, the new player
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
I understand the points, but honestly these examples are asinine.
1. They all included paid services. I'm willing to bet a dollar that all of the people who are complaining are doing so about the free version and are not paying customers. I'm pretty confident in that bet, because I seriously doubt any slashdot member will actually admit to having payed for Real software ;)
2. They are all too liberal with the side effects that the real player actually has.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
I'm a computer engineer, and I spend time daydreaming about how computers could be better, and lamenting about the ways that they're not. Then I do a little work to try to bring them one step closer that goal (however I can).
If a company makes a bad program that's used by many people
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:4, Insightful)
It wasn't long ago that you were promised a "free real player"... but to get it, you had to search out the tiny, virtually hidden little link on not one but several pages in a sequence to finally get to the "free" version that would not expire in several days and demand you pay.
Of course, the non-free (as in beer) version that expired quickly wasn't conspiciously labeled as such in the several places it was displayed... so most people, even knowledgable technical people, were usually tricked into downloading the trial version of the expensive player, having a reasonable believe that they were in fact installing the free one they had been promised.
Many sites that offered videos in Real's format resorted to giving detailed explaination of exactly where to find the free one and how to get past all the attempts to trick you into downloading the expiring trial. What did Real Networks do? They regularly changed the pages, in what appears to any rational observer a deliberate attempt to intentionally hide the truely free version and dupe anyone looking for it into downloading the one that isn't free.
Upon installing either the free or trial versions of Real's player, it wasn't long ago that they would randomly throw popup advertising on the screen. Perhaps there was a way to disable this, but it wasn't obvious.
During the installation process, Real would demand the user to give their email address. The purpose was only to sell these addresses to marketers. The typical install, which is what most users select, would subscribe you to lots of junk. The custom/expert/advanced install would have a list of marketing partners.
Slashdot even had coverage of Real's highly deceptive tactic of using a very long list of opt-in marketing, where the ones that initially appeared in the list were all unselected.... giving the user an appearance that the default was to opt-out. But MANY more appeared below the visible portion and were only seen if the user scrolled down. All those others, not shown without scrolling, where checked by default. That's a pretty sneaky trick.
But it doesn't stop there. It's keep running in the background, even if asked not to. They had a history of sending private info back to their server, even if told not to. They have a history of grabbing file associations when they reasonably shouldn't. The list goes on and on. If there's a sneaky, deceptive tactic to be used in free downloads, Real has done it.
Maybe that's changed now. But they have left a legacy of mistrust that is very well deserved.
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:2)
If I ate a food that made me sick, and made others sick, with no indication of why this might be so on the packaging, I'd warn others.
Then again, that only shows that your metaphor isn't very good. As I mentioned in another comment, I haven't followed the Real saga closely, but when software companies try to pull dirty tricks on their customers they deserve to be pummeled for it, publicl
Re:Whats with all the personal angst? (Score:1)
Every single one of the rebuttals has mentioned someone getting sick. That isn't the same thing.
You can barely even call it spyware since you agree to install it in the first place. The point of the analogy is when it comes right down to it, Real has shady business practices, but they are well within thier rights to practice business how they want. This means if you don't like it (and I hope you don't), don't support the products. In other words, Re