Messenger Plus! and download.com - Printable Version
-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: Messenger Plus! for Live Messenger (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+---- Forum: WLM Plus! General (/forumdisplay.php?fid=23)
+----- Thread: Messenger Plus! and download.com (/showthread.php?tid=51515)
Messenger Plus! and download.com by Weyzza on 10-07-2005 at 11:15 PM
It's been a while since Messenger Plus! was removed from download.com's database. It sure was disappointing.
But, today, I found out that download.com isn't that strict in practicing their policy.
Check this software out: Sun CD/DVD Burner 2.0.
The publisher clearly states that it contains new.net (dunno if that is a spyware/adware; it seems to be like an adware).
download.com even reviewed this software and acknowledged the hassle that the third-party program can make.
quote:Obviously, the third-party program is not optional.
Originally stated in 'ere
...as long as you don't mind the third-party software.[...] However, we should note you'll have to accept a fairly innocuous third-party app to install this program; this may turn some users off.
So, isn't it the time to consider Plus! submission to download.com?
Microsoft has updated the MSAS definition file; Patchou has redesigned the installer, plus the fact that the sponsor has always been and, I think, will always be optional.
What do you guys think?
Do we need another petition?
Edit:
I was thinking about the idea, and I reached a conclusion that the only one who will make the petition, if we are going to have one, is Patchou, just like he did for petition to Microsoft.
He is the creator of Plus!.
I somehow believe that, if the petition is made by someone or some people other than Patchou, we will never make it.
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by guanako on 10-08-2005 at 12:31 AM
they must have a reason to have it there, its got a good rating just wait till more ppl uses it and realises wat it really is about, then it migth get remove 
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Chestah on 10-08-2005 at 01:43 AM
I say we take a crack at it
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Supersonicdarky on 10-08-2005 at 01:45 AM
first we should try to add without petition, if they decline start petition 
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by guanako on 10-08-2005 at 01:46 AM
go for it im in 
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Hank on 10-08-2005 at 04:26 AM
doesnt AOL own the download.com domain etc now?
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by matty on 10-08-2005 at 06:53 AM
quote:MarkMonitor.com - The Leader in Corporate Domain Management
Originally posted by Animal
doesnt AOL own the download.com domain etc now?
----------------------------------------------------------
For Global Domain Consolidation, Research & Intelligence,
and Enterprise DNS, go to: www.markmonitor.com
----------------------------------------------------------
The Data in MarkMonitor.com's WHOIS database is provided by MarkMonitor.com
for information purposes, and to assist persons in obtaining information
about or related to a domain name registration record. MarkMonitor.com
does not guarantee its accuracy. By submitting a WHOIS query, you agree
that you will use this Data only for lawful purposes and that, under no
circumstances will you use this Data to: (1) allow, enable, or otherwise
support the transmission of mass unsolicited, commercial advertising or
solicitations via e-mail (spam); or (2) enable high volume, automated,
electronic processes that apply to MarkMonitor.com (or its systems).
MarkMonitor.com reserves the right to modify these terms at any time.
By submitting this query, you agree to abide by this policy.
Registrant:
CNET Networks, Inc
(DOM-311578)
235 Second Street
San Francisco
CA
94105
US
Domain Name: download.com
Registrar Name: Markmonitor.com
Registrar Whois: whois.markmonitor.com
Registrar Homepage: http://www.markmonitor.com
Administrative Contact:
Host Master
(NIC-1500677)
CNET Networks, Inc
235 Second Street
San Francisco
CA
94105
US
hostmaster@cnet.com
+1.4153442000
Fax- +1.4153442000
Technical Contact, Zone Contact:
Host Master
(NIC-1500677)
CNET Networks, Inc
235 Second Street
San Francisco
CA
94105
US
hostmaster@cnet.com
+1.4153442000
Fax- +1.4153442000
Created on..............: 1996-Feb-24.
Expires on..............: 2013-Feb-25.
Record last updated on..: 2005-Jul-25 21:57:27.
Domain servers in listed order:
NS.CNET.COM
NS2.CNET.COM
NS3.CNET.COM
MarkMonitor.com - The Leader in Corporate Domain Management
----------------------------------------------------------
For Global Domain Consolidation, Research & Intelligence,
and Enterprise DNS, go to: www.markmonitor.com
----------------------------------------------------------
By the looks of this whois report I would say no.
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by -rafy- on 10-08-2005 at 09:21 AM
A petition will not work in this case.
It is completely different from the Microsoft issue.
Download.com has a new policy in place which they have every right to have. (the zero-tolerance policy)
Microsoft incorrectly recognised plus as spyware. Two completely different issues.
Its not worth persuing this really. Download.com can enforce whatever they damn like. They will not accept plus! as that would undermine their entire policy on the issue.
Besides, i doubt we need it on there anyway.
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Hank on 10-08-2005 at 09:58 AM
aww okz thanx Matty. ..i thought AOL bought CNET out a year or so ago
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by sena on 10-08-2005 at 11:04 AM
No I don't think so, I think that CNet was it's own company and still is...
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Weyzza on 10-08-2005 at 02:31 PM
quote:I know that this is kinda different compared to the MSAS issue, but if Plus! can be submitted to download.com, more people will be using Plus!.
Originally posted by -rafy-
A petition will not work in this case.
It is completely different from the Microsoft issue.
Download.com has a new policy in place which they have every right to have. (the zero-tolerance policy)
Microsoft incorrectly recognised plus as spyware. Two completely different issues.
Its not worth persuing this really. Download.com can enforce whatever they damn like. They will not accept plus! as that would undermine their entire policy on the issue.
Besides, i doubt we need it on there anyway.
I can see that most newbies and prolly some professional will go to download.com if they are looking for a software.
If download.com is applying the zero tolerance policy, why then is Sun CD/DVD Burner in the software list?
That means they are not consistent in their own policy.
You know what, forget about it...
I just think that it is good to have Plus! in download.com's database, but Plus! has already been accepted widely with millions of downloads. So, maybe that's fine.
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by absorbation on 10-08-2005 at 02:33 PM
If you remember download.com rea-dded messenger plus! under a different creators name it then was removed a few days later
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by Impheatus on 10-08-2005 at 02:33 PM
Let's wait for Patchou to answer to this thread, because he once said that he didn't care abour being removed from download.com since he was not getting enough downloads from this site.
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by L. Coyote on 10-08-2005 at 02:52 PM
quote:That was someone else, I believe. And it wasn't MsgPlus!.... I think it was the Advanced Messenger Plus (something else).
Originally posted by Absorbation
If you remember download.com rea-dded messenger plus! under a different creators name it then was removed a few days later
Anyway, it's Patchou, and he only the one that has the power to add the program on DL.com (regarding it is accepted by the mods of that site).
However, I don't see the positive impact in that. Many people will rate it low because they can't or couldn't read the sponsor agreement screen, and it will give a bad idea to new potential users...
Then there'll be fights about "user xxx doesn't know what he's talking about", etc.
I think it's good with the msgplus.net/.com sites and mouth to mouth distribution...
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by WDZ on 10-09-2005 at 04:30 AM
quote:No, check this thread: Plus! back on Download.com
Originally posted by Leo
That was someone else, I believe. And it wasn't MsgPlus!.... I think it was the Advanced Messenger Plus (something else).
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by albert on 10-09-2005 at 05:01 AM
I think this is like a school situation where you're friend got a better mark than you, just because the teacher forgot to mark a mistake..
Telling DL.com that they got othes spyware/adware or wte it rlly is, will probably (not to say surely) not get msgplus! back, only get the other software off..
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by L. Coyote on 10-09-2005 at 12:44 PM
quote:Oh right, still... There's a perfect example of how people will start a comments fight about it...
Originally posted by WDZ
No, check this thread: Plus! back on Download.com
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by CookieRevised on 10-09-2005 at 01:19 PM
If you got problems with it, then do as lp15 suggested. Tell Download.com that there is another "potential dangerous" download on their servers...
I agree with Leo here:
quote:Plus doesn't need Download.com and certainly doesn't need the bad reps from people who can't read...
Originally posted by Leo
Anyway, it's Patchou, and he only the one that has the power to add the program on DL.com (regarding it is accepted by the mods of that site).
However, I don't see the positive impact in that. Many people will rate it low because they can't or couldn't read the sponsor agreement screen, and it will give a bad idea to new potential users...
Then there'll be fights about "user xxx doesn't know what he's talking about", etc.
I think it's good with the msgplus.net/.com sites and mouth to mouth distribution...
RE: Messenger Plus! and download.com by zaidgs on 10-09-2005 at 10:53 PM
shit download.com!! i knew i cannot trust all content on tht site to be 100% spyware free!! i wonder why they havent banned tht one yet! their zero-tolerance policy is so debatable......