quote:
Originally posted by jegar
Sorry dude this is the official statement from Microsoft:
quote:
"Cyril Paciullo was awarded with MVP status this year on the basis of his technical expertise and strong community contribution. However, his active MVP Award status was revoked as soon as the extent of the connection between his application and spyware was made apparent to the MVP Program."
So all of a sudden it is spyware? That proofs to me enough about the exact reason why it was revoked and it is indeed exactly like people have said: because of some biased security MVPs who can't see beyond their eyeflaps and instead of investigating stuff they generalize, brand everything and everyone.
"the extent of the connection between his application and spyware"????? lol
This does sound seriously like a literal thing which one of those guys would say, but that is my opinion. Of course if a few security MVPs shout to MS it is spyware, MS will take action...
And unfortunatly (but logically), MS doesn't seem to investigate themselfs but blindly trust upon its MVPs. If the above quote is indeed the true reason then either MS is very hypocritical in their findings (as I said before, MS and Patchou still have a very good relationship and Patchou was invited more than once to RedMond to talk bussiness etc), or its findings are literally what those security MVPs has said, which means the knowledge level of those security MVPs is very low (in this case) and it proofs how they do not investigate stuff but simply shout and generalize.
MVPs should know the stuff they're talking about and MS also expects that they do not base their findings on arguments of a few others or base their stuff on 'google searches', but actually investigate stuff for themselfs.
If people, willingly or not, can't make or know the difference between adware and spyware, I question their knowledge level on this subject.
Unless they do know the difference but claim or want that everything is considered spyware in a 'let's-safe-the-world' kind of way, and as such they should start complaining to MS about MS's own products to begin with, or start complaining to google or any search engine for that matter. Heck even every page which stores info. Of course, they wont, as it is MS which has given them that very same reward.
Or unless they do know the difference but conveniently call it spyware as that is a nice way to put fear in the unexperienced user and let them use those anti-whatever programs instead. Marketing? To let the user use product x over product y (without mentioning anything about the product's accuracy)?
---------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by (V)oribundenVampir
All the way back, LEE123 is "sort of right". Giving an award to someone that "indirectly pushes" (according to critics, or not) spyware to your computer is some kind of mistreating for the novice users who just clicked "YES"/"I ACCEPT" when installing MP.
quote:
Originally posted by coolvi
That piece of "spyware" and the nagging screen are possibly the most controversial parts of this great program.
...
Try to phrase it more friendly--I mean, the inclusion of spyware has already given the software a negative tint--
without commenting on the other stuff said (which I partially agree upon): it is not spyware...
When talking about the sponsor, call it with its proper definition. Constantly calling it spyware is one of the causes of all the trouble here.
Even calling it malware would be more correct as that can be somewhat seen as a general term for adware, spyware, virusses, etc... But spyware is certainly something different than adware!
/ 
