| Author |
Message |
Scar
Lifeless Person
Joined: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 6111
Location: Chuck Norris's nightmares.
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 23, 2008 3:56 am Post subject: Firefox boss slams Apple for trying to sneak Safari onto Win |
 |
|
| Quote: | Mozilla’s CEO blasted Apple for distributing its Safari browser via the Apple Software Update service on Windows that is used by millions of iTunes users.
In a blog posted today, John Lilly, the chief executive of Mozilla, claimed the distribution practice is unethical because it allegedly tricks users into downloading not only their regular iTunes and Quicktime updates but also a brand new web browser — without the user’s consent.
As shown in the blog, the dialog box asks users to check off the software they want installed — two boxes, one showing iTunes and QuickTime together, and the other displaying Safari, and at the bottom an option of installing the two items or quitting. The two boxes — including Safari, the Windows version of the default browser in Apple’s MacOSX — are checked by default when the dialog box pops up.
“What Apple is doing now with their Apple Software Update on Windows is wrong. It undermines the trust relationship great companies have with their customers, and that’s bad — not just for Apple, but for the security of the whole Web,” claimed the CEO, whose company’s open source Firefox browser is No. 2 on Windows. “As a software maker we promise to do our very best to keep users safe and will provide the quickest updates possible, with absolutely no other agenda …. Apple has made it incredibly easy — the default, even — for users to install ride along software (Safari) that they didn’t ask for, and maybe didn’t want. This is wrong, and borders on malware distribution practices.”
Some agreed strongly with Lilly’s contention, some disagreed vehemently. The blog has caused a bit of a controversy.
“If Microsoft did the identical action, install some non-user-selected software using their software update channel, there would be cacophony across the Internet,” wrote one sympathetic reader.
Others read the blog as a defensive response to Apple’s Safari 3.1 for Windows, which was released on Apple’s update site for Windows yesterday.
“Wow. You Windows users are not only paranoid, but so anti-Apple that your comments are hysterical,” chimed one respondent.
“Much to do about nothing! The problem here is clear: Mozilla’s CEO is intimidated by the competition,” added yet another writer.
Lilly claimed in his blog that his statements are not a criticism of Safari as a web browser and that he had no problem with a company using its installed software as a channel for other software. His concern is that many end users may not realize that they are downloading an entirely new web browser with their regular iTunes updates.
Still others say Lilly doesn’t give end users enough credit.
“This is the biggest non-isue yet - and anyone using a computer that can’t use that screen and make a good decision should go back to a typewriter,” another blogger said.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=2157
|
i do think this is very wrong, but apple has been doing this for years. A year or so ago quicktimes had apple update pop up telling me that i needed to update to the new version of quicktime. What was the option that was automatically checked: Quicktime plus itunes". So if i simply clicked update as we all usually do it would have installed extra crap on my pc that i didn't want and dont need to use.
Turns out that I did have the latest version of quicktime, it just wanted me to use their media player.
People usually do not check what the program wants them to update. I mean if you open up quicktime, i tunes etc and it pops up saying you need to update it you will usually agree and click install updates, because after all updates are to fix bugs and other errors in your programs nad also improve overall quality and production values. So people just agree.
For additional softwares to be automatically checked is very wrong and sinister in my opinion. For one, it's not an update. it's a whole new software. so it avoids the entire purpose of even having an update program.
People who compare this to Microsoft and windows are wrong also.
My windows update NEVER pops up and automatically has additional software for me to install. Never. People who say this must have their settings changed, because it isn't on by default. I know you can agree in the windows update settings to get these new programs and such, but it isnt on by default. On my Vista the addition software not only is not checked, the expandable group isnt even expandable and is hard to find sometimes also. So its wrong to say Microsoft does the same thing.
If Microsoft did this they would be in court right now fighting the cases and such.
I think this is a very bad thing for apple. They have been doing it for years, as i said from my personal experience, but now they are messing with a very serious issue right now which is the second browser war, and people are calling them out on it.
_________________
http://www.damnidunno.com | http://www.mjhq.net | http://www.rebx.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Jacky
SolidRaven is a noob.
Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Posts: 3739
Location: Earth Password: dd4b21e Sex: Male
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 6:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
Microsoft is already facing a lawsuit regarding this.
Microsoft is being accused of bringing popularity of other Microsoft products (such as Windows Media Player) by tying it their operating systems. That's the reason why they released Windows XP without Windows Media Player, because of a lawsuit which they lost.
And for Apple, this is also not something right to do. It's like you are buying a meal and this shop is trying to advertise their new chili which they produce. They add the chili without asking if you want it in your food or not, and you happen to be allergic to spicy stuff. Is this considered right?
What would be right is to provide an option, in this case the option to install Safari or not, and through honest methods and not trying to play around words and making the user install it unknowingly.
_________________
Jacky
Create a story, 1 word per post! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Rashy
Lifeless Person
Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 632
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jacky: You do have the option of not installing Safari, its just the updater (or at least mine, it seems others aren't having this problem) will annoy you until you do install it.
To relate it into your analogy, it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter repeatedly asks you to try their chili, free of charge, even though you turned it down before.
_________________
Rashy! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
LP-SolidRaven
Dictator of the Dump
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 7015
Location: The cheese is made out of moon
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rashy wrote: | Jacky: You do have the option of not installing Safari, its just the updater (or at least mine, it seems others aren't having this problem) will annoy you until you do install it.
To relate it into your analogy, it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter repeatedly asks you to try their chili, free of charge, even though you turned it down before. |
Your analogy is flawed this time. The right one would be: "it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter asks you if you want a regular dish with nothing extra. But he gives chilli without you knowing."
_________________
| Quote: |
<bart416> I just realized something
<bart416> we celebrate the fact that this piece of rock made one rotation around a glowing ball of plasma that is kept together due to its own gravity well
<njsg> HAPPY NEW YEAR
<Easter> ^^
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
exsanguination
Forum Regular
Joined: 27 Apr 2005
Posts: 412
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SolidRaven wrote: | | Rashy wrote: | Jacky: You do have the option of not installing Safari, its just the updater (or at least mine, it seems others aren't having this problem) will annoy you until you do install it.
To relate it into your analogy, it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter repeatedly asks you to try their chili, free of charge, even though you turned it down before. |
Your analogy is flawed this time. The right one would be: "it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter asks you if you want a regular dish with nothing extra. But he gives chilli without you knowing." |
No, the software isn't installed automatically, its just selected to be installed by default. You still have to agree and click install to get the software.
So to continue the silly analogy it would be like the waiter bringing out chilli with your order and asking you if you want it. When you agree, ONLY then the chilli will be added.
I agree its exploiting carelessness, but people need to read and stop needlessly clicking yes all the time. The only issue I have is that it checks software you don't already have installed on your machine by default. THAT is the only issue and I still think its blown out of proportion but that is because I'm not one to click 'next next next yes "install keylogger with this software?" yes finish' |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Scar
Lifeless Person
Joined: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 6111
Location: Chuck Norris's nightmares.
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2008 9:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| exsanguination wrote: | | SolidRaven wrote: | | Rashy wrote: | Jacky: You do have the option of not installing Safari, its just the updater (or at least mine, it seems others aren't having this problem) will annoy you until you do install it.
To relate it into your analogy, it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter repeatedly asks you to try their chili, free of charge, even though you turned it down before. |
Your analogy is flawed this time. The right one would be: "it would be like sitting down to eat in a restaurant and a waiter asks you if you want a regular dish with nothing extra. But he gives chilli without you knowing." |
No, the software isn't installed automatically, its just selected to be installed by default. You still have to agree and click install to get the software.
So to continue the silly analogy it would be like the waiter bringing out chilli with your order and asking you if you want it. When you agree, ONLY then the chilli will be added.
I agree its exploiting carelessness, but people need to read and stop needlessly clicking yes all the time. The only issue I have is that it checks software you don't already have installed on your machine by default. THAT is the only issue and I still think its blown out of proportion but that is because I'm not one to click 'next next next yes "install keylogger with this software?" yes finish' |
Actually the chili would already be added, you'd just have to eat it. as in the option is already added you just have to install it.
And usually with updates people click install updates hence the word update means it updates your software with the latest patch/version.
Doesn't matter how much its blown anywhere, it's still wrong and Microsoft gets sued for this sort of thing. Apple shouldn't be treated any better.
_________________
http://www.damnidunno.com | http://www.mjhq.net | http://www.rebx.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
LP-SolidRaven
Dictator of the Dump
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 7015
Location: The cheese is made out of moon
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| exsanguination wrote: |
No, the software isn't installed automatically, its just selected to be installed by default. You still have to agree and click install to get the software.
|
Who still really reads setup windows these days? I know many people that just move their mouse over next and keep clicking until the program is installed.
| Quote: | | So to continue the silly analogy it would be like the waiter bringing out chilli with your order and asking you if you want it. When you agree, ONLY then the chilli will be added. |
It's more like the chilli will be removed if you ask to remove it...
| Quote: | | I agree its exploiting carelessness, but people need to read and stop needlessly clicking yes all the time. The only issue I have is that it checks software you don't already have installed on your machine by default. THAT is the only issue and I still think its blown out of proportion but that is because I'm not one to click 'next next next yes "install keylogger with this software?" yes finish' |
Apple pretty much always does what microsoft got sued for. It becomes harder and harder every release to find a stand alone quicktime. I don't want iTunes or Safari with it...
_________________
| Quote: |
<bart416> I just realized something
<bart416> we celebrate the fact that this piece of rock made one rotation around a glowing ball of plasma that is kept together due to its own gravity well
<njsg> HAPPY NEW YEAR
<Easter> ^^
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
ClickFanatic
Est. 2005
Joined: 18 Jan 2005
Posts: 3857
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's opt-out versus opt-in, and I opt for opt-in.
I don't mind if a new product was offered to me via an update, but it should not be selected by default. Let me choose it if I want it.
It's not the biggest issue in the digital world, but a consumer expects to receive only the relevant updates. So I find it very understandable that people (including me) find Apple's trick unethical.
On a side note, I think this Apple-related quote applies quite well here: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate"
_________________
Captain Jell-O Buster from the Future
[img]http://feeds.feedburner.com/sparepencil.1.gif[/img] |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Jacky
SolidRaven is a noob.
Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Posts: 3739
Location: Earth Password: dd4b21e Sex: Male
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ClickFanatic wrote: | It's opt-out versus opt-in, and I opt for opt-in.
I don't mind if a new product was offered to me via an update, but it should not be selected by default. Let me choose it if I want it.
It's not the biggest issue in the digital world, but a consumer expects to receive only the relevant updates. So I find it very understandable that people (including me) find Apple's trick unethical.
On a side note, I think this Apple-related quote applies quite well here: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate" |
Same for me. I don't like irrelevant updates to be selected for me by default.
I have Automatic Updates turned on for Windows XP. If it installs SP3 without me knowing I would definitely hate Microsoft.
The Internet Explorer 7 was also selected by default (I am still running IE6), but it opened up a window and prompted me if I wanted it or not. That's still okay for me, but I would still prefer that they ask me beforehand, and only download the updates that are relevant, such as fixing some exploits in Windows XP instead of offering new software in place of older, or offer new software which I don't have.
_________________
Jacky
Create a story, 1 word per post! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Scar
Lifeless Person
Joined: 15 Dec 2004
Posts: 6111
Location: Chuck Norris's nightmares.
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jacky wrote: | | ClickFanatic wrote: | It's opt-out versus opt-in, and I opt for opt-in.
I don't mind if a new product was offered to me via an update, but it should not be selected by default. Let me choose it if I want it.
It's not the biggest issue in the digital world, but a consumer expects to receive only the relevant updates. So I find it very understandable that people (including me) find Apple's trick unethical.
On a side note, I think this Apple-related quote applies quite well here: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate" |
Same for me. I don't like irrelevant updates to be selected for me by default.
I have Automatic Updates turned on for Windows XP. If it installs SP3 without me knowing I would definitely hate Microsoft.
The Internet Explorer 7 was also selected by default (I am still running IE6), but it opened up a window and prompted me if I wanted it or not. That's still okay for me, but I would still prefer that they ask me beforehand, and only download the updates that are relevant, such as fixing some exploits in Windows XP instead of offering new software in place of older, or offer new software which I don't have. |
I can understand why IE 7 would be selected by default. IE 6 is very dangerous and it was actually installing an update to a program that you already have installed. So i can totally understand that. Some might not want that, but then they can also disable those types of updates and only get the serious security ones. But then they could argue that ie7 is for that purpose.
_________________
http://www.damnidunno.com | http://www.mjhq.net | http://www.rebx.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Jacky
SolidRaven is a noob.
Joined: 01 Jan 2005
Posts: 3739
Location: Earth Password: dd4b21e Sex: Male
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scar wrote: | | Jacky wrote: | | ClickFanatic wrote: | It's opt-out versus opt-in, and I opt for opt-in.
I don't mind if a new product was offered to me via an update, but it should not be selected by default. Let me choose it if I want it.
It's not the biggest issue in the digital world, but a consumer expects to receive only the relevant updates. So I find it very understandable that people (including me) find Apple's trick unethical.
On a side note, I think this Apple-related quote applies quite well here: "The serpent deceived me, and I ate" |
Same for me. I don't like irrelevant updates to be selected for me by default.
I have Automatic Updates turned on for Windows XP. If it installs SP3 without me knowing I would definitely hate Microsoft.
The Internet Explorer 7 was also selected by default (I am still running IE6), but it opened up a window and prompted me if I wanted it or not. That's still okay for me, but I would still prefer that they ask me beforehand, and only download the updates that are relevant, such as fixing some exploits in Windows XP instead of offering new software in place of older, or offer new software which I don't have. |
I can understand why IE 7 would be selected by default. IE 6 is very dangerous and it was actually installing an update to a program that you already have installed. So i can totally understand that. Some might not want that, but then they can also disable those types of updates and only get the serious security ones. But then they could argue that ie7 is for that purpose. |
I have SP2 pre-installed when I purchased this laptop. You can consider my IE6 safer than the IE6 with no serivce pack installed.
And I understand the agony of having an unsecure IE6, because my first computer came with Windows XP with no service pack installed. Back then as an Internet greenhorn, like all other users, I was also using IE6. Popups would come like missiles shooting a plane down, and viruses and trojan horses would come as if there's no tomorrow.
_________________
Jacky
Create a story, 1 word per post! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
Desbrina
Jadeite
Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 2958
Location: Earth
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
|
|
Forum FAQs 
Knowledge Base 
Memberlist 
Usergroups 
Hosting
Register
Donate 
Profile 
Log in 
