Slashdot Mirror
AOL 9.0 Called Badware
An anonymous reader writes "The bad news at AOL keeps coming. First they get in trouble for releasing search data on more than half a million customers, then it gives away security software with a nasty EULA, now its free client software is accused of acting like badware according to Stopbadware.org, the Google-funded rating group."
So, Google technically owns like 5% of AOL, and funds stopbadware.org. So this is sort of like Sony vs. Sony, isn't it? Not directly relevant, but interesting as it shows how widespread these big Internet companies are, and how many pies they have their fingers in.
That sounds like a term a 5 year old would come up with.
Does this mean people actually believed that old versions of AOL were good? From what I can recall AOL has never been good. Perhaps it didn't act with malicious purpose, but it has, in my opinion, never been good and I certainly recall several occasions in my previous support job where it ended up being the cause of problems with totally unrelated software. My apologies to any AOL supporters out there, but this is looking like the end for AOL.
To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion...
Big Internet company claims competitor's product is bad bad bad.
I'm shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
Global warming is a cube.
When you are in a hole, stop digging.
The suite is also criticized for engaging in "deceptive installation" and faulted because some components fail to uninstall.
This is just ridiculous. Why are there so many programs that refuse to uninstall or leave pieces of themselves lying around? How hard can it be for the "uninstall" function to actually work? Worse, do I really need several dialog boxes to get rid of something? I can always install it again. It's not like I'm wiping my hard drive.
Make love, not reality television.
...I'm the guy with the coasters.
Seriously, none of the free AOL coasters that I've ever received in the mail have ever done anything remotely 'bad'. Unless you consider sticking to the bottom of a cold glass 'bad'.
I've been waiting for one of the new versions to prevent that sort of thing, though. That is certainly a necessary upgrade - maybe version 15?
AOL 9.0 Security Edition was released 11/18/04. This is relevant for today how? Everything in retrospect is bad for you.
From the summary: "...its free client software is accused of acting like badware..."
This is news? Everyone I know has been saying that for *years* about AOL and their software. It tries to take over your system, has odd compatability problems, is extremely difficult to remove, and bombards you with ads. And that's when you *pay* for it!
dragonhawk@iname.microsoft.com
I do not like Microsoft. Remove them from my email address.
I wonder what the "Google Toolbar" rates...
The AOL software is down right angelic compared to the Jessica Simpson Screensaver!
On the same token, AOL is probably ready to go, but they will remain till a service is presented that can offer the same sort of service to the same people, but be much better too. Even more important though, is the ability to convince AOL users that is not only smart to switch, but easy and painless at the same time. AOL users are, typically, some of the newer users of the internet, so that needs to be kept in mind for anyone looking to knock the big guy off.
Lastly, I would not count AOL out just yet. While another service may come along to challenge them, it may only to serve as a catalyst for change within AOL. This would be a good thing overall, but it does suck that we have to wait or a company to be threatened in order or them to innovate.
Invexi - a Phoenix, AZ based web design and web development company.
Between not letting you cancel (even post mortum) and having "bad"ware... the only thing left for them to do is start including dell batteries with their CDs
AOL has been badware since its inception. Even back in the day with version 3.0, why the hell did we need an entire goddamn program just to establish a dial up connection?
Check out the cave on the east side of lake Hylia. Strange and wonderful things live in it.
Badware, badware What'cha gonna do? What'cha gonna do when they deinstall you? Badware, badware What'cha gonna do? What'cha gonna do when they deinstall you?
Robert Oschler - RobotsRule.com
Spyware has a conotation of being, you know, about _spying_ on the user. Malware implies some malicious intent. Etc. That's stuff which not only doesn't cover all the crap out there (e.g., yes, how about stuff that keeps nagging me after I thought I uninstalled it?), but also is attackable -- and indeed attacked -- in courts on technicality grounds. You get people like Claria/Gator sending legal nastygrams around just because they're prepared to argue in court about some technicality in that classification.
"Badware", while maybe it does sound like a kindergarten word, tends to convey the broader meaning and not get bogged in such lexical arguments. It doesn't imply malicious _intent_ or have to fit any definition of spying or whatever else these fucktards argue in court. It's just "bad".
And, frankly, as an end-user I don't care why or with what intent it was written like that. E.g., if a toolbar or anti-virus is a nightmare to uninstall and leaves components running after I uninstalled it, it's "bad". I don't care if it's like that by malice or if Hanlon's Razor applies. ("Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.") It's just "bad" and they better clean up their act.
To give a personal example, I had an experience like that with one of those MacAffee all-in-one security packages. An older version, but annoying anyway. Among the many problems it had, picture this: so when installing I installed it on D:, to free space on C:. But the first update installed itself in the default directory in C: anyway. But here's the stupid part: it also let the original version from D: running at the same time, so I had two anti-viruses running at the same time, slowing my machine to a crawl. So I uninstall it. Ok, it uninstalled the newly installed one from C:, but left the old one still installed and still running. Only this time without an uninstall, so I had to manually edit the registry and remove files to get rid of it.
I'm sure that Hanlon's Razor fully applies there. It was no malice, there was no intention to spy, it's just written by the cheapest incompetent monkeys. But it's "bad" anyway. So "Badware" seems to fit that just nicely.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
After all, it is often computers owned by people like the average Joe Schmoe which get compromised and are used to send spam or propagate worms.
Let's talk about Joe Schmoe for a second here. Joe Schmoe is probably a decent guy, and not necessarily dumb. It's just that he has a job, bills to pay, hobbies, and with any luck, a wife/girlfriend, and maybe kids. He thinks of his computer as he thinks of his washing machine. He buys it at a big box store, spends an hour or so setting it up, and then he uses it as a tool. When it breaks, he calls Geek Squad or the smart nerdy kid down the street, just like if the washing machine breaks, he calls the repair guy from Sears.
He doesn't look at a PC as a car, he thinks of it as a washing machine. We need to educate him about how to use it safely (SP2, patches, and AV for starters), and acting all high-and-mighty about it gets you nowhere.
It's not Badware, it's just drawn that way?
Large object in the center of the Solar System called Hotthing.
...the worst tech product of all time
this is called full disclosure. deal with it. Lenovo and Sun also sponsor StopBadware.org, big deal. Whether or not google have alternate reasons for getting behind a push like this they have a history of philanthropic work, I am not surprised to find them involved.
Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
This in no way benefits Google. It is not the same way that MS funds FUD to help itself. The group's mission has no hidden agenda. It is not trying to make a profit by putting down a different group. It is simply pointing out bad software.
Though, I am trying to figure out how the H#$l you got upgraded. I would guess that at least one of the mods is from a FUDster. In addition, your mod ups point out the changing nature of slashdot. All in all, I am guessing that we have MAJOR artificial turfing going on here.
My god, you're a moron.
First of all, people *do* operate cars without a thought to safety. Have you ever driven on a major highway in a large city?
How about the number of people who destroy thousand-dollar engines for want of two bucks of motor oil?
If Joe Schmoe decides he wants to click "Yes" when AnnoyingAdBar, LLC tells him to, than doesn't he pretty much get what he deserves?
(And, more importantly, when he pays me to fix it, don't I get what *I* deserve?)
Support freelancers, encourage stupidity!
I know its very popular to bash AOL, but in their time they served a purpose.
Back in 95, I had Prodigy. It was terrible. My username and email were something like "85XZW9@prodigy.net" or some such un-memorable non-sense. I couldn't tell people my e-mail address because I couldn't even remember it myself. IIRC, there was no "screenname", just the account name. Their client software was very much a DOS type app (even when run under Win3.1) that could not be minimized and filled the whole screen with a single task. And they did not have IM or anything like it.
So one-day I tried AOL 2.something. It had a windows interface, so I could have multiple tasks open (i.e. one with the news, another with the weather, and another with a browser). I had a real username that was memorable and that approximated my own (along with a few other screennames for chat). And they had IM (no buddy list yet, that would be another year or two away), so I could send private messages in chat. And there was more content than prodigy. The web based advertising and spamming business were still immature, so they were not as sophisticated or motivated to spy on their customers as they are now.
I also tried a few more services back then, MSN, still independantly run compuServe, something called WOW, etc. None of them were as good as AOL in 1995. Remember that pure ISP-only "web" was still young, web content was sparse, and search technology was immature, so it was hard to locate. Once cable-modem came to town in 1999, I keep AOL around for a few years for the email address. But I shut that down back in 2002.
In their time AOL was the best on-line + internet service around. Basic internet was just not developed enough and the other services just didn't match up.
I would love to see someone operate a toaster oven with the same casual disregard for safety that people seem to want to operate computers with.
I put my toaster on the counter, stick the pop tarts in, and push the button. They get done in a minute, and I eat them.
The problem with computers is that if you use the washer incorrectly (or set it up incorrectly), it floods. You notice the problem right away. Most users don't realize they're botted until 2-3 months later (when the adware or spyware gets really, really bad).
The best way to do this is to offer computer classes with incentives, and to make home installion a part of computer sales. Failing that, Dells should all come with the firewall on, and AV and anti-spyware installed and running with a 6 month subscription, as well as a note (in dead tree form) reminding the user that he needs to update and renew the stuff in 6 months.
The real one is "AOL"
Which makes me wonder... is "AOL Keyword: AOL" recursive? Having never had, used, or even breathed on an AOL browser, I wouldn't know.
AOL is worse than malware. Malware is written with bad intent, or possibly written by Malcom Reynolds. AOL is just badware -- badly conceived, badly designed, and badly implemented.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I use a Mac. In fact, I am typing this on an iBook, waiting for my Mac Pro order to come in (31 more days...). I don't think it's Joe Schmoe's fault. I am not blaming anyone. I'm saying we need to fix it. Windows needs to be more secure. Patching needs to be easier for Joe Schmoe. But most of all, Joe Schmoe needs more education than "PCs have viruses. I'm a Mac, and I'm virus free". We need to accept that most relatively unskilled home users will continue to use Windows on their desktops. We need to educate them how to use Windows safely, or adapt the internet to the fact that there are thousands of hostile bots out there.
I'd actually ask them to require stricter standards especially at installation
1) Program has option to install in any directory you choose - surprise how many of them lack this even
2) Make start menu and desktop shortcuts wherever you choose - I hate ones that just add three icons to my desktop
3) Make no folders other than in the one they are installed in or that you specify - When Reader 7.0 came out I was constantly deleting that bloody myEbooks crap until I figured out how to stop it.
4) Do not add themselves to startup with windows automatically - I didn't say you could be resident just so that you can pop up your damn app at the slightest click of the mouse. Again bloody Adobe and iTunes do this.
5) Software that requires administrator privleges to install or run needlessly - I'm thinking CoD2
6) Any additional software installed without consent which is not required to run the application - iTunes and Quicktime
7) Any software that changes file associations by itself - give me the option and I will tell you what I'm going to let you open automatically.
7) Anything that does not give you a single entry in the Add Remove Programs List.
These are pretty basic and ought to be good manners as far as software is concerned.
Frankly badware should also include any software that is written poorly and is bloated and uses excessive memory and even things that give you a bloody skin without an option to change back to the default. I've worked hard to keep the classic windows interface with XP and I certainly don't want to see some stupid app like iTunes (or Winamp but there are windows skins) looking however they want without giving me the option to turn it off. I like my boring grey and I'm going to keep it that way.
Reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled.
FTA:
Backed by tech companies such as Google, Lenovo Group, and Sun Microsystems
It is run out of two well-respected university departments: Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet & Society in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and University of Oxford's Internet Institute in the U.K.
It's not just funded by Google, and the researchers are in public departments, not privately employed ratings companies.
Android Software Engineer
AOL has ALWAYS been regarded as "badware" by anyone who can use a toothpick. AOL falls into every kind of malicious software category there is. Malware, Adware, Spyware, Spamware...AOL fits all of those pretty damn well, and the new title of "Badware" just goes to show how horrible the program and service is. I hope AOL stock tanks and the business goes belly up. It DESERVES to. AOL is a marketing ploy in the purest sense.
AOL is:
Malware: AOL has elements in it that allow it to hijack the MSN Explorer web browser (which is why I use Mozilla FireFox). AOL programs also have a habit of installing countless time-consuming updates, which are just nothing more that a few actual programming patches mixed in among more desktop internet shortcuts for marketing tie-ins. Also, as I have experienced in some of my previous systems, it can cause conflicts with Windows (yeah, I know...Linux) that are more often than not, caused by the AOL program self-installing bundled software (more marketing tie-ins).
Spyware: Well, we already have heard plenty about that one so I don't need to explain it.
Spamware: Customers are routinely sent emails for new services. Each new "service" is the same thing with a new name.
Adware: Serves up a smorgasbord of advertisements with each new window opened. Windows abound with cheap gimmicks that only lead to the user being asked to purchase something. Most "news" stories or information has some kind of marketing/sales tie-in, as do just about every service AOL offers. Customers (I once was, when 14.4 dialup was the rage) are constantly poked and prodded with sales pitches. Each new "service is actually just another sales pitch/marketing scheme with a fresh new wrapper on it.
Badware: If you read all of the above, you get the point. If you still dont't get it, you will be lucky to master a beltbuckle.
AOL just doesn't get it..... People are leaving them because they are just wayyy too obsessed with advertising. AOL has made itself the society's posterchild of advertising run amok.
-----
Sig Sauer
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
To some extent this is already happening. I'm an In-home technician for a major electronics retailer and I can tell you that if you buy a PC in a retail store like ours, the sales people will pound into you the idea of in-home setup, virus protection, etc. The problem is that people will find a way around it if it'll save them a few bucks. People can be told it's better for a pro to configure it but they'll take their chances for a slightly smaller bill. Even if we made it mandatory with every purchase, people would just go elsewhere for "cheaper" pc's without the service. And even with the AV/AS installed and a pro setup they're not enough to combat consumer ineffectualism. I can't count how many times customers come in with virus-ridded pc's and tell us they "just ignore the anti-virus pop-up thingy" asking to do a scan.....
<gir voice> I love this sig... </gir voice>
Lawyers and pop tarts http://www.overlawyered.com/2004/12/poptart_fire_l awsuit.html
Flaming strawberry pop tart toaster blowtorch http://www.pmichaud.com/toast/
The definitive word from Dave Berry: http://www.cfcl.com/vlb/Cuute/f/pop_tarts.txt
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
I installed AOL 9.0 on a virtual machine to see for myself, and it is a seriously annoying piece of software. It takes an extra section of the taskbar for itself (about 1/5 the width of a 1024 screen). It adds an autostart tray icon and about five desktop shortcuts. I launched the program to see if I could log in with my AIM account. I got to a screen where I could log in with an existing account or register a new account, but that screen had no back or cancel. I could only kill it with task manager.
It's obviously made for newbies who need lots of handholding, and it's good that they're bundling free antivirus with AOL 9.0 because that demographic really needs it. If you want to try out free AOL 9.0 over broadband, do yourself a favor and install it in a VM. MS Virtual PC and VMWare Player are both free (beer). QEMU is Free, but you need the KQEMU module to get decent speed, and it's free (beer).
No, they shouldn't. Most AV software is notoriously impossible to uninstall without destroying your current OS install. If they choose an AV, anti-spy, firewall package I don't like, I need to reinstall the OS before I can use the computer, and most computers don't come with an installable OS option. They come with a restore to factory default and that default includes the stupid firewall, anti-spy and AV software I don't want.
You know, a more cynical person, after reading about how our esteemed legislature is just *drooling* all over the idea of heavily regulating the internet, and after reading several stories about how politically-backed PR firms have been increasingly 'astroturfing*' internet forums and other community based sites, might start to think that all these nearly identical messages from ACs advocating a "driver's license for the internet" are some form of covert propaganda.
A more cynical person, someone experienced with both politics and the internet, might think that messages like this, posted with such similar wording, with such a similar idea being conveyed, could be 'testing the waters,' to see how the techies might respond to such a proposal.
A more cynical person might think that some senator or congressman, perhaps something involving Ted Stevens, is feeling out the idea of floating a bill, maybe something called "The Internet Security Act," or "The National Data Protection Act," or even the "Save the Children from Internet Pedophiles Act," where compulsory licensing is hidden away within.
A more cynical person would probably realize that all those license fees would simply disappear into heavily pork-filled projects, the main beneficiaries of which would be gigantic corporations, probably technology based, but equally likely to be ConAgra, Exxon, United Defense, or Halliburton. Even a simpleton would know the license fees do nothing to benefit them.
A cynical person might already know that as soon as a license becomes madatory, a huge revenue stream is created by fining those individuals who are unlicensed. Just like parking tickets, tax penalties, and code violations, this money will go to supporting even more regulations.
A cynical person would suspect that an unlicensed computer would become basis for sneak-and-peeks, no-knock-raids, and unwarrented wiretapping. A cynical person knows that countries like Cuba, China, Iran, and Saudi Arabia already have laws regarding licensing of internet access. Sure has helped them, hasn't it?
A more cynical person might think that kind of thing, indeed.
*Astroturfing: In American politics and advertising, the term astroturfing describes formal public relations projects which deliberately seek to engineer the impression of spontaneous, grassroots behavior. The goal is the appearance of independent public reaction to a politician, political group, product, service, event, or similar entities by centrally orchestrating the behavior of many diverse and geographically distributed individuals.
You get paid to fix problems - I get paid to prevent them.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Making giant batches of koolaid. Pour the mix in set the machine, and it automagically adds the water and stirs.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Seriously, I'm pretty sure most men, at least, know what they're driving. Sorry, but it's only the women I know who have had trouble recollecting certain significant details about their vehicles, such as the number of doors or when they last changed the oil.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Because Google has a real interest in taking down AOL considering that they paid a billion just to do business with them.
Judges and senates have been bought for gold; Esteem and love were never to be sold.
I recognize the difference between a washing machine and a computer. but I'm a computer science major, and I have about 30 posts on slashdot today. But everyone else has other interests. There are rocket scientists whose password is "password" (or would be if they could get away with it). All I'm saying is that we need to educate people better, and we can't expect the world of them unless we're willing to sit down and teach them stuff. Threatening to take away computers won't work, because all the big companies will oppose it, and Joe Schmoe will oppose it.
First of all, people *do* operate cars without a thought to safety.
A better example to prove your point: I was watching an auto insurance ad that showed testimonials of people saying "I saved enough money on my insurance to buy (fishing gear / a camera / etc)"
Yeah, you'll be really fucking happy with that fishing rod when you get in a wreck and see that $20,000 doesn't cover shit.
My boss' computer puked. Badly. I nuked the HD, and restored everything from a disk image I had made when I first built it for him, then did the Windows Updates. All was well. I created a NEW disk image, and returned the machine to him.
He installed AOL 9.0 and it puked. Again. I suggested he try uninstalling AOL. It said that it uninstalled, but the computer was still lethargic and crashing. So, he brought it back in.
Before nuking it & restoring the new disk image, I figured I'd take a look around. As the article said, there were numerous "pieces" of AOL's "badware" scattered everywhere! I sent him a link to the stopbadware.org site article, with a note telling him that this was exactly what I saw, and was concerned about. I plan to bring this information to the bosses above him, as well.
In summary, this article hits the nail squarely on the head. If you want to use AOL's newer features, you're MUCH better off logging into their WEBsite with Firefox, and using AdBlock and NoScript judiciously. It's amazing how many 3'rd party sites want to run scripts! More than half of them can be safely left blocked without adversely affecting the AOL site's functionality.
With their 9.0 client software, you surrender *all* control. They link you to their servers via VPN. Block the VPN, and the client balks. Leave the VPN open, and any hacker that gets into their servers (or any mischeivous/disgruntled employee)could potentially install rootkits or whatnot onto your PC.
AOL's client software also relies HEAVILY upon IE... and we all know how flawed THAT is.
Willie...
Failing that, Dells should all come with the firewall on, and AV and anti-spyware installed and running with a 6 month subscription, as well as a note (in dead tree form) reminding the user that he needs to update and renew the stuff in 6 months.
Or Dells should start shipping with an OS that's more resilient to viruses and spyware. I'm not MS-bashing, it can be Vista for all I care (assuming Vista fits that description). Part of the problem is that the most popular security software (McAfee and Norton) are absolutely terrible, suck up computer resources, and cost too much.
I've known a lot of users who won't buy security software because they view it as an unreasonable cost. They've just bought a new computer, and now they're supposed to spend $100 a year to make it work properly? Plus, half the time these security package break as much as they fix. Suddenly users programs stop working or they can't connect to something because the firewall is blocking it.
That's just from the Joe Schmo perspective. From a more expert perspective, it still doesn't make sense, since much of what the security software does is plug up Microsoft's poorly designed security. Maybe I'm just spoiled by open-source software, but being able to operate a computer securely doesn't seem to me to be something people should have to pay extra for. It seems like it'd be better if security were open to the public for review, analysis, and optimization anyhow.
From the article... "An AOL spokesman said that it is "clearly ridiculous" to categorize his company's software as badware. "No company has done more to fight malware than AOL, and millions of users are protected by our software every day,"
Isnt this like the author of "virtual bouncer" claiming that they shouldnt be classified as malware/adware, simply because they remove adware/malware themselves? Yes, they removed all BUT the adware that pays them, but they still remove MOST adware/malware, therefore they should be considered good.
This is like paying the mafia to protect you from criminals... who will protect you from your protectors?
I cant even begin to count the number of PCs I have seen with the TCP/IP stack hosed due to an AOHell software corruption... and when you call support. "can you connect to AOL? you can? but you cant get other apps to talk to the internet when you are connected to AOL(MSN messenger, outlook express, etc)? oooh... sooory.... not our problem. our browser dials and surfs OK so you are on your own... not our problem."
I guess AOL proved there was a market for people like yourself that were incapable of figuring out how to do this on your own (hint: Dial-up networking is so easy to use it has a wizard), but for the vast majority of us, AOL, and the lusers that came with it were a plague on the internet. Hell, I was using the internet for years before that through an ISP without a PPP connection: I had a shell account and that was all I needed. I wouldn't expect that shell access would be useable by the average human (without an understanding of Unix), but when Windows 95 came out with DUN, that changed things for everyone. Of course, there were still people that couldn't figure it out like you and for those people AOL filled the niche. Sometimes I wonder if we would have been better off without them.... [ducks]
"When the president does it, that means it's not illegal." - Richard M. Nixon