forced dropbox

[REDACTED]

i do not enjoy having programs installed on my PC without my consent.. with this last update when i restarted my computer, Avast FORCED me to install dropbox.. it said it was finishing the update and installed it. no option to stop the install.. so I will no longer be using Avast and as a Staples resident tech i will no longer be recommending it to my customers..

[Staticguy]

Prior to installing Avast! it gives u options to whether or not to install Dropbox or Google Chrome you just need to read it and deselect if you don't want them! All it takes for us is effort to read them properly and choose our decisions based on the installer.

For now you can simply uninstall dropbox via add/remove no harm done.

[Eddy]

avast didn't forced you at all.
It was your own choice to install Dropbox.
As Staticguy said, you should have read first.

Another pebkac error.

[Skakara]

It was your own choice to install Dropbox.

This actually would be correct IF it would be opt-IN.

[REDACTED]

While I agree that Avast acts a lot like some of the malware we're trying to block with it, in this day and age of aggressive marketing it would be naïve to the extreme to think you can just blaze through everything pressing the biggest, shiniest buttons.

You would be wise to take responsibility for your own actions - or inactions.

The term "forced" simply does not apply here.  "Fooled into" maybe.

-Noel

[Skakara]

I'd like to quote one of my favorite artists:

But still we are victims of word games,
semantics is always a b*tch:
places once called under-developed and 'backwards'
are now called 'mineral rich'.

Responsibility is a two way road; maybe avast should take responsibility of their actions to "fool" inexperienced computer users? And let's face it, the (hide & seek) opt-OUT game of installers is just that; a very well planned game to fool some users.

The only actions users can do to change the status quo is to voice their opinion and/or refuse to use such programs.

And let's not forget that there are cases where the avast user had NO way of "choosing not to install", i.e. un-selecting force-fed additional software.

[Eddy]

avast isn't "fooling" inexperienced computer users.
They make decisions in order to protect those users from doing "foolish" things.
Yes, some people would rather not have that.
But that is only a very tiny amount of people.
And many of those think it is wrong because they don't understand things.
About 220.000.000 people are using avast.
You (almost) don't hear anything from over 99,99% of them.
They are satisfied with how things are done by avast.
You won't see a perfectly working car in a garage for a repair 

Keep in mind that with so many users it simply is not possible to satisfy all.

[Skakara]

Obviously your morals don't see anything wrong with the "opt-OUT game of installers". Also you don't seem to understand the high step involved to start participating in a forum, most of the people just go away, you won't hear anything from them, they just leave. And let's be frank, most users are ignorant and stupid, they won't even notice, nor understand what is going on with their cputers. This is what this "opt-OUT game of installers" is targeted for.

[REDACTED]

Oh, I agree entirely.

But overemphasizing to the point of calling something "forced" is particularly UNhelpful because it misrepresents reality.  In short, it just makes the poster seem naïve.

On the other hand, a rational complaint that Avast is being devious by trying to trick users into installing things they don't want can be entlrely justified.  And those in charge will be more impressed by a factual representation of reality than some inaccurate emotional utterance.

At one time in history, there weren't guardrails and fences.  Occasionally some irresponsible or stupid people accidentally fell into the river and went over the falls.  It's always a shame when people lose their lives, yet smart and careful folks did manage to survive somehow.  We're better for it.

Now there are guardrails and fences to protect irresponsible folks.  We call that civilized, yet people still manage to fall in, and now to hurt themselves on the guardrails and fences themselves.  And they sue.

Are we better off?  Or would we have been better in the long term to educate people to be more self-aware and responsible?

-Noel

[Skakara]

And those in charge will be more impressed by a factual representation of reality than some inaccurate emotional utterance.

You, and those in charge, seem to forget that this "emotional utterance" is a REAL reaction, a negative one, to this avast trickery. Is that irrelevant? I don't think so. Avast did something that the user didn't like and voiced his/her opinion about it. THAT'S the reality!

Or would we have been better in the long term to educate people to be more self-aware and responsible?

And this is related to the topic how? Is tricking people and making a negative user-experience with avast considered as "educating"? Or smart?

[REDACTED]

Asking people to try to be more aware of what they're doing is always good advice.

-Noel

[Eddy]

Are we better off?  Or would we have been better in the long term to educate people to be more self-aware and responsible?

If a man is hungry, you can give him food. But as soon as he ate it all, he will be back asking for more. It is better to teach him to grow his own food.

[Skakara]

You 2 are a riot. More poor analogues (analogues are always poor) to muddle the water. Off-topic and borderline trolling. To me this reads that you have a hard time of accepting the truth in this topic.

I think that avast should reconsider their stance on this "opt-OUT game" trickery. Is the benefits really that good so that it justifies annoying and tricking users, i.e. creating a negative UX?

[Eddy]

It is not our fault that you don't understand how things are working.

[Skakara]

Oh wow, what an argument. Trolling feels good, eh? I'll leave you to it.