Article:		Top 12 Ways to Degunk Your PC
Subject:		Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
Date:		2004-05-25 22:54:25
From:		docsavagemob
I downloaded Registry First Aid, "shareware" according to their website. It ain't, it's crippleware. After a lengthy two-part scan you get to fix exactly 15 problems per scan; to fix all found by the program at one time will cost you 21 bucks. Using the "shareware version" for author's 4000 errors would have taken a very, very long time.

Showing messages 1 through 11 of 11.

• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-26 08:20:59  GeekOrthodox [View]
  
  
  Right, I found that out too. In fact, I have yet to find a "shareware" registry cleaner or demo that is fully functional.
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-26 10:01:03  docsavagemob [View]
  
  
  Heh. It gets worse. I decided to use it with the 15 fix limit anyway...soon it became 14 problems fixed per scan, then 13. It really is crippleware; you may not be able to correct all registry problems found no matter how many scans you run without shelling out the $21.
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-26 13:53:32  InfiniSource [View]
  
  
  It appears you have little understanding of what "shareware" is all about. It is NOT freeware. The idea is to try it and if you like it, then you buy it. The objective is NOT to furnish the world with a tool they can use to clean up Windows for free without paying for it. We run a business and we have many mouths to feed. We like to call it "registration incentive" and this is the reason RFA is the number one converting utility in the shareware market today. If we let people clean their registry for free there would be little incentive left to buy it. We have a tremendous amount of positive customer reaction as you can see here:
  http://www.rosecitysoftware.com/reg1aid/feedback.html
  ----
  Joseph Burke
  President/CEO
  InfiniSource, Inc.
  <jburke@infinisource.com>
  
  
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-26 17:38:07  docsavagemob [View]
  
  
  Perhaps you have forgotten the way shareware originally worked. A fully functional version of a program was made available to whomever was interested in it. If they liked it and intended to use it again they were asked to make a contribution. Sometimes an amount was suggested by the author, sometimes not. It was then up to the user to do the honorable thing.
  
  You are not providing a shareware download. You are providing a version with reduced functionality, a demo which is a very different thing. And you are assuming that I would not have paid you for your program if I planned on continuing to use it. While that wasn't true before, it is now. Maybe you should consider hiring a PR person.
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-27 02:56:18  Dan1 [View]
  
  
  The above author "docsavagemob" confuses shareware and donationware. He described the way donationware works.
  
  Shareware means a limited program version - not fully featured. It may have a splash window on start, time- or use- limits or some features disabled in unregistered version.
  
  I've downloaded RFA and run. Yes, it found many errors. About 300. And it fixes only 10-13 at a time. BUT THIS WORKS. I've spend about an hour to reduce the number of errors to 20. If you have a lot of time you can use this program not paying to the developer. But if you set much your time you will probably win paying $21 to keep your system clean and support future versions.
  
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-27 08:16:59  docsavagemob [View]
  
  
  No. Heh. This is rapidly becoming pointless. "Donationware" usually implies a request by the author for the user to donate to a third party, frequently a charity, if they continue to use the program.
  
  The term "shareware" was first used in the early 80's and programs distributed as shareware were not crippled. You were encouraged by the author to "share" a program you liked with other users who would hopefully continue to pass it on, each user sending money to the author if they intended to keep using the software. It was, at the time, a very different way to distribute software.
  
  I downloaded RFA because of the article describing it and Rose City Software's "shareware" label. I was irritated to find that it wasn't shareware and that I couldn't fully evaluate it without paying them $21.
  
  So I removed it. I wouldn't have downloaded in the first place if I had known it was really crippleware.
  
  
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6!
  2004-05-27 08:06:28  Joli Ballew | [View]
  
  
  I downloaded and installed several trial and shareware versions of various Registry enhancement programs, and purchased several I thought were worthy, before settling on this one to add to the book.
  
  The shareware version of this program did what I fully expected it to do, inform me of errors, give me an opportunity to fix a few, and then tell me how and where to buy the full version to complete the deal.
  
  I had no intention of not paying for the one I decided I liked, and for $21, figured it was well worth the benefit I received.
  
  That seems to be the way the world works, and I am completely happy with, and still believe in, the application noted.
  
  Great software, and a good way to finalize the degunking process!
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6! - FINAL NOTES
  2004-05-27 09:38:21  InfiniSource [View]
  
  
  I will take a moment to just make one final response here. Thanks very much, Joli, for your kind review. RFA has won EVERY major shareware award on the internet including The Shareware Hall of Fame and Best Utility of the year from the SIA. To be perfectly frank, we are not interested in people's views about our "PR capabilities" when they are the type who expect shareware developers to provide their thousands of hours of work for free or on the honor system to anyone who wants to use it. Shareware has changed a great deal since the early days... There are now more than a million shareware applications out there, competing hotly for constumer dollars, and most use some sort of distinct registration incentive... the developers that do not wind up providing it for free to the majority of users. That is not our intent. We have many shareware titles at Rosecitysoftware.com; and many which provide an ongoing usefulness work fine in a time limited mode - 30 days is the norm. Not a single one of our titles relies on "the user to do the honorable thing". If it did we would all be working second jobs unable to devote ourselves to providing the best quality shareware we can to the internet public. RFA provides its biggest punch on the first run... if you find 300 or 1000 obsolete entries and we fixed them for free, most users would try it, and then conveniently "forget" to pay for it. Therefore we use the functionality limitation incentive with RFA and it works quite well. As I say we have won all the awards and have a huge amount of great feedback posted on our website. There isn't a chance we will change that regardless of what any freeloaders may suggest. Shareware is a business, and as such you find the most effective way to market your product. We are obviously doing a pretty good job since RFA has generated more than one million dollars in sales in the past 12 months.
  ----
  Joseph Burke
  President/CEO
  InfiniSource, Inc.
  Rose City Software
  http://www.RoseCitySoftware.com/
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6! - FINAL NOTES
  2004-05-27 13:06:17  docsavagemob [View]
  
  
  Wow! A freeloader! Me! A careful reader of this thread will note that the only point I've made (pay attention CEO Joe) is that RFA *isn't* shareware. That's it. I didn't say that I was going to use it and not pay for it (although my first response to CEO Joe was ambiguous and could be interpreted that way...what I meant to say was that I wasn't going to use RFA). I didn't say it was a poor product. I didn't say Rose City owed me a free version or that they should change how they choose to deliver their products. I merely described the limitations of the "shareware" version offered for download, limitations that are not described anywhere on their webpage. And I also pointed out that the RFA they offer isn't shareware. That's what prompted CEO Joe's defensive responses.
  
  Joe, you are not a "shareware developer". You develop software and you choose the shareware distribution method for at least one of your products. And if you had said anywhere on the RFA download webpage that the version offered had reduced functionality or if it had been offered with a time-limit scheme we wouldn't be having this discussion. In fact your home page says exactly the opposite:
  
  "Award-winning titles like TweakMaster Pro, Registry First Aid, MemoryBoost Pro and ClipCache Plus have won every major shareware award on the Internet and are widely considered to be the "best of breed". Each is available for a free full-functional 30 day trial download."
  
  You might want to change that.
  
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6! - FINAL NOTES
  2008-10-21 04:16:47  BeMan [View]
  
  
  Ah!

  docsavagemob

  you sound suprised that a CEO would take this stand with a potential customer and would air it to the public as well. Apparently, you are from a long-gone age as I am. An age where "False Advertising" was a crime and also an age where "The customer is always right" was a practice employed by the majority of businesses.
  
  We do however, live in a different America today. One where the sheer number of potential consumers and greed, rule all. To provide a pleasant experience with an immediate monetary loss for a consumer in hopes of gaining their long-term loyalty, is a concept seemingly lost by most (definately not all) businesses of today. It is however, an absolutely viable principle still. For instance, about 20 years ago, I had the pleasure of doing business with two particular companies, Discount Tire and Circuit City. Both of these businesses employed these old proven principles and immediately gained my loyalty as well as my word-of-mouth, satisfied-customer, advertising for them through many years to come.
  
  To expense your company even $50 for a customer, completely satisfying them, in most cases, brings an unseen pay-back of loyalty and positive advertising, equaling future revenue. The fact that it is unseen, or non-immediate, seems to be what trips up our "near-sighted" American Capitalistic business owners and managers. The flip side however is that, if you're not happy, "Hey, there are more where you came from." This attitude, while playing the numbers-game, imo, is pathetic.
  
  Your re-iteration of "Each is available for a free full-functional 30 day trial download." really is the point here. Regardless of the vernacular for "Shareware", "Crippleware", "Trial-Version", etc., the point here is that a business professed to provide something they clearly did not, I.E. "False Advertising" and to top it off, the CEO, propmtly provided you with some lovely "American Customer Service."
  
  All of this to say, As a consumer, it doesn't matter what this company ever puts out or how good it is proclaimed to be, they will never get a Benjamin from me. Not because of a customer complaint/review, rather because of their business beliefs/practices and their CEO's customer service.
• Whoa Nelly! Beware of tip 6! - FINAL NOTES
  2005-05-23 21:43:30  ganesha23 [View]
  
  
  To all concerned:
  
  shareware
  · n. Computing, software that is available free of charge and often distributed informally for evaluation.
  -OED
  
  I would suggest that all sides take a step back and relax. As is apt to happen on posting boards people are writing things that they wouldn't say to each other's face. And just a note to the CEO, there is nothing wrong with defending your product but when you start exchanging barbed remarks with a critic no matter how much you may disagree with them it makes me wonder how I would be treated if I had a problem with your product and needed support. Just an observation.