Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 188 posts

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#161

Post by rsl7 »

shocks wrote: post #127
thaumaturgy wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worse than that, actually. Experienced computer users interact with a computer in a completely different way from inexperienced ones; at some point, experienced users develop the ability to do some kind of fast cognitive relevance filter on the screen, so they know which UI elements they can interact with, which ones might be important, which ones aren't, and so on. Less experienced users can't do that -- they h…

Completely agreed. Amongst my non-computer literate friends, many of them adopt the "click next quickly until the install starts or it stops working" tactic.

Yes, the install dialogs might as well be a series of screens of lorem ipsum with buttons labeled WHATEVER

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#162

Post by jlgaddis »

taproot wrote: post #160
niggler wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The game is to get those people who aren't tech savvy, and PG knows and actively supports it. There literally is no way to do what IM is trying to do without somehow engaging in questionable behavior (reminiscent of Facebook in many ways)

> There literally is no way to do what IM is trying to do without somehow engaging in questionable behavior For starters, default to not install the crapware. Alternatively, instead of creating more required user actions than necessary. While the software is installing, show splash screen type adverts of software the user may also be interested in installing with a way to add them to the install queue on the fly or s…

> "... rate of install will be shit, but if they were really interested in doing the right thing ..."

That's just it -- they aren't.

The sole purpose is to generate revenue. They don't make money when users don't install the software.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#163

Post by niggler »

taproot wrote: post #160
niggler wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The game is to get those people who aren't tech savvy, and PG knows and actively supports it. There literally is no way to do what IM is trying to do without somehow engaging in questionable behavior (reminiscent of Facebook in many ways)

> There literally is no way to do what IM is trying to do without somehow engaging in questionable behavior For starters, default to not install the crapware. Alternatively, instead of creating more required user actions than necessary. While the software is installing, show splash screen type adverts of software the user may also be interested in installing with a way to add them to the install queue on the fly or s…

The customers (advertisers) actively push for insidious installation methods. Legitimate software developers don't advertise using those methods (have you ever seen an ad for WinEdt?), preferring google or other direct methods.

So the population IM attracts are precisely those unscrupulous developers and programs that profit from questionable behavior. Working in a proper manner runs counter to their customers' goals.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#164

Post by JungleGymSam »

You can explain it any way you want but it's still a product that's meant to take advantage of an ignorant audience plain and simple. Any person outside their audience knows where and how to get the software they want. There is no use for IM's service outside of the ignorant mass of computer users.

Consider another angle on this software: it is a direct contributor to the daily stress of IT people and the "computer person" found in many families.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#165

Post by lawnchair_larry »

205guy wrote: post #86
garry wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was able to totally remove Babylon from my system after installing it through an IM ad unit. I can't speak for installs from other sources, because I hear what you say is true. But I saw with my own eyes that it didn't happen with IM.

Garry, you've spoken up a lot here to defend IM, and that's fine, they probably need defending. However, it would've been nice to disclose in this thread that you're a YC partner. I know, it's in your profile, and easy to find, as I did. But I'm a newbie here, I don't know personalities, and your posts made it sound like you're some Joe-User happy with IM's product, which isn't really the case.

Haha, that explains it. Thanks for pointing that out.

There are contrarians in every thread, but if there is one thing for certain besides death and taxes, it's the fact that nobody wants this garbage on their machines. It's the cancer of Windows. To see someone so adamantly defending it had me really confused.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#166

Post by lawnchair_larry »

garry wrote: post #77
RyanZAG wrote: post #49

Confusing inept users into installing random toolbars[1] that break their browsers and force them to call IT pros to 'clean up' their computers is pretty scummy. Sorry, but it is. You can make a lot of money doing all kinds of popular things -- pimping women, selling drugs, selling 'likes' on facebook, selling botnets that create fake clicks on advertisers, ponzi schemes, etc. Some are illegal, some are just barely l…

I installed these things from an Install Monetizer install on my own computer. I uninstalled them. They were all completely uninstallable. None of them broke my browser. IM actually screens out advertisers and publishers who break browsers, and they don't work with them. Seems better to me. As another commenter mentioned, IM is trying to legitimize a space that's scummy, the way Google did for PPC.

So you're a YC partner defending this company. You also posted this in another thread, which was your own submission with a linkbait headline to your own blog, which was an obvious advertorial for Survata:

"Survata is a survey-wall -- meaning you have to answer a survey before you see a given article. They have about 20 publishers signed up, and they're all non-spammy content."

Survata is also YC funded.

FYI, all survey walls are "spammy content" and the data from them is garbage. Installer bundles are spammy content. This is all scummy. Please stop funding these types of companies. And please stop with the borderline meatpuppet posts and plugs.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#167

Post by jessedhillon »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #118
jessedhillon wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're a much more patient and understanding person than I am, pg. My initial reaction to pretty much every comment here is "Peanut gallery -- start your own incubator, or just accomplish one noteworthy thing in your life." As a non-pg entity, I feel vicarious indignation. Who are these random nobodies who think they're entitled to question how/where you spend your time and effort? And the people who get up on their…

I never really like these type of arguments. For example if I believe a doctor is acting unethically is it wrong for me to call him out because I don't have a medical license? Sure, there may be factors here we don't understand here but I think now would be an excellent time to unveil whatever grand plan they have to head off the PR shitstorm this is in the process of creating. As I have mentioned elsewhere YC have g…

For example if I believe a doctor is acting unethically is it wrong for me to call him out because I don't have a medical license?

No it doesn't mean that. What it means is that you, as a non-doctor, should excercise some discretion and humility wen choosing your words. Expressing harsh condemnation and judgment when you have a small piece of the picture is an unbelievable asshole move. None of these Tough Guys throwing around words like "crapware" and "spammer" would ever call anyone out like this in public, I guarantee it -- it's all keyboard courage and nerdrage.

This seems to be largely because they appear as a company that has strong driving principles about the sort of changes they want to see in the world.

IMO it's more due to the fact that YC asks for nerds to come as they are -- the entry process asks you how you're a hacker, and if you're selected you get an interview where pg wants you to geek out with him about your product. No flashy pitches or navigating social networks to get the right intro -- it's a process that cuts out all the BS that doesn't appeal to nerds.

The idea that there is some violated goodwill is just backwards rationalization. And it doesn't change my point, which is, essentially: who are you to question where YC invests?

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#168

Post by jessedhillon »

davidroberts wrote: post #125
jessedhillon wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're a much more patient and understanding person than I am, pg. My initial reaction to pretty much every comment here is "Peanut gallery -- start your own incubator, or just accomplish one noteworthy thing in your life." As a non-pg entity, I feel vicarious indignation. Who are these random nobodies who think they're entitled to question how/where you spend your time and effort? And the people who get up on their…

I've earned several hundred thousand dollars directly from customers by doing honest work. I guess that means I can say that taking advantage of a person's lack of computer expertise to crowd his computer with toolbars, hijacking his search efforts, and making his web browsing slow to a crawl just to make a buck is very sleazy behavior.

Uh. No you could already say that. You are also qualified to talk about how hard it is to earn money and find customers for whom you can deliver value. You can also now maybe talk about the balancing act that occurs when you take on outside money, start a new product, or look for customer money in places that are less-than-promising. Perhaps you can also talk about what it's like to have to do things you might find distasteful and work with people you might otherwise not choose, so the business can stay afloat.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#169

Post by chii »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #93
swampthing wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Prefer" is a higher bar than "don't care" / "not a nuisance". I don't know what IM installs - but I see Norton on their webpage. I can easily see "most end-users" installing something, seeing the opportunity to install Norton Anti-Virus, and thinking to themselves "oh yea, that sounds like that'd be useful". Just about everybody on HN is extremely technically savvy - we can't assume that our computing preferences ar…

Of what value to users can be a piece of software that they never heard of, don't know what it does and don't feel a need for it? Were they having a problem they wanted solved, they'd intentionally look for the software. > we can't assume that our computing preferences are shared by "most end-users". Those are still anecdotes, but I think most of us actually can say this or that about end-users preferences, after cou…

if you ask these non-technical end users whether they rather have the free software that comes with some crapware, or have to purchase a paid version (of the same software), i think you would find most would choose the free version.

While i dislike the idea of crapware, if it funds useful pieces of software, perhaps its a nuisance that could be tolerated.

Re: What we discovered about InstallMonetizer

#170

Post by chii »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #102
TeMPOraL wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess most of us here got used to YC's reputation and don't want to see it loosing it. > If YC doesn't fund some scuzzy but profitable company, someone else will. This is never a valid argument for explaining your behavior. There's a good chance that someone else will do it anyway, so now there are two bad actors instead of one.

Yep, if there are less VCs and incubators willing to fund these companies then these companies will find it harder to get favourable terms, therefor there is less incentive to start these sorts of business.

The problem with your logic is that if these ethically grey business models are profitable, you have to agree that the less morally demanding VC will indeed fund them (after all, profit is profit). Eventually, YC might still have their high ethical standards, but its the unscrupulous VC that makes the most dough. And the market selects for those who makes the most dough, not those who has the highest moral standing.
Post reply on HN