Congrats Comodo team. Now we don’t have any trace of any Comodo product on Softpedia.
I hope that now all of you are happy. 88)
As long as they remove all the defamatory statements too, then we will be happy.
End users have many respectable and decent download sites they can go to. If Softpedia can’t promote Comodo without misleading its users, then I rather they didn’t even mention Comodo on their website!
Melih
But, they aren’t misleading users. CIS is adware, and for the reasons I’ve explained a few posts behind. I share the same thoughts as Softpedia.
Heck - and its something I don’t care, at all - there’s no denying. CIS installs SafeSurf - not needed. SafeSurf installs Ask.com toolbar, which comes hard bundled to it. So, there’s not even an opt-in/opt-out for Ask.com toolbar. Only for SafeSurf.
Lets talk about what truly is happening behind the stage.
And, lets not come with bllsht that people need to read the EULA. I read the EULA, and nowhere it is stated that SafeSurf provides redundant (unneeded) protection, since its already provided by Defense+. I’ll install SafeSurf, believing I will be more protected. By doing it so, Ask.com toolbar gets automatically installed. So, as you may see - and, again, lets be honest - there was no opt-in nor opt-out for Ask.com toolbar.
This is what happens behind the stage.
Regards
If their statements were not misleading why did they have to change it after our legal letter?
Melih
Please, lets not deviate ourselves. Forget about Softpedia for a second. Can it be?
Read my previous post, and honestly tell me that what I wrote are lies. Then tell me, if according to that, CIS isn’t adware, by installing Ask.com toolbar for income.
You said this! Not me…
So explain this to us all pls. If they are, according to you, were not misleading why did they have to change their misleading statement after we sent the legal letter?
Melih
And, you keep deviating from what I ask.
Anyway, Softpedia didn’t mislead their visitors. They tagged CIS as adware. They did it, because, honestly, it is adware. I agree.
I don’t really care if in their article explaining - I didn’t even read it. Couldn’t care less. - why COMODO was removed and tagged adware, they wrote anything not exactly reflecting the reality. But, the point is CIS is adware.
Again, please, forget about Softpedia, and honestly answer to my question. All I wrote are lies? If not, then how do you see CIS yourself?
If you claim they didn’t mislead can you pls explain why they had to modify their misleading statements?
This is very relevant because the issue is Softpedia’s authority and credibility and for them to be able to redefine an industry accepted term. They mislead their users. We sent legal letters. They changed their misleading statements. And there is you keep saying they didn’t mislead even though Softpedia admitted through their own actions that they did!
Do you realise Softpedia modified their misleading statements?
If you do, do you know why they modified it?
If it was not misleading why would they modify it? If they thought calling Comodo Adware is legit then why didn’t they keep it there and let us sue them and see how the judge decides 
They knew very well they can’t call us Adware and they had no case and what they were doing is wrong hence modified their statement.
thanks
Melih
Some made the misleading point that the toolbar is not needed although whenever the toolbar is needed or not is left to each single user, through the optout option, to decide.
So much effort is spent to provide the impression that users are unable to choose even a toolbar (Comodo Safesurf toolbar powered by Ask.com) the whole description of the installation step focus on.
Are those recent members honestly concerned that someone will neglect that a toolbar will be installed or rather they’re putting much efforts to provide the impression that the toolbar will somewhat sneak behind the scenes advocating fear and spreadiing doubts and uncertainity?
Besides individual perspective is arguable whereas there is an established industry standard for adware.
The toolbar will not provide extra protection, if you have CIS 3.8 or a higher version installed. I think it is not needed because of that.
I have something to add to the general mess: I disagree with the idea that “users should always be attentive to what installers say and ask, so it serves them right if the toolbar gets installed or other unwanted things happen.” (That is what a few members seem to be writing/implying.)
Why? Sometimes I am tired. Or thinking of other things (though I usually “focus” my attention on computer things when I am “doing computer”). So I just skim right through the installer windows, with really reading them. The unwanted changes are made. That is why I want the options, if any, to be opt-in (unlike how they are right now).
If you disable Defense+, the toolbar do help.?
As the description fit you must acquit.
The toolbar bundle provide more than protection which is only one aspect of the listed description. Users can choose to retain the toolbar and/or the protection even in case they choose to uninstall CIS. Or uninstall the toolbar and/or the protection separately and use only CIS. Uses can choose and decide differently from what you think and by all means they can optout if they are willing to.
Would it make any sense to assume a car wheel to steer where the driver would like to even if he willingly cover his eyes with both hands?
Or rather have a signpost removed arguing that someone may hit it as sometimes someone could be thinking about other things? ???
Many efforts were made in this topic to push forward the impression of a forced installation by assuming users will be coincidentally careless when they install something and coincidentally not willing to install the toolbar. This is not much far from the perspective that EULAs are usually added during installations to trick users. 
yo! O0
i think the whole topic is basically discussing about:
- opt out or opt in (ticked or unticked by default)
IMO this issue is exaggered, ppl don’t even care about this before the softpedia mumbo jumbo (gotta love the word ;D). if ppl can come here, make an account, & reply to this topic, how hard can it be to untick some options? 88)
you might ask, "how about novice user, blah blah blah.tell you what, I AM a proud novice user,with my super hero ability, i managed to find the tickboxes O0
yeah,i’m still sleepy this morning, so i wish i can drive my car,eat my breakfast, do my reguler job with my eyes closed for the rest of the day :-TU the thing is…it’s not gonna happen.last time i check, that’s what you call “LIFE” 88) unless you’re rich enough to make a custom made installer… 88)
- if CIS itself already give you the same protection, why the unnecessary toolbar?
i asked this question too. but it seems like Endymion read my mind ;D
- the difference of definition of adware by CIS & softpedia.
simple,you make your own criteria of adware,
you decide whether CIS is adware or not,
and you choose to use/not use CIS.
so what’s the problem? ???
.
.
.
.
.
sorry guys, got bad coffee this morning 88)
Anyone who say softpedia is right, why would you trust a site who spread adware?
Because if all the programs softpedia have tagged as adware, is adware. Then they have adware on their site for download.
And because of that, people download the programs, and get “infected” with adware…
So if Softpedia is right, then softpedia spread adware, and because of that i will advise you not to use their site…
But that’s only if you say softpedia is right, if you say they are wrong, just call softpedia liars.
And i will still advise you not to use their site, you can’t trust liars.
LOL
thats a very clever explanation actually
Melih
Because is the same thing like Comodo does and I still trust Comodo.
Softpedia tag a software as adware so it’s your decision to install it or not. Comodo offer you an option to install adware on your PC so it’s your option to install it or not.
But it’s a subtle difference: average Joe go to Softpedia site to download a free program. He see if it’s adware or not and he decide to download it or not. The same average Joe install CIS because is free and after install now he have a brand new shiny useless toolbar.
That’s the only problem and Melih avoids an answer and plays ostrich policy: bury the head in the sand maybe the problem disappear…
Are you for real? Pay attention. I see Melih is fighting nails and teeth over this. Neither he nor his company wants Comodo products labeled as adware. Why is this fact so hard to understand?
I myself wonder why is so hard to understand. By Comodo.
For me is very clear. I want to install a free security suite with default settings. Click Next-next-Finish. Super, now I have a brand new free security suite installed but as a bonus I have a ■■■■■■ useless Ask toolbar. I dunno how you call it but for me is adware/spyware/malware/crapware/whatever-you-call-itware.
And this is the source of the problem. The adware definition. CIS is per definition NOT adware. But you do get added features which can be opted out. Opt out on them and you have your free security suite. Or click next…next… finish and uninstall what feature you don’t want afterwards. Having some overview on what is running on your computer is never a bad thing. Plus you’ll gain some experience and understanding about your computer and it’s installed software. Something I always recommend for users of all levels.
Being able to drive a car doesn’t automatically make you a good driver. That comes by experience and continued use 
@ burebista:
If you don’t think for yourself, and let others do it for you, then what’s the point of your existence?
What’s my point? It’s very simple: think for yourself.
Let me give you an example.
What if a person gives you a piece of paper, and asks you to sign it?
Would you sign it? or read it first?
You see, that’s why GOD gives people free will, so they can think.
The same goes for novice users who don’t get tired of complaining.