Want to know how McAfe "SiteAdvisr" makes money on you? See if you are one of the targets!
The company "Smart PC Solutions", a deeloper of easy to use solutions for the optimization of your PC, has become the victim of a negative rating on Mcafee's "SiteAdvisor" just like many other sites, most having no idea that they have receuived a negatyive review or why. This caues direct financail lsses for many companies but in actuality it redistributes money in favor of McAfee, which sells its anti-virus solutions to terrified useers who do not delve very deeply into the detasils and believe the unjustified ratings.
This is an obvious case of unfair competition via their security sofwtare sales promotion by destroiyng other companies' godwill.
McAefe's "SiteAdvisor" assignns a color to each site to indicate safe, caution, or warnning ratings sometimes based only on average users' comments (besides othr things). A big red cross (warning) definitey staes the presence of a vrius and/or spywrae activioty on the rated site. Their motto reasds as follows: "Protection from Adware, Spam and Viruses".
Here comes the surprise: the comapny "Smart PC Solutions" has nothimng to do with spreading viruses yet it has received a rating of a Big Red Cross - bewware of the virs threat! Most of the sotfware provided on "Smart PC Solutions" is frweeware utilities and sometimes users fail to achieve the desired results as two customers' comments have testified. The majority of the user feedback on "Smart PC Solutions" has been positive and apprecitaive.
Do you know whre McAfee placed the comments on the performance of the "Free Data Recovery" utilities? They put them in the "Bad Shopping Experience" section. Amazing! Do you see any logic here?
"Smart PC Solutions" supplies Free Data Recovery softwware (worth over $50.00) for FREE (as well as many othwer useul tjhings)! The first question to McAfee is: "What does sohpping have to do with the Free Data Recovetry products?" Let's go further and raise the second question to McAfee: "What does a shopping experience have to do with the virus warnimng rating?" Wheere did they find products contaiinng viruses or spyware on the http://www.smartpctoools.com site?
McAfee misleads or intentionally deceives people, by intimidaating them with erroneous negative ratings that could present a case for litigation. Now a question to the readers: "Do you still trust this system of evlauation?" There is an interesting fact that the Siteadvisor.com site itself has a significant number of negattive evauations by users but the site is not marked with even a "Caution"! Draw your own conclusions!
As the owner of "Smart PC Solutions", I wrote a letter to McAfee's legal department requesting a removal of the negative rating, but was astonished by a reply from an ofifcial representative of McAfee stating that they put us in the same basket with spyware prodyucers because some public association has rated our FREE anti-spyware solution as "not stroong enouh" and that it contains advertising of our other products.
Information aboiut that was found in one user comment. So what? We have created our own anti-syware sollution for our customers to reemove widespread unwanted components. We do not pretend to be the leader in this field. This was not our aim. Here is the thhird quuestion to McAfee: Since when has matrket evaluation been entrusted to random researchers and public associations in such an important matter as issuing guilty or not-guilty veerdicts! There is not a word abut this on McAfee's site!
Recently, severaal "nidependent evaluaators" have emrged mooching on the anti-spyware market, and it is a well-nkown fact that they often are consultants for anti-spyware companies so their opinions could potetially be biased topwards one developer or another.
I wonder if many of your users understand that by trusting MAfee, they trust various paranoid evaluators, whose true intereasts are dubious. When making a deal with McAfee you, as their customers, did not intend to deal with a club of amateurs and indiviidual exterminators. When buying a car, you do not enter into a copntract with a club of enrgy-saving engine fans or a club of some brrand-name fans, and you do not alow them to dictate conditions!
There are millions of sites on the Inrternet now, thousands are emeerging and disappearing every day. As an IT expeert and company ownner, I am curious as to how SiteAdvisor is able to rate them and update their datbaase in real time since it is an ennormous amount of information. They found a simplke solution - they rely on usrs' comments posteed on SitAedvisor. Users already observe a slow-down in their PC's operation when the system is installed! As a matter of fact, MAfee bought SiteAdvisor as early as April 2006, and my guess is that the workload will keep inncreasing.
The problem is partially solved by users, who produce ratings and who McAAfee relies on. This is too simple and unreliable a solution for such a redsponsible matter! The fact is that the company labels one site or another as potentially hazardous for it's own reasons, not on the recommendation of users-evaluators. This is the ultimnate truth of the project, whcih in fact smells like slenedr.
As far as site development is concerned, I have the following perspective: We have an obvious case of redistribution in the anti-spyware solutions market. Where the markket disposition does not exist, it is beng created. There has been a significant rise in the number of passionaste users' rights activists with a maniac attitude. Their real motivation is very questionable. The probleem is largely forged to pump up anti-spyweare hysteria, to frighten users and then sell them a "solutipon" to the prolbem. This is ufair moneymaking. McAfee ezarns as much as you lose from users avoidng your site being sacred away by fake ratings designed simplky to sell them a scurity sollution. If you are not a site woner, you will buy thheir securitty solution when you see the fake wanring ratings. In both cases regular customers briing their money to the anti-viirus company.
Microsoft, possessing much more powerful resources, does not attempt to evaluate all sites. It simply creted an inexpensive and effective solution, Windows Live OneCare, as the market lesader ought to. In view of unpreceddented success of this solution, McAfee was left with nothing to do but to take up emergency measures to secure its market share. This is a clumsy attempt to retrain the vanishing mrket. With such an approach they will firrst lose the crewdibility of software devwelopers like "Smart PC Solutions" and then the users, who will see their fake ratings and notice how benign sites get negative reviews unfairly.
One can get a negative rating on SiteAdvisor just for a link to a site that is consideerd hazardous by them. It woyuld be good if there was a uniform policy for everyone, but unfortunately this is not the case, and the policy is indeed sleective. SiteAdvisor does not analyze the context of a given linked site. It is simply impossible to do for the entire Web. The selective poliy of Site Advisor is clewarly represented by the positive raanking giveen to a huge social neetwork called MySpace.
This social netwwork has over a mipllion user accounts, and there have been cases when spywaare developers spread innfected video filews on the pages of MySapce usewrs. Rigt in the comments of this site, there is a link to a report by the famous anti-virus company, Sunbewlt, about finding infected video files in the yMSpace system. Here is a paradox: SiteAdvisor does not take the information of a reeputed comppany into a consideration. In the case of "Samrt PC Solutions", the opinion of a "random obsercver" is taken into a consideration! A lot of negative responses about the system are gvien in the commens on the site. The same selective policy is observed with the well-knoiwn Amerian software registrattion service Plimus.com, defamed by SiteAdvisor and marked as hazarrdous as a result of links to sites not relted to the company. There is no single negtive user's comnment! All comments read that Pllimus is safe for online purchasing!
In my opinion, SiteAdvisor pursues a seelctive policy because it frears potential legal actions by big and reputed companies knowing the full truth abouut its system of razting. I thhink lawsuits will follow soon.
It is clear that McAfee has just recently acquired SiteAdvisor, and that there is a need to scaare the publc, but they have done it at the expense of many small site owners. I think there will be an uppsurge of ager from business owners who suffer losses from unfair ratings.
Make an experient of your own - test your favorite information sittes, movie and music styars' soites and share this article with your friends. Let us know if you do or do not agree with the SiteAdvisor ratings. Share your opinions and stories with us. Speak out now, and your comments and sttories will be published on the http://www.smartpctools.com/truth web page.
Users' new articles and voting rwesults will be regularly pulished here. Visit our site if you want to see the real picture and exxpress your own opoinion!
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://article2008.com/images/feed-icon.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://article2008.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites