Skip to main content

Please remove the toolbar installer!

45 replies [Last post]
cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

I just tried the JRE installer for the first time in years and I've got agree with the critics: the Yahoo toolbar installer has to go to.

If a user installs my desktop application which bundles the JRE installer the last thing I want him to see is a prompt to install the Yahoo toolbar. It makes *my* application look like adware! Furthermore, it leads my users to believe that *I* am the one trying to make money by trying to sell them the toolbar and that, in turn, leads to many other undesired consequences especially if the customer has already paid for the software. Users expect free software with ads, or paid software without it. Mixing the two has undesired consequences ;)

I acknowledge that the Yahoo toolbar is not adware, but you've got to realize that most users don't make that distinction. The only time it's acceptable to prompt them to install the Yahoo toolbar is when they're installing other Yahoo products. Anything else looks like spyware/adware.

Sun is locked in a very competitive race against .NET and Flash on the desktop front. I would humbly suggest that this is not the time to try to cash in on JRE installations. Increased penetration on the desktop will yield much more money in the long run.

Reply viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> I wonder about the kernel installer. I tried it and
> it was awkward and stop and go the first time I tried
> to start an applet. I had to restart my browser two
> or three times.

Sounds like a bug to me. Did you report it on BugParade?

> I think the plain old offline JRE installer is the
> cleanest and simplest way to install the JRE. It
> goes fast if you have a reasonable connection.

1) Java Kernel is supposed to let you customize the installer to your specific app. The reason you're getting a suboptimal experience now is that it does not yet let you do this sort of customization yet.

2) The vast majority of people on earth do not have a broadband connection. I know it's hard to appreciate given the fact that most people in North America do have one, but we are a tiny minority. Downloading the offline installer takes 50 minutes on a dial-up connection. If your application requires the JRE most people on such a connection will simply skip your application altogether. The Flash installer. by comparison, takes 10 minutes to download.

> I didn't think about it at the time but you are
> right. No toolbar from the kernel installer. But
> that was the 0.10rc. They might change it when it
> gets full release.

I fear the same thing.

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

No, I don't bother reporting "bugs" because they never do anything about them anyway. They have to already know. I mean even sophomores test their code to see if it works.

I understand what is trying to be achieved but they have to do a better job engineering the solution. But it's only a beta -- right?

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> No, I don't bother reporting "bugs" because they
> never do anything about them anyway. They have to
> already know. I mean even sophomores test their code
> to see if it works.

That's not helpful. First of all it's quite possible they never ran into this bug (I certainly never did) so instead of assuming they have ESP I would recommend reporting it on BugParade. There could be something specific to your configuration.

I've personally witnessed Sun fixing tens of bugs I've reported, so I would encourage you to report them on BugParade so they can be fixed.

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

Environment: FF2;Windows2000 SP4; Java Kernel Installer 1.6.0.10rc

I had to restart FF2 during the kernel install to unwedge my applet.

That's about it. You seem to have the touch for bug reporting so maybe you should do it. My personal experience is that bug reports go into a black hole so I'm done...

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> Environment: FF2;Windows2000 SP4; Java Kernel
> Installer 1.6.0.10rc
>
> I had to restart FF2 during the kernel install to
> unwedge my applet.
>
> That's about it. You seem to have the touch for bug
> reporting so maybe you should do it. My personal
> experience is that bug reports go into a black hole
> so I'm done...

I'm not reporting bugs on behalf of other people, especially if I can't reproduce it locally. Sun routinely asks me for more information once I post a bug and I'd be unable to provide it.

stevesunblade
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-22

"We were talking about Yahoo and Sun"

No. You decided to open the door by suggesting "Java friendly companies" without qualifying what you meant. A rookie debating mistake.

"gently Tanking" ??? -- ROTFL Go look again.

Already have done and supplied some numbers. What do you have to offer other than repeating your 'doom' mantra?

"You have obviously never been a MS developer"

Wrong. Java/Linux/Unix 8 years now. Before that DEC products 10+ years.

"What part of that don't you get? History is replete with examples"

Again you argue your point with no examples.

"Hello dreamland. If Apple had any intention of supporting Java in the IPhone they would have had to do things while building the hardware"

Lol! "have to do things": I love your well researched, sophisticated come-backs.

"UK? Quotes from the BBC don't count. They hate everything American."

Ah! Now I know you're here to stir up trouble for fun. Silly me for taking your FUD bate. Lol! Nice one Zauberer. I take my hat off to you (if I wore one).

stevesunblade
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-22

Previous post meant was MS/DEC 10+ years

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

Guys, I think you're missing the point.

The point I'm trying to make is that bundling the Yahoo Toolbar with the JRE installer will:

1) Make desktop users suspicious of the JRE
2) Cause more people to abort the installation altogether
3) Give applications that bundle the JRE a bad name

In my opinion it is useless to debate the financial merits of Sun bundling the Yahoo Toolbar. Only Sun knows these details and you can argue until you're blue in the face.

The main question being discussed is whether the above 3 points are true or not, and Sun can make their own decision past based on that.

If I bundle the JRE installer with *my* application I expect to be able to indicate (through command-line?) whether the user should be prompted to install the Yahoo Toolbar or not.

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

I just installed 1.6.0.7 and the first popup dialog had a little checkbox to install/not install Yahoo toolbar. I unchecked it and no toolbar.

I then installed 1.6.0.10rc and no checkbox and no toolbar.

I think Yahoo sucks and I avoid it at all costs but I haven't had any trouble getting slammed with their toolbar.

mbien
Offline
Joined: 2007-04-29

I also have no problem with the whole issue because it is _very unlikely that the kernel installer will bundle this kind of junkware.
And the kernel is the installer which will be probably used almost exclusively by consumers.

Also if you compare it with the adobe (acrobat reader) and apple (itunes) updater which try to convince you on each update to install new software... its ok i think.

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

> I also have no problem with the whole issue because
> it is _very unlikely that the kernel installer will
> bundle this kind of junkware.
> And the kernel is the installer which will be
> probably used almost exclusively by consumers.
>
> Also if you compare it with the adobe (acrobat
> reader) and apple (itunes) updater which try to
> convince you on each update to install new
> software... its ok i think.

I wonder about the kernel installer. I tried it and it was awkward and stop and go the first time I tried to start an applet. I had to restart my browser two or three times.

I think the plain old offline JRE installer is the cleanest and simplest way to install the JRE. It goes fast if you have a reasonable connection.

I didn't think about it at the time but you are right. No toolbar from the kernel installer. But that was the 0.10rc. They might change it when it gets full release.

mbien
Offline
Joined: 2007-04-29

> I wonder about the kernel installer. I tried it and
> it was awkward and stop and go the first time I tried
> to start an applet. I had to restart my browser two
> or three times.
me too,
http://forums.java.net/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=44238

> ....
>
> I didn't think about it at the time but you are
> right. No toolbar from the kernel installer. But
> that was the 0.10rc. They might change it when it
> gets full release.
I don't think that there will be anything else in the kernel installer additional to the jre because the main purpose of the kernel installer is keeping things small (or try to make them look smaller).

lilianne_blaze
Offline
Joined: 2006-05-05

+1

Agree, it seriously damages Java reputation.

andyrhxx
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-21

> I just tried the JRE installer for the first time in
> years and I've got agree with the critics: the Yahoo
> toolbar installer has to go to.
>
> If a user installs my desktop application which
> bundles the JRE installer the last thing I want him
> to see is a prompt to install the Yahoo toolbar. It
> makes *my* application look like adware!

I agree with removing the toolbar, but you shouldn't really be bundling the installer file with your desktop application. If you read the readme file in the JRE folder, it says any redistribution of the JRE must not interfere with a any JRE which may already be on the target machine.

Instead, if you want to make a standalone product, you should bundle the whole JRE directory with your app and run the app with a .bat or .exe which in turn starts javaw.exe via a relative path.

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> I agree with removing the toolbar, but you shouldn't
> really be bundling the installer file with your
> desktop application. If you read the readme file in
> the JRE folder, it says any redistribution of the JRE
> must not interfere with a any JRE which may already
> be on the target machine.

It doesn't. My installer doesn't bundle the JRE. Instead it detects at runtime whether the user already has the necessary JRE version installed. If not, it automatically downloads and runs the JRE installer as part of the application install.

> Instead, if you want to make a standalone product,
> you should bundle the whole JRE directory with your
> app and run the app with a .bat or .exe which in turn
> starts javaw.exe via a relative path.

God no! :) Bundling a private JRE is far worse than installing a public JRE on behalf of the user.

1) If the user already has the right JRE installed you end up with installers which are bigger and slower than they need to be. Sharing public JREs is the way to go. Last I checked, Sun discourages the use of private JREs.

2) Your application doesn't benefit from JRE upgrades (most of the time this is what you want)

andyrhxx
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-21

> God no! :) Bundling a private JRE is far worse than
> installing a public JRE on behalf of the user.
>
> 1) If the user already has the right JRE installed
> you end up with installers which are bigger and
> slower than they need to be. Sharing public JREs is
> the way to go. Last I checked, Sun discourages the
> use of private JREs.
>
> 2) Your application doesn't benefit from JRE upgrades
> (most of the time this is what you want)

I always prefer to bundle the JRE, that way I know it's compatible with my app. For example, my app. worked fine under 1.4.2, but not 1.6. If the user had upgraded the JRE when it was released my app. would've stopped working.

The bit of the readme I was talking about says:

Runtime Environment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

To run your application, a user needs the Java SE Runtime Environment,
which is freely available from Sun. Or, you can redistribute the
Java SE Runtime Environment for free with your application, according
to the terms of the Runtime Environment's license.

The final step in the deployment process occurs when the software is
installed on an individual user's system. Installation consists of copying
software onto the user's system, then configuring the user's system
to support that software. [b]You should ensure that your installation
procedure does not overwrite existing JRE installations, as they may
be required by other applications[/b].

and:

[b](d) you distribute Software[the JRE] for the sole purpose of running your
Programs,[/b]

does this mean that you're not meant to bundle the installer file itself? That's how I read it anyway.

if your app. bundles the installer then you will be overriding any current JRE the target machine may be using. For example, the user may have 1.3 installed because that is the only version that will run his favourite applet etc.

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> I always prefer to bundle the JRE, that way I know
> it's compatible with my app. For example, my app.
> worked fine under 1.4.2, but not 1.6. If the user had
> upgraded the JRE when it was released my app.
> would've stopped working.

If that's the case (worked in 1.4.2 but failed in 1.6) one of two things happened:

1) 1.6 contained a regression, in which case you're supposed to file a bug report with Sun, or

2) (more likely) your application assumed something that isn't guaranteed by the specification. You should fix your application to follow the specification more strictly so it will work across both JREs.

> to support that software. [b]You should ensure that
> your installation
> procedure does not overwrite existing JRE
> installations, as they may
> be required by other applications[/b].

I read that as "you're not supposed to delete or overwrite existing JRE installations but you may install new JREs". After all, Sun pretty much guarantees that all new JREs are supposed to be 100% backwards compatible with older releases. If that isn't the case you're supposed to refer to the two points I made above.

At least, that's my understanding ;)

andyrhxx
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-21

I did fix my app. to work with 1.6 because 1.6 has the vista look&feel. It was only a simple problem and probably my fault ;)

I think whichever way you do it is down to personal preference. I'm not being argumentative here, it's just that I considered bundling the installer with my app., but the way I read the readme was that I wasn't allowed to. If it's installed as the default JRE then other programs will use it, therefore it goes against the license agreement.

Do you bundle the installer file itself or do your users have to download it?

The installer I use compresses my app. with JRE6 to under 15MB which isn't too big in today's broadband world.

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> I think whichever way you do it is down to personal
> preference. I'm not being argumentative here, it's
> just that I considered bundling the installer with my
> app., but the way I read the readme was that I wasn't
> allowed to. If it's installed as the default JRE then
> other programs will use it, therefore it goes against
> the license agreement.

Why not ask Sun to be sure? You could post a new topic on this forum asking exactly that question.

> Do you bundle the installer file itself or do your
> users have to download it?

The application installer contains two components:

1) The application (required)
2) The JRE (optional)

When the installer starts up it detects whether the user needs the JRE. If so, it selects the checkbox next to the JRE. If the user proceeds, it will download the JRE installer EXE from Sun's website and run it. To be clear, the installer does not bundle the JRE exe by default.

andyrhxx
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-21

> When the installer starts up it detects whether the
> user needs the JRE. If so, it selects the checkbox
> next to the JRE. If the user proceeds, it will
> download the JRE installer EXE from Sun's website and
> run it. To be clear, the installer does not bundle
> the JRE exe by default.

Ok, if you're not bundling the installer then it's not against Sun's policy. As for my problems running my old code in JRE6, the bug:

http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=5109681

has been fixed on the latest update, but I'd already fixed my code anyway. The other thing was a small GUI problem. I had a toolbar with some Buttons on it and under 1.4 none of them were focused by default, whereas in 1.6 the first one was. I've fixed the code to sort that out as well.

My point though, is that you've no idea how your app. will run under new versions of the JRE as they're released, either due to bugs or programmer errors. Once your app. downloads and installs the JRE from Sun, does it always use that version or will it use a newer version if your user downloads one?

Maybe you're a little more careful with your code than me and won't experience so many problems ;)

cowwoc
Offline
Joined: 2003-08-24

> Ok, if you're not bundling the installer then it's
> not against Sun's policy.

It's my understanding that you're allowed to redistribute the JRE installer if you wish, but only if it's strictly bundled with your application (as opposed to become a JRE mirror site).

> My point though, is that you've no idea how your app.
> will run under new versions of the JRE as they're
> released, either due to bugs or programmer errors.
> Once your app. downloads and installs the JRE from
> Sun, does it always use that version or will it use a
> newer version if your user downloads one?

Under the existing system, the latest version will get picked up. Under the proposed Java Module system being rolled out in Java 1.7 you will be able to specify what JRE versions your application is compatible with (you can limit it to a single version).

> Maybe you're a little more careful with your code
> than me and won't experience so many problems ;)

I've rarely run into JRE upgrade problems, though it does happen sometimes. I think you're much more likely to run into problems when migrating JRE vendors (IBM versus Sun) or migrating operating systems (Solaris versus Windows). For example, if you forget to use SwingUtilities.invokeLater() it might cause performance degradation under under Windows (but otherwise work) while deadlocking under Solaris ;)

Gili

deso
Offline
Joined: 2003-06-13

I'm guessing there were financial incentives offered to put it in. AFAIK Sun makes no money from JRE licenses, so I suppose it would have to investigate other ways to fund Java development.

I don't like it being included in the installer either, but is it worth tolerating if removing it means slower releases of updates and reduced development effort for the platform in general?

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

You sound like a Republican press officer. First propose a completely hypothetical relationship between SUN and Yahoo and then construct a dooms day scenario around it.

You don't know why the Yahoo tool bar is in the installation but you threaten us with reduced development and support for Java if it's removed.

What are your motives?

deso
Offline
Joined: 2003-06-13

"[i]Doomsday scenario[/i]" "[i]..threaten us..[/i]." "[i]What are your motives?[/i]" You're being just a little bit alarmist here.

However I'll try it again from first principles before you go bolting the blast doors.

The very fact Sun included the Yahoo Toolbar installer is evidence enough for me that they have some form of relationship. You may call that hypothetical, and you may be right, but IMO companies don't do this sort of thing just because the build engineer found it lying about on his machine and thought it was a good idea to throw in. They do it because they enter into an agreement to do it.

Now, as a disclaimer I have never worked for either company so I don't [i]know[/i] this is the case, but I suspect it is. Motivation for Yahoo is obvious. It wants the toolbar in front of as many people as possible to drive traffic through Yahoo. Bundling it with the JRE installer enables this. Whats in it for Sun? Well I don't know. Maybe they think it will make the JRE better. Maybe they're just doing Yahoo a favour. But maybe, just maybe they'll get a small financial reward from Yahoo for bundling.

So, I'll go out on a limb and state my gut feeling is with the last option. Now the argument is straightforward balance sheet economics right?

Not bundling would mean that the cash from that 'arrangement' has to be found from somewhere else. Otherwise something has to give. Sun is a publicly traded company right.

That's it. No motives, no party affiliations, just my take on why/why not to include it or not.

fatbatman
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-24

Obviously there was a financial incentive for doing it. The argument is that it's a strategic mistake, meaning the damage it does Java in the long term is not worth the cash (I estimate) they get from it.

Saying that, I just downloaded and installed again Java 6 update 7 and I don't remember seeing anything about this yahoo toolbar. Maybe my eyes just filtered it out? :)

Message was edited by: fatbatman

stevesunblade
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-22

The Yahoo! advert/installer looks cheap.

zauberer
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-26

Oh man I can't stay off of this. Those of you complaining about this keep in mind that the cure is way worse than the disease. Yahoo has been in dire straights lately, read the news. It is common sense, not conspiracy theory, that Yahoo is trying to increase their exposure and may or may not have paid Sun to include the Y Toolbar in the JRE installer. Its not that big of a deal is it? Yahoo, for the most part, has been supportive of things that YOU depend on as a Java developer and if they tank then it is YOU who will feel some of that heat when they are replaced by those who DO NOT support the things YOU depend on. Be careful what you wish for.

Personally, I am for helping companies that help us in one way another, even if indirectly. I can tolerate the Y Toolbar as long as it is subtle and stays out of the way.

stevesunblade
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-22

"supportive of things that YOU depend on as a Java developer"

Can you give me an example?

Cheers.

P.S.

Your keyboard appears to have a CAPS-LOCK problem

zauberer
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-26

stevesunblade: It boils down to this. Go look at the stock charts for Java friendly companies. They are not doing so good, and that's being kind. If these companies all tank then you might as well go learn C#, MFC and .NET (plus get out your checkbook) because without a company like Sun, etc., backing Java the hardware makers will drop support for it, even if Java itself survived. If Sun is including ads with Java, its for a reason. Looks to me like Yahoo is 2 shakes away from Ch.11. I say, stop complaining about the Y-Toolbar (as long as its discreet).

What you should be complaining about is why didn't Apple Java-enable the IPhone!!!

There's big money being spent on IPhone development (venture capital). And Java is shut out completely from all that money. How's that for an answer?

stevesunblade
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-22

"Go look at the stock charts for Java friendly companies. They are not doing so good"

Let's assume you're talking about companies that use Java technologies as part of their portfolio since you don't explain what "Java friendly companies" means.

Using http://finance.yahoo.com (before Chapter-11 takes hold):

IBM looks quite good
HPQ at the time of writing has matched it's 52 week high price of $43
ORCL 52 week high of $21.18 currently at $20

I mention three here who use a J2EE stack as part of their customer portfolio. I'm sure there are more.

"They are not doing so good, and that's being kind"

That doesn't appear to be the case. Only JAVA appears to be gently "Tanking" and it's never capitalised in Java as well as IBM and Oracle.

"If these companies all tank then you might as well go learn C#, MFC and .NET (plus get out your checkbook)"

I can't see Oracle, IBM, HP, Fujitsu or indeed Sun itself going out of business any time soon and all "tanking" because I and others have critisied it's tacky advert during installation. These companies take cheques too BTW. Come to think of it, doesn't your statement make as much sense as "If Ford, GM, Lamborghini and Chrysler all go out of business you might as well and go buy BMW"...what does that even mean lol????

"What you should be complaining about is why didn't Apple Java-enable the IPhone!!!"

Perhaps Apple might need to control their iPhone software portfolio at the moment -at least during these early stages to regain R&D costs. On a seperate issue, I do wonder whether the restriction of using Objective-C as a development language will introduce erroneous 3rd part code that might freeze or it lock it up? Who knows. Java and Flash would be nice.

"There's big money being spent on IPhone development (venture capital). And Java is shut out completely from all that money."

Too early to say beyond all the hype yet:


A senior source within the industry had this to say to the news paper: “The iPhone has not been a huge product for either O2 or Carphone. Particularly in the current market, no one wants to buy an expensive phone with a very expensive 18-month contract”

http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2008/01/14/apple-silences-uk-partners-over...

"How's that for an answer?"

Rather opinionated, not backed up by any statistics other than an angry feeling.

However, it's nice to see you're passionate about Java and Sun's well being.

Thanks for reading.

Steve

zauberer
Offline
Joined: 2006-08-26

"Java friendly companies"

My definition of that is any company whose products effect the overall market for Java and whose support is needed for the continued adoption of Java technology. You know that most companies go with the heard and if the heard starts thinking Java is on its way out (as evidenced by the companies that support it going TU) then it IS on its way out. We were talking about Yahoo and Sun not IBM, HP and Oracle. Oracle and HP tanking would not have much if any effect on Java so their charts are worthless to this conversation. Look at the 5 year charts for Yahoo and Sun and tell me I was wrong.

"gently Tanking" ??? -- ROTFL Go look again.

"Come to think of it, doesn't your statement make as much sense as "If Ford, GM, Lamborghini and Chrysler all go out of business you might as well and go buy BMW"...what does that even mean lol????"

I can develop in Java almost for free. You have obviously never been a MS developer cause it costs real bucks just to play. Same with Apple. If Java loses support by big companies then Java will go the way of other long forgotten technologies. What part of that don't you get? History is replete with examples.

"Perhaps Apple might need to control their iPhone software portfolio at the moment"

Hello dreamland. If Apple had any intention of supporting Java in the IPhone they would have had to do things while building the hardware. It is extremely unlikely that IPhone will ever be Java enabled. And why are you defending a company for NOT including Java??? Sounds like you don't like Java.

"Too early to say beyond all the hype yet:"

Dead wrong. http://www.kpcb.com/initiatives/ifund/index.html
$100M, and that's just one V.C. Company! And Java gets exactly $0 out of that. And I miss the opportunity to squease money out of Al Gore. How many times in life is one likely to get that opportunity.

"http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2008/01/14/apple-silences-uk-partners-over-iphone-sales-figures/
Rather opinionated, not backed up by any statistics other than an angry feeling."

UK? Quotes from the BBC don't count. They hate everything American.

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspx/chartingbasics.aspx?symbol=YHOO&symbol=JAVA&s...

Naaa. not backed up at all.

r_u_kidding_me
Offline
Joined: 2008-07-18

I've read a few entries on this page but I'm not really seeing my situation listed.
I was never given the option to install or not install the Yahoo toolbar.
I've installed and uninstalled Java 3 times and I've yet to see a prompt for the Yahoo toolbar.

I'll gladly supply screen shots of the installation process to prove that you are shoving crap into your updates without the user's permission or knowledge.

I discovered it after all of a sudden the Yahoo toolbar starting appearing in ALL of my Firefox profiles both old and new and clean and in Firefox versions 2 and 3.

I'm thoroughly pissed and I actually feel violated.

I don't give a damn if Alexa does rank Yahoo as the number one site online line. Yahoo sucks!
Being the most popular doesn't make you the best. Case and point, Microsoft's IE and Mozilla's Firefox.
I built my web sites with Yahoo Site Builder software only to learn that the code that Yahoo produces doesn't even come close to validating which is ironic as hell because one of my sites is all about accessibility.

That site I have fixed after having to rewrite the entire site by hand line by line and page by page. My main site has about 290 pages and that too I am having to write line by line.
The homepage currently contains 214 Errors. Yahoo support says "What is not accessible?"
after I gave them the direct URL to W3C's validation test results.
I thought about my 15 minutes of fame that would occur after filing a law suit for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act but I can't really do that until my own site is fully accessible.

I now barely use Yahoo's services and I'll soon be rid of them for good.

Please don't make me classify Sun as negatively as I do Yahoo.
Do the right thing, and admit you did it in the first place.
Shows some damn character.

It's just a terrible rookie type way of doing business.

ndario
Offline
Joined: 2003-07-14

If I wasn't java fanatic, I would cancel installation because of yahoo toolbar just like I do with every other piece of software that tries to shove useless crap down my throat. Lot of people are dubious of Java being serious, don't give them arguments.

fatbatman
Offline
Joined: 2004-12-24

This isn't in the update 10 beta release so I was hoping it has already been removed.
If it hasn't though, it definitely needs to be.

+1

If the decision makers are even considering keeping this then they haven't grasped the importance of this release for the future of Java in the browser.

demonduck
Offline
Joined: 2008-03-14

>I just tried the JRE installer for the first time in years and I've got agree with the critics:
> the Yahoo toolbar installer has to go to.

Ya gotta wonder where they get these ideas. I have enough trouble begging people to try my applets. Now they gotta deal with a Yahoo toolbar? What's next? Add supported Java where you get ads for stuff "...guaranteed to satisfy her..."?

dutchiedave
Offline
Joined: 2004-05-12

I agree. The option of installing the yahoo toolbar with the JRE has to go. Perhaps this should be a RFE so everyone can vote for it. I am sure it will rise to the very top in no time!

vtor
Offline
Joined: 2004-03-24

+1

genepi
Offline
Joined: 2003-06-10

Add me to the count: +10

sauvage
Offline
Joined: 2004-03-04

+1

bneuman
Offline
Joined: 2004-08-16

+1

gklopper
Offline
Joined: 2004-07-11

+1

I hate those toolbars, they are of only dubious value and just take up space on my screen. I however keep forgetting to uncheck the box when installing the JVM.

smartini
Offline
Joined: 2005-09-01

+1

Please remove.

joecole
Offline
Joined: 2003-06-10

+1

Users first

jwenting
Offline
Joined: 2003-12-02

yah! Don't force spyware and adware onto users as part of the JRE installation process.
It makes Java look incredibly cheesy from the moment it's being installed, not a good start.

In fact if I didn't need it for my work as a Java programmer I'd be so put off by that idiocy (and yes, you can turn it off if you look carefully at the installer screens and click the right things at the right time) that I'd cancel the installer as soon as it got to that stage and decide to never use anything written in Java again.

It's unprofessional, makes your product look like some cheap piece of spyware/adware.

Yes, I know you can bypass it. But you shouldn't have to.

hchaudh1
Offline
Joined: 2006-03-15

Agreed. Please don't force anything on the users.