iPhone 3GS from AT&T. Free Shipping
Download.com site feedback: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list
- 9/25/07 12:04 PM
This is download.com
by Dango517 - 12/6/07 9:04 PM In reply to: A list of alternative software providers by lindaabchttp://www.download.com/?tag=navtab
It is a part of Cnet but apart from these Cnet.com. This is the content portion. Download.com is the software side of Cnet.
This is what they provide:
http://www.download.com/?tag=navtab
block external storage
by danoflas - 9/30/07 7:14 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
Is there out any program who can restrict external storage diveces?. You know, like your external 160-300gb hdd where u backup your photos or documents. I'd like to know an application who "passwords" those devices. a firewall option maybe? thanks. saludos u all.
Just links.
by R. Proffitt
- 9/30/07 7:23 PM
In reply to: block external storage by danoflas
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=disable+usb+devices&btnG=Google+Search finds it.
Bob
External Storage
by mountain_racer - 9/30/07 7:35 PM In reply to: block external storage by danoflasHow is the drive attached? USB, Firewire, E-Sata, or Ethernet (NAS - Network Attached Storage) etc.?
Bob covers USB above but, they can be encrypted easily with encryption software as the drive typically appear as drive letters and files are easily moved onto them.
Go to the software section of download.com and search for file encryption. You can then filter by operating system, license type, etc. Then you can sort by user and/editor review ratings. Pick the one that most suites your needs.
NAS typically comes with software in the box that you can use to password protect your files but encryption software can be used as additional protection.
It is difficult to give a definitive answer without the following:
"Note: If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem."
I think folks are confused about what you mean by "features"
by mountain_racer - 9/30/07 7:40 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
"let's restrict it to new features that you'd like to see included on the site."
Peter,
I think this thread needs a better defined set of rules or a much narrower definition of what you are looking for. It seems to have grown into a help forum 
Folks,
Peter seemed to be looking for suggestions to improve the website, not a list of questions as to "how to" fix a problem.....
Hows this for a suggestion
by lindaabc - 10/1/07 1:01 PM In reply to: I think folks are confused about what you mean by "features" by mountain_racerHow about a very detailed how to do "whatever", listing for us so called stupid people who never had the benefit of learning how to search for information on the internet. Or having a button we that are visually impaired can click on that leads to a site that we can click on links leading to specific lists of software. I realize you probably already have this, but it is configured in such a way that it is difficult for a person with really bad vision to read. The easiest type for a person with low vision or very bad vision to see is plain simple black on white. It gives the most contrast. The typing you have in blue is mostly just a blur to me, and the red is only slightly better. It may look pretty, but it does not help me. Also larger type would be nice. I realize that there is a way for things to be altered on the computer itself, but every time you go to a different website (or computer), you have to go back and adjust it so that it works correctly. If you happen to be borrowing a public computer, such features are not always on them. And then there is the scrolling issue. It can be difficult to keep track of what you are reading when you not only have to go up and down with the scrolling, but sideways as well. (I commonly find I have to do that if I use the program on this computer for the visually impaired.) At least that is what I have run up against, which is why I no longer use the program. Also, it messes up any pictures that may be shown on the site. I know it does on my desktop. In other words, is it possible to make the site more friendly for us who have limited vision. Maybe instead of mucking about with the original site, a less complicated page could be linked to it that is designed for people with low vision in mind. This probably is to much to ask for.. it is just a wish.
A great suggestion
by mountain_racer - 10/1/07 6:06 PM In reply to: Hows this for a suggestion by lindaabcI think we are on the right track now! I never meant to imply that anyone was, as you put it, "stupid."
To respond to your suggestion, CNet has on a number of occasions published two versions of a webpage, for example - their Crave blog is available in both "black on white" (like here) and "white on black."
http://crave.cnet.com/
As far as font size, font type,and font color, these are all adjustable. You can set a preferred font in the Firefox browser in the "tools" - "Options" - "content tab"
You can often increase the font size in any window by simply holding the control key (PC) or the "Apple" key (MAC) and pressing the "+" (plus sign) key.
I don't currently use Internet Explorer or the MSN browser so I can't help you there. You may be able to adjust them, I just don't know. how. You may try the "help" button in the browser and type "font".
That didn't work.
by BrianZachary - 10/1/07 8:56 PM In reply to: A great suggestion by mountain_racermountain_racer:
"You can often increase the font size in any window by simply holding the control key (PC) or the "Apple" key (MAC) and pressing the "+" (plus sign) key."
I tried that but it didn't work for me. I'm using Avant Browser on Windows so I don't know if that makes a difference. Anyway, like with any other browser I have seen, you can change the text size under the View menu, so that's not a big deal.
Besides, being that lindaabc says she is legally blind and can barely see the text, I assume she already has the text set to the largest setting, but that still may not be of much help to her, so she asks for the site to make their text on their pages at a larger size. I may be wrong.
You are rite
by lindaabc - 10/2/07 7:14 AM In reply to: That didn't work. by BrianZacharyYou are rite. It does not help much. Also, if you are traveling, and borrowing a computer, you do not always have the option of changing settings in a way that can help. And most of the times when you are able to change settings, you are left with a scrolling issue. It is easy enough to scroll up and down, but when you also have to go back and forth side ways, it can get confusing as well as tedious. If print on the site was already larger, the side ways scrolling could possibly be avoided. It would hopefully keep the same width. The page would just need to be longer.
I tried it
by lindaabc - 10/2/07 7:23 AM In reply to: A great suggestion by mountain_racerI checked out the way Crave is set up. Forget the white on black. I couldn't make out anything. The black on gray, was not much better. And the red type was unreadable by me. A better way to "highlight" something for a person with low vision would be to make the typing bold and slightly larger.
How about suggestion a download manager
by PudgyOne - 12/6/07 8:53 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
on files over a certain MB. Some of these files are huge. Some people are on dialup, still and others say the downloads are so huge, they hang there. Yes, they'll hang there if the file is huge. I have DSL up to 768kb and I always use a download manager when I download most files.
I have told the people to try using this one
http://www.download.com/Free-Download-Manager/3000-2071_4-10301621.html
You could say, because this file is large, CNET suggest that you use a download manager. You can then either suggest a couple of them or you can tell them you can find a download manager here http://www.download.com/Download-Managers/3150-2071_4-0.html?tag=dlbc
and let them choose which one to use.
Rick
cNet wishes
by purple_reading_giraffe - 1/1/08 10:09 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
Thanks for asking
1. Keep those of us stuck on dial-up in mind. Limit java and pictures and bandwidth-intensive ads. I might prefer to use lindabc's site for the visually impaired if it meant mostly plain text.
2. Maintain awareness of and commitment to the trust cNet has built by being fair and impartial. Do not let the creeping commercialism overwhelm you.
3. Allow us to tag-for-later those files, pages, articles we are interested in but lack time to download now. Bookmarks work, but a my page with saved links to favorite forums, articles, and especially a "software to check out" list (with brief summary of rating, size, category for each) could be very helpful. You could auto-add those items on ones Watch list which have been updated but not downloaded. Must have check boxes to select multiple links and delete or mark as updated or open-in-tabs in one click.
4. Limit the number of pages one must pass through to get a task done or to discover information. Check boxes with an "add to my list" or "expand editor's review" or "download now" options would be great.
5. Allow lists to be expanded to whatever number per page the user prefers. This greatly speeds up browsing.
6. Have a staff member stuck on dial-up regularly review the site.
7. Update those wonderful articles from 2005 that list the best favorite free software for a new pc. Have a page listing links to the best and most useful and timeless how-to articles.
8. Yes to areas dedicated to alternative OS's.
9. Include older Os's as well, and prior versions of software that worked on those systems, including DOS. Keep significant prior versions of software on file as much as you are able. Sometimes an update just doesn't work as well on some systems or for some people. Also, some of the much older software was just as good, but MUCH smaller; my 1st home computer was a Compaq with Windows 95, a 1 (actually .98) gigabyte harddrive, and enough bundled software it took an entire desk drawer to store the Compliance Package of installation disks. The disk was still only 1/2 full. Also, some of us are still using (or letting the kids use) older systems, and newer software can cause problems.
Checks and balances...
by symian - 2/5/08 7:19 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
Long time listener, first time caller here,
I've recently been scouring Download.com for some tweak'g and customizing software for XP, and was, as always when I come away from the site I trust, confident that I have selected some products that won't have wasted my time nor compromised my system's integrity. Although, one review made me hold my breath, as the product it was concerning, was one I had nearly d/l'ed before reading a couple more notes from the peanut gallery. This title is named:
TaskSwitchXP Pro 2.0.1
This is the quote from a review of the product:
"CONSUMER BEWARE! TROJAN FOUND!
by: pdredsox5 on 30-Jan-2008 11:18:56 AM
Pros: N/A - I never got a chance to use it
Cons: Immediately upon downloading TaskSwitchPro, my antivirus program (Symantec) discovered multiple infections of a security risk known as Trojan.Zlob. After a full removal of the trojan, I attempted to redownload TaskSwitchPro, for I doubted that the security risk could have originated from a CNET download. Yet, within seconds, Symantec identified Trojan.Zlob to once again be present on my computer.
I have since given up on TaskSwitchPro XP and returned to using Microsoft's Powertoy "Alt-Tab Replacement." They do pretty much the same thing – give you individual screenshots of all open programs – except that TaskSwitchPro shows you the placement of each program as it appears on your desktop."
I understand that your editors, webmasters and administrators are inundated with hundreds, even thousands of software products each day, and I believe it is a monumental task to filter through every one of them looking for possible embedded threats. There might already be a system in place for users to flag a particular software entry to prioritize which ones receive a 'once over' from your site's testers/reviewers.
I guess this brings me to my official request: if there is such a system of checks in place to easily alert the proper site authority, please make it more apparent to the casual software entry viewer (with bright flashy neon lights!). Or, if there is not yet any way to flag these potential offenders, please take some time to consider that any user in their right mind would never entertain for a second, the idea of d/l'ing any software after reading a sincere review such the one above.
Thanks for your time.
I agree...
by John.Wilkinson - 2/5/08 7:50 PM
In reply to: Checks and balances... by symian
Currently the only way to report downloads that potentially contain malware, are corrupt, or otherwise are unsuitable for listing you must click the "Help Center" link in the bottom left corner of the download page, choose the E-mail option, and file your complaint through the web form. While download.com support personnel usually respond within a week and resolve the issue, more often than not the member won't know how to file such a report and instead leave a user comment that may never be noticed by download.com staff. Thus, I too would like to see an option to flag a download for review, choosing from one of a few common reasons, much like you can currently do with respect to user comments. In addition, there should be a system in place where a download is automatically flagged for review or at least lowered in the search results if it receives an excessively low user rating over a period of time. (Ex: 49 of the first 55 user reviews are 1/5 stars.)
John
My CNET wishlist
by welrdelr - 2/10/08 4:26 PM In reply to: Open thread: CNET Download.com wish list by peterbutler
How about a toolchain for the ARM architecture?
A distribution based on FreeBSD for the MIPS architecture?
How about a few tutorials explaining to people how a computer works and making comparisons between more than three architectures?
"A library of Linux applications"? No. Linux is Linux/GNU. The applications are GNU, the kernel is linux. You should have said "a library of open source applications."
How about the editors use multiple operating systems and architectures and then give reports?
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
|
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
