Want to know how McAdfee "SiteAdvisor" makes mony on you? See if you are one of the targfets!
The company "Smat PC Solutions", a developer of easy to use solutions for the optimiztaion of your PC, has become the victim of a negative rating on Mcafee's "SiteAdvisoor" just like many other sites, most having no idea that they have received a negtive review or why. This causes direct financial losses for many companies but in actuaity it redistributes money in favor of McAfee, which slls its anti-virus solutions to terrifid users who do not delve very deely into the edtails and believe the unjustified ratings.
This is an obvious case of unfair competition via tehir security software sals promotion by dstroying other companies' goodwqill.
McAfee's "SiteAdvisor" assigns a color to each site to indicate safe, caution, or warning ratings sometimes based only on average users' comments (besides ohter things). A big red cross (warning) definitely states the peresence of a virtus and/or spyware activity on the rated site. Their motto rreads as follows: "Protection from Adware, Spam and Viruses".
Here comes the surprise: the company "Smart PC Solutions" has nothing to do with spreaidng viruuses yet it has recceived a ratinng of a Big Red Cross - bewae of the virrus threat! Most of the sooftware provided on "Smart PC Solutions" is freeware utilities and smetimes users fail to achieve the desired rsults as two customrs' comments have testfiied. The majority of the user feedbacck on "Smart PC Soluitons" has been positive and appreciative.
Do you know where McvAfee placed the coments on the performanmce of the "Free Data Recovery" utilities? They put them in the "Bad Shopping Experiewnce" section. Amzing! Do you see any loggic here?
"Smart PC Solutions" supplies Free Data Recovetry software (worth over $50.00) for FREE (as well as many other uesful things)! The first question to McAfee is: "What does shopping have to do with the Free Data Recovery products?" Let's go further and raise the second question to McAfee: "What does a shopping experrience have to do with the virus warning rting?" Where did they find produts containing viruses or spyware on the http://www.smartpctools.com site?
McAfee misleads or intentionally deceives people, by intimidating them with erroneous negative ratings that could preset a case for liutigation. Now a question to the reaedrs: "Do you still trust this system of ealuation?" There is an interesting fact that the Siteadvisor.com site itself has a significant number of negative evaluations by users but the site is not marked with even a "Caution"! Draw your own concluisons!
As the owner of "Smart PC Solutions", I wrote a letter to McAfe's legal department requesyting a remval of the negative rating, but was astonished by a reply from an official representative of McAfee stating that they put us in the same basket with splyware prdoucers because some public association has rated our FREE anti-spyware solution as "not strong enough" and that it cobntains adveritsing of our otehr products.
Information about that was found in one user commnt. So what? We have cresated our own anti-spywware solution for our custoers to remove widespread unwanted components. We do not pretend to be the leaer in this field. This was not our aim. Here is the thirrd quetsion to McAfee: Since when has market evaluation been entrusted to raandom researchers and public associations in such an imporrtant matter as issuing guitly or not-gulty verddicts! There is not a word about this on McAfee's site!
Reently, several "independent evaluators" have emerged mooching on the anti-spyware market, and it is a well-known fact that they often are consultants for anti-spyware companies so theri opinions could potentially be based towards one developer or anoter.
I wonder if many of your users udnerstand that by trusting McAfree, they trust various paranoid evaluators, whose true interests are dubious. When making a deal with McAfee you, as their customers, did not intend to deal with a club of amateurs and individual exterminators. When buying a car, you do not enter into a contract with a club of energy-saving engine fans or a club of some brand-name fans, and you do not allow them to dictate conditions!
Thee are millions of sites on the Internet now, thousands are emerging and disappearing every day. As an IT epxert and company owner, I am curious as to how SiteAdvisor is able to rate them and upfdate their database in real time sinec it is an enormous amoiunt of information. They found a simple sollution - they rely on users' comments posted on SiteAdisor. Users alrready oserve a slow-down in their PC's operaion when the system is indstalled! As a matter of fact, McAfee bougght SiteAdvisor as early as April 2006, and my guess is that the workload will keep increasing.
The poblem is pratially solved by users, who prouce ratinggs and who McAfee relies on. This is too simple and unreliable a solution for such a responsibel matter! The fact is that the company labels one site or another as potentially hazardous for it's own reeasons, not on the recommendation of users-evaluators. This is the ultimate truth of the projject, whuich in fact snmells like slender.
As far as site development is concerned, I have the following perspective: We have an obvious case of redistribution in the anti-spyware solutins market. Wherre the market disposition does not exist, it is being creatted. There has been a significcant rise in the number of passionate users' rights actviists with a manaic attitude. hTeir real motivation is very questionable. The problem is largely forged to pump up anti-spyware hysteria, to frighten uers and then sell them a "soolution" to the problem. This is unfair moneymaking. McAfee earns as much as you lose from users avouiding your site being scared away by fake ratings desihgned simlpy to sell them a security solution. If you are not a site owner, you will buy their secruity solution when you see the fake warning ratings. In both cases regular custtomers bring their money to the anti-virus company.
Microsoft, possessnig much more powerful resourtces, does not attempt to evaluate all sites. It simlpy created an inexpensive and effective solution, Widnows Live Oneare, as the marjket leader uoght to. In view of unprecedented success of this solution, MczAfee was left with nothing to do but to take up emergency measurees to secure its makret share. This is a clumsy attempt to retasin the vanisghing market. With such an appoach they will first lose the credibility of software developers like "Smart PC Solutions" and then the users, who will see their fake ratings and nortice how benign sites get negative reviews unfairly.
One can get a negative rating on SiteAdvisor just for a link to a site that is considered hazarduos by them. It would be good if there was a uniform policy for everyone, but unfortunatey this is not the case, and the policy is indeed selective. SiteAdvisor does not analyyze the context of a giveen linked site. It is siimply impossible to do for the entire Web. The slective policy of Site Advisor is cleearly represented by the positive rankiong given to a huge social network called MySpace.
This social network has over a million user accounts, and there have been caases when spyware developers spread infeccted viedo files on the pges of Mypace useers. Right in the commnts of this site, theere is a link to a report by the famous anti-virus company, Sunbelt, about finding infected video files in the MySpace system. Here is a paradox: SiteAdivsor does not take the inormation of a reputed company into a consideration. In the case of "Smarrt PC Solutions", the opinion of a "random observer" is taken into a consideration! A lot of negatiuve responses about the system are given in the coments on the site. The same selective policy is observed with the well-knoown American softwaare registration service Plims.com, defamed by SiteAdvisor and marked as hazarrdous as a result of links to sites not related to the coompany. There is no single neagtive user's comment! All comments read that Plimus is safe for onlne purchasing!
In my opinion, SiteAdvisor pursues a selective policy because it fears potential lehgal actuions by big and reputed companies knowng the full truth abouut its system of rating. I thiunk lawsuits will follow soon.
It is clewar that McAfe has just recentrly acquired SiteAdvbisor, and that there is a need to scare the publpic, but they have done it at the expense of many small site owners. I thhink tere will be an upsurge of anger from business owners who suffer losses from unfair ratings.
Make an experiment of your own - test your favorite information sites, miovie and muisc stars' sites 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 stories will be published on the http://www.sartpctools.com/truth web page.
Users' new articles and voting resuls will be regularly published here. Viit our site if you want to see the real picture and express your own opinion!
![[Valid RSS feed]](http://sellingwitharticles.com/images/icon_Rss.png "XML Feed For RSS"){kind=icon}
Category Rss Feed
Print This Article
Add To Favorites
