Would you confirm that, about the adware/spyware tricks? If confirmed,
that would definitely interest me.
Perhaps it's just my obliviousness or rapidly fading memory, but I don't
recall ever seeing a trap on Oracle's Java download trying to install
adware/spyware.
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/jre8-downloads-2133155.html
I've used Java (JRE, JDK and Netbeans) on Windows actively for 5+ years,
and occasionally for longer than that, and I just don't recall seeing a
malware trick there. I see them on other sites for other software, but
not there for Java.
Greg
On 10/29/2015 11:44 AM, Simon Phipps wrote:
One more factor to consider is that the official Java installer promoted by
Oracle tries really hard to trick the end-user into installing
adware/spyware at the same time. We used to avoid this in the Sun installer
by bundling Java, but having it as an external dependency for new AOO users
means they face the challenge not only of finding and installing Java but
avoiding the malware as they do so.
I'd say this was a really big negative for a dependency on official Java.
It's not a problem on Linux where there is usually an OpenJDK bundle
available, but it's a huge negative on Windows.
S.
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orc...@apache.org>
wrote:
The Java dependency problem keeps coming up buried in other threads. I am
redirecting the most recent case so we can put light on this situation.
Before the dependencies on Java are increased/improved, I think there is a
crucial usability matter.
1. Currently users are trap-doored by exercising a feature or dialog that
suddenly raises a Java dependency, sometimes for which there is no escape
other than finding a way to shut down AOO that is not a normally-required
skill.
2. The fact that full functioning of AOO is buried in the system
requirements in a way that users can easily overlook (or never examine) is
a problem. We can fix that page, even providing (or linking to) specific
details of what the dependencies are. That would be useful so developers
and power-users have the details. However, the system requirements are
probably not read by most who download the software (based on over 40
million downloads of 4.1.1, overwhelmingly on systems designed for casual
users).
3. If the installer required presence of Java, that would be a clear
indication that it is required for operation. It would also be helpful if
the installer provided an usable link for installing a workable Java if one
is not present.
4. If the presence of Java is indeed optional, and the user does not have
it or elects not to use it, AOO should not even offer functions for which
Java is required. That is another way to improve the usability and at
least avoid users falling through trap-doors.
5. Shouldn't we do this better? Or are we to decree that AOO is only
intended for power-users who have strong skills with regard to managing
their configurations, managing the install of dependencies,
trouble-shooting and being able to work around the not-dependable way
things work now?
Three paths come to mind.
A. Remove the Java dependencies.
B. Adjust the Java dependencies,
1. So that the dependencies are clear and the situation around
failures to find a suitable JRE is made workable for casual users. This
could involve the above (2-4) remedies.
2. Only then consider increasing the dependencies on Java for
full-function operation in some controllable way.
C. Make AOO a Java application that has C++ components, rather than the
reverse.
These are all serious. Probably on the way to either A or C, one must
address B.
We also need to consider what the project's capacity for any of these
cases happens to be.
Thoughts?
- Dennis
PS: There is a bigger question about platform presence in here. There are
distributions for which Java dependency is not particularly attractive and
we may be cutting ourselves off from those. That might not matter if we
are talking about the small percentage of the downloads that are for
neither Windows nor Macintosh desktop PCs.
-----Original Message-----
From: Pedro Giffuni [mailto:p...@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2015 08:07
To: Apache OO <dev@openoffice.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Thinking of joining OpenOffice as a developer
Hello;
First of all, a warm welcome to Patricia. Java developers are
particularly welcome at this stage!
Just IMHO, the C++ side of AOO is either under-control or
too-ugly-to care-about, so we would do good focus more on the
Java parts, which are also somewhat ugly but still promising.
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
--
Greg Bullock
NorthWest Research Associates
301 Webster St.
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 582-4907
g...@nwra.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
