FREE Great Programs for Windows 7 [2]

Lady Fitzgerald said:

Brink said:

Stevekir said:

I downloaded CDBurnerXP and was about to install it when the Terms and Conditions included the word "Candy". Remembering that this thread had removed imgburn because they were under the Candy umbrella, I did not install it.

Perhaps CDBurnerXP should also be de-listed.

Thank you. CDBurnerXP removed from list. :)

Curious. The updates for CDBurnerXP appear to be "Candy" free. It's a good thing I keep all of my downloaded program installation files.

I've never had a problem due to Open Candy. All it ever does is "offer" to install PUPs but gives the option to opt out of them if you pay close attention when installing the program you want.

Unless I am very familiar with a software, and especially since I have started trying some of the giveaway programs, I find it worth the extra few minutes to turn on ToolWiz TimeFreeze before doing the install. If I see anything weird I disable TimeFreeze and reboot. All changes to the system partition disappear. If the install looked good and the software seems worth keeping then I just do it again while TimeFreeze is disabled.

Edit: TimeFreeze is the clostest freeware I've found to Returnil. There may be a few differences but very similar in concept.

mjf said:

Lady Fitzgerald said:

I've never had a problem due to Open Candy. All it ever does is "offer" to install PUPs but gives the option to opt out of them if you pay close attention when installing the program you want.

Same here. I still use Imgburn.

If you end up with a PUP for other software then follow this as an example
How to Remove PUP.Optional.OpenCandy (Removal Guide)

Actually, Open Candy itself is embedded in program installers and cannot be stripped from them. Open Candy does install potentially undesirable programs, such as Google Chrome, Google Task Bar, Ask Task Bar, etc. if one isn't paying attention while installing a program and/or doesn't use the advanced installation (where opt outs are normally hidden) but isn't malware itself nor does it install actual malware, such as viruses or Trojans.

MBAM will hit on any program installer that has Open Candy embedded in it but will remove the entire installer, not just Open Candy. With MBAM 1.75 and earlier, I had to rename the installer for one of my programs (FreeFileSync) to keep MBAM from hitting on it and insisting on removing it; adding .disable to the installer's filename took care of that. The latest version I have installed (2015.06.20.05) gives me the option to have MBAM warn me of any PUPs instead of automatically removing it. MBAM, no matter what version, has never found any nasties after using an installer with Open Candy in it (other than Open Candy itself if I fail to rename the installer first).

Avast free will also hit on files with Open Candy in them but gives me the option to continue (or not) with whatever I'm doing at the time it picked up on it. Had it been actual malware, it would have blocked it outright.

Open Candy is a obnoxious nuisance and I would like to shoot the people who make it and use it but, in itself, is not a hazard. One just has to be very careful and pay close attention when installing a program that has it embedded in the installer.

MilesAhead said:

Lady Fitzgerald said:

Brink said:

Thank you. CDBurnerXP removed from list. :)

Curious. The updates for CDBurnerXP appear to be "Candy" free. It's a good thing I keep all of my downloaded program installation files.

I've never had a problem due to Open Candy. All it ever does is "offer" to install PUPs but gives the option to opt out of them if you pay close attention when installing the program you want.

Unless I am very familiar with a software, and especially since I have started trying some of the giveaway programs, I find it worth the extra few minutes to turn on ToolWiz TimeFreeze before doing the install. If I see anything weird I disable TimeFreeze and reboot. All changes to the system partition disappear. If the install looked good and the software seems worth keeping then I just do it again while TimeFreeze is disabled.

Edit: TimeFreeze is the clostest freeware I've found to Returnil. There may be a few differences but very similar in concept.

I always use Macrium Reflect to make an image before I ever install a program or an update of any kind. It takes only 11-12 minutes to make and verify an image and about the same amount of time to restore one should something go wrong from installing a program or an update.

Lady Fitzgerald said:

Open Candy is a obnoxious nuisance and I would like to shoot the people who make it and use it but, in itself, is not a hazard. One just has to be very careful and pay close attention when installing a program that has it embedded in the installer.

I'm surprised by the amount of quality free software that relies on either donations or a hope that you will buy the paid version (eg. Macrium, FileLocator...). Open Candy is a possible nuisance for those who cannot read and provides a revenue source for those producing "free" software. I've seen software not containing OpenCandy that has "offers" you should decline.
Running the installer from the command prompt with the /Nocandy switch used to work.

Yes MBAM will pick installers with OpenCandy embedded. If it bothers you delete the installer and move on.
I'd be interested in an informed discussion. If it has become more devious I'd like to know and I'll steer clear of it.

mjf said:

Lady Fitzgerald said:

Open Candy is a obnoxious nuisance and I would like to shoot the people who make it and use it but, in itself, is not a hazard. One just has to be very careful and pay close attention when installing a program that has it embedded in the installer.

I'm surprised by the amount of quality free software that relies on either donations or a hope that you will buy the paid version (eg. Macrium, FileLocator...). Open Candy is a possible nuisance for those who cannot read and provides a revenue source for those producing "free" software. I've seen software not containing OpenCandy that has "offers" you should decline.
Running the installer from the command prompt with the /Nocandy switch used to work.

Yes MBAM will pick installers with OpenCandy embedded. If it bothers you delete the installer and move on.
I'd be interested in an informed discussion. If it has become more devious I'd like to know and I'll steer clear of it.

One of the things you have to understand is that it is often not the authors that include nasties in the installer but the hosting site. Unfortunately Sourceforge has joined the dark side which is why reputable authors are moving their software elsewhere (eg GIMP and FreeFileSync).

mjf said:

Lady Fitzgerald said:

I've never had a problem due to Open Candy. All it ever does is "offer" to install PUPs but gives the option to opt out of them if you pay close attention when installing the program you want.

Same here. I still use Imgburn.

If you end up with a PUP for other software then follow this as an example
How to Remove PUP.Optional.OpenCandy (Removal Guide)

Yes mate I have found SuperAntiSpyware really efficient and quick at removing PUP's SUPERAntiSpyware | Remove Malware | Remove Spyware - AntiMalware, AntiSpyware, AntiAdware! < freeware version really good.

kado897 said:

One of the things you have to understand is that it is often not the authors that include nasties in the installer but the hosting site. Unfortunately Sourceforge has joined the dark side ....

First define a nasty. I can understand a large hosting site unwittingly hosting suspect installers but why would they inject "nasties" into an installer. I'm in no position to say it doesn't happen but it is a really dumb business practice if it does happen. If it can be shown then maybe we need a list of black banned hosting sites.

mjf said:

kado897 said:

One of the things you have to understand is that it is often not the authors that include nasties in the installer but the hosting site. Unfortunately Sourceforge has joined the dark side ....

First define a nasty. I can understand a large hosting site unwittingly hosting suspect installers but why would they inject "nasties" into an installer. I'm in no position to say it doesn't happen but it is a really dumb business practice if it does happen. If it can be shown then maybe we need a list of black banned hosting sites.

How-to Geek has been on a rant about it for some time. This is an example Yes, Every Freeware Download Site is Serving Crapware (Here?s the Proof)

kado897 said:

mjf said:

kado897 said:

One of the things you have to understand is that it is often not the authors that include nasties in the installer but the hosting site. Unfortunately Sourceforge has joined the dark side ....

First define a nasty. I can understand a large hosting site unwittingly hosting suspect installers but why would they inject "nasties" into an installer. I'm in no position to say it doesn't happen but it is a really dumb business practice if it does happen. If it can be shown then maybe we need a list of black banned hosting sites.

How-to Geek has been on a rant about it for some time. This is an example Yes, Every Freeware Download Site is Serving Crapware (Here?s the Proof)

Some can be easily removed with MBAM. But some installers contain Conduit along with other PUPs that interfere with notification tray icons. I ran into this with a download of PowerISO. Removing the crap was not fun. That inspired me to run TimeFreeze before trying any install. In the case of PowerISO a right click scan with MBAM showed it contained PUPs. But up to then I had only encountered fairly harmless ones. I installed anyway. Bad move. :)