Awards and Recognition for Portability and Stealth including separate recognitions for Truly portable, and Portable + Stealth.
Almost every website I visit to download software lately has software awards of one sort or another.
But none have had a Portable award, or a Portable + Stealth award.
I think one way of bringing more developers to the ideal of portability is to recognize the efforts to make a software portable and to acknowledge the value of portability.
A simple award logo design with a link to this website could easily encourage more portable software development, including the development of currently non portable software into portable.
Simple logo suggestions other than the words Portable and Portable + Stealth (image concepts); a hobo's kerchief on a stick but use a flash drive instead of a stick, A flash drive with a planet earth globe on it (portable world), A smiling flash drive, a ninja (head or full body) with a flash drive/port logo.
While it would be best from an established website like TPFC it could be organized to use only volunteers to submit and award such a logo/award.
The first candidates would be the entire database of active and portable softare found right here at http://portablefreeware.com
Awards and Recognition for Portability and Stealth
Awards and Recognition for Portability and Stealth
Last edited by donald on Tue Jan 06, 2009 4:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
Good idea.
However, how about commercial programs? I think sb. should establish a new site w/out freeware in the name.
Also, everything but "stealth". This word is really misleading. If you know then you know, but all noobs think that "stealth"="nobody can see what I'm doing"...and though it's incorrect, the name clearly suggest such feature.
However, how about commercial programs? I think sb. should establish a new site w/out freeware in the name.
Also, everything but "stealth". This word is really misleading. If you know then you know, but all noobs think that "stealth"="nobody can see what I'm doing"...and though it's incorrect, the name clearly suggest such feature.
please forward the idea to him
please forward the idea to Andrew
for testers please note the entire database at TPFC is full of candidates so testing is already accomplished by the TPFC testers
note also that it should recognize only active software that is portable or portable and stealth
volunteers would be required to submit the awards to the software developers rather than add to Andrews load in maintaining the site
the awards should be dependent on the software ie; only present on the software's page/window/paragraph and or next to its downnload link\'s\mirror link
oh and m^(2) please suggest a replacement for stealth perhaps stealthy? please come up with a good one that we will all like as you seem offended by the misapprehensions of others based on the connotations of Stealth a commonly used and popular term present in TPFC database
for testers please note the entire database at TPFC is full of candidates so testing is already accomplished by the TPFC testers
note also that it should recognize only active software that is portable or portable and stealth
volunteers would be required to submit the awards to the software developers rather than add to Andrews load in maintaining the site
the awards should be dependent on the software ie; only present on the software's page/window/paragraph and or next to its downnload link\'s\mirror link
oh and m^(2) please suggest a replacement for stealth perhaps stealthy? please come up with a good one that we will all like as you seem offended by the misapprehensions of others based on the connotations of Stealth a commonly used and popular term present in TPFC database
-
Cornflower
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:58 am
- Location: Canada's capital
To me, the statements on the accepted apps here on TPFC give more than adequate recognition. The moderators and folks here state after testing that something is portable, partially stealth, more fully stealth, or otherwise.
The comments others, esp. regulars make here usually show the popularity and value of the portable freeware, and this is worth more to me that a simple star or thumbs up rating.
The comments others, esp. regulars make here usually show the popularity and value of the portable freeware, and this is worth more to me that a simple star or thumbs up rating.
Cornflower, Donald is proposing a badge for the developer's website, which is very different from the internal recognition at TPFC. It would also promote TPFC and portable freeware in general to those who have found the approved software by other means.
If it were just something to add to TPFC, I would agree with you, but I think Donald's idea is a great one.
It seems like developing criteria for "active" applications might be tricky. The last releases of PStart and GreatNews were over a year ago, for instance, but I think they would both definitely deserve the recognition. I would suggest a minimum of 3 years, though I think that would still leave out some great tools that still get downloaded.
Also, contacting developers and offering them this badge sounds like lots of work which would need to either be coordinated to avoid duplicate contacts or be done by a single person. However, just offering some kind of opt-in link for developers on the TPFC home page seems inadequate.
I would be willing to help.
If it were just something to add to TPFC, I would agree with you, but I think Donald's idea is a great one.
It seems like developing criteria for "active" applications might be tricky. The last releases of PStart and GreatNews were over a year ago, for instance, but I think they would both definitely deserve the recognition. I would suggest a minimum of 3 years, though I think that would still leave out some great tools that still get downloaded.
Also, contacting developers and offering them this badge sounds like lots of work which would need to either be coordinated to avoid duplicate contacts or be done by a single person. However, just offering some kind of opt-in link for developers on the TPFC home page seems inadequate.
I would be willing to help.
active to me means
Active to me means there is still a way to contact the developer, and hopefully a website which hosts the application.
For an example of a dead app see ghostzilla a nice app but no website and the developers seem to have abandoned the application entirely. http://www.portablefreeware.com/?q=ghostzilla&m=Search
For an example of a dead app see ghostzilla a nice app but no website and the developers seem to have abandoned the application entirely. http://www.portablefreeware.com/?q=ghostzilla&m=Search
I would suggest that as long as the app is still hosted and has a website that it should be considered, but those which are no longer free should not get a badge matching freeware applications but should get a pay/shareware badge if any.Note: The website seems to be unavailable as of Feb 2007 ...
Last edited by donald on Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
I started a topic about this already, but I'll write it here too to have the thread complete:
I suggest "clean". The reasoning is here.
Cornflower, please note that donald doesn't use the word "freeware". So a lot of software that is not in the database could get the badge. And I like it this way. It's gonna increase portability awareness and promote this way of keeping settings.
EDIT: I wrote this post before actually posting, something with my net. donald said something about payware already.
I'm definitely for adding badges for payware too.
And rather the same badges, it's gonna prevent confusion. Licensing has nothing to portability. Also, sometimes adware is hard to distingush from freeware, i.e. KomaMail shows a "buy me" screen once / few months.
I suggest "clean". The reasoning is here.
Cornflower, please note that donald doesn't use the word "freeware". So a lot of software that is not in the database could get the badge. And I like it this way. It's gonna increase portability awareness and promote this way of keeping settings.
EDIT: I wrote this post before actually posting, something with my net. donald said something about payware already.
I'm definitely for adding badges for payware too.
And rather the same badges, it's gonna prevent confusion. Licensing has nothing to portability. Also, sometimes adware is hard to distingush from freeware, i.e. KomaMail shows a "buy me" screen once / few months.
Personally I think the Stealth or Clean argument is rather moot here.
If there are going to be awards for programs that are portable shouldn't they only go to programs that we on here would call stealth?
If a program leaves files in directories or settings in the registry then that shouldn't be classed as portable.
My reasoning for this is as follows.
As Donald says
This I feel will cause people to stay with the "It'll do" ideology.
If we're going to encourage portable applications we should encourage them to be done right.
I think only two awards are need
Portable Software
and
Portable Freeware
If there are going to be awards for programs that are portable shouldn't they only go to programs that we on here would call stealth?
If a program leaves files in directories or settings in the registry then that shouldn't be classed as portable.
My reasoning for this is as follows.
As Donald says
If awards are given to software that leaves traces where is the incentive to build more portable apps?I think one way of bringing more developers to the ideal of portability is to recognize the efforts to make a software portable and to acknowledge the value of portability.
This I feel will cause people to stay with the "It'll do" ideology.
If we're going to encourage portable applications we should encourage them to be done right.
I think only two awards are need
Portable Software
and
Portable Freeware
You have a point. Though generally I don't like the PortableApps.com definition of portability, awarding dirty apps...maybe in a way that clearly shows that it's a sub-quality portable app.Local wrote:Personally I think the Stealth or Clean argument is rather moot here.
If there are going to be awards for programs that are portable shouldn't they only go to programs that we on here would call stealth?
If a program leaves files in directories or settings in the registry then that shouldn't be classed as portable.
My reasoning for this is as follows.
As Donald saysIf awards are given to software that leaves traces where is the incentive to build more portable apps?I think one way of bringing more developers to the ideal of portability is to recognize the efforts to make a software portable and to acknowledge the value of portability.
This I feel will cause people to stay with the "It'll do" ideology.
If we're going to encourage portable applications we should encourage them to be done right.
I think only two awards are need
Portable Software
and
Portable Freeware
to m^(2) about payware
to m^(2) about payware
I agree awarding payware apps is an ideal but I don't think many would support it as this is "the Portable Freeware collection"
This is the reason for the conditionals and the reference to a separate award when I referenced payware apps that are portable
Also if stealth is replaced with clean I am fine with that but none of that is up to me or you but will be likely decided first by Andrew as the person responsible for this site(then by the community volunteers or lack of same).
Such an award needs a site like this for any real credibility and the entire TPFC community as well.
So unless you can convince the majority and Andrew (you will need volunteers and this site)
As to distribution of work it should probably work like the current moderator/contributor model.
Some work on a specific section reporting on progress and coordinating with a person in charge. Just like Andrew and his helpers here.
I agree awarding payware apps is an ideal but I don't think many would support it as this is "the Portable Freeware collection"
This is the reason for the conditionals and the reference to a separate award when I referenced payware apps that are portable
Also if stealth is replaced with clean I am fine with that but none of that is up to me or you but will be likely decided first by Andrew as the person responsible for this site(then by the community volunteers or lack of same).
Such an award needs a site like this for any real credibility and the entire TPFC community as well.
So unless you can convince the majority and Andrew (you will need volunteers and this site)
As to distribution of work it should probably work like the current moderator/contributor model.
Some work on a specific section reporting on progress and coordinating with a person in charge. Just like Andrew and his helpers here.
Last edited by donald on Tue Jan 06, 2009 1:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What is the Portablapps.com definition?
I tend not to like anything they have to say
but it'd be nice to see others opinions.
(Quick gripe: Check out Softpedia and see how many apps Haller "Developed":evil:)
The only thing I don't mind being left on a machine from my apps is MRU's which I can't help (Yet?) and non-personal files in the Temp folder.
Somebody will have to make a standard for this award if we go through with it, a set of rules to check each program against.
A question though.
Should size make a difference?
I have games that run portably perfectly, even stealth ones but at a GB and upwards could/should they be classed as portable?
I tend not to like anything they have to say
but it'd be nice to see others opinions.(Quick gripe: Check out Softpedia and see how many apps Haller "Developed":evil:)
The only thing I don't mind being left on a machine from my apps is MRU's which I can't help (Yet?) and non-personal files in the Temp folder.
Somebody will have to make a standard for this award if we go through with it, a set of rules to check each program against.
A question though.
Should size make a difference?
I have games that run portably perfectly, even stealth ones but at a GB and upwards could/should they be classed as portable?
Re: to m^(2) about payware
This site is more about "portable" than "freeware". We have a payware forum and it doesn't lay unused.donald wrote:to m^(2) about payware
I agree awarding payware apps is an ideal but I don't think many would support it as this is "the Portable Freeware collection"
But "portable freeware" awarding payware doesn't sound good, that's why I said that a separate site would be needed.
Yes, it obviously have to be branded by Andy.donald wrote:This is the reason for the conditionals and the reference to a separate award when I referenced payware apps that are portable
Also if stealth is replaced with clean I am fine with that but none of that is up to me or you but will be likely decided first by Andrew as the person responsible for this site(then by the community volunteers or lack of same).
Such an award needs a site like this for any real credibility and the entire TPFC community as well.
So unless you can convince the majority and Andrew (you will need volunteers and this site)
As to distribution of work it should probably work like the current moderator/contributor model.
Some work on a specific section reporting on progress and coordinating with a person in charge. Just like Andrew and his helpers here.
"PA.com portable"="portable+clean".Local wrote:What is the Portablapps.com definition?
I tend not to like anything they have to say
(Quick gripe: Check out Softpedia and see how many apps Haller "Developed":evil:)
The only thing I don't mind being left on a machine from my apps is MRU's which I can't help (Yet?) and non-personal files in the Temp folder.
Somebody will have to make a standard for this award if we go through with it, a set of rules to check each program against.
At first it looked nice, it was like a statement "we make quality apps". Until they said that Miranda isn't portable, because it leaves 1 unused registry key and this is a major problem that they have to fix.
IMO yes. Portable hard drive can take a lot.Local wrote:A question though.
Should size make a difference?
I have games that run portably perfectly, even stealth ones but at a GB and upwards could/should they be classed as portable?
-
Andrew Lee
- Posts: 3063
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
- Contact:
Personally, I am not too keen about the idea.
Firstly, I have never been too fond of such badges and awards. Smells of too much self-promotion on the originating site.
Plus it only contributes to badges "pollution" on the target site without creating any additional value.
Secondly, those who have been around for awhile should know that I don't particularly care about "stealth". It's just too complex a topic to summarize in one word, and everyone has their own take on it. For example, some apps indirectly cause Windows to create/update some registry entries eg. MRU, DirectX. I typically don't consider this when deciding whether an app is stealth, but apparently I know many people disagree with me.
Firstly, I have never been too fond of such badges and awards. Smells of too much self-promotion on the originating site.
Plus it only contributes to badges "pollution" on the target site without creating any additional value.Secondly, those who have been around for awhile should know that I don't particularly care about "stealth". It's just too complex a topic to summarize in one word, and everyone has their own take on it. For example, some apps indirectly cause Windows to create/update some registry entries eg. MRU, DirectX. I typically don't consider this when deciding whether an app is stealth, but apparently I know many people disagree with me.