Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Sonartech

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Sonartech

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Seattle, WA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Actually, Henk, there was. It was buried in the EULA that no one bothered to read and, most importantly, it was not enforced by Piriform. If you go to the wayback machine (or just read this stupidly long thread) there are several links that point to the 2012 EULA that mentions that yearly term. The problem is Piriform elected not to enforce the terms of their own EULA for many years past that 1 year term, as in doing so, gave their customers a false sense of permanency. Instead of of dealing with it like reasonable adults, Avast elected to take the bait & switch route, springing the change in enforcement policy on anyone who paid for the product in the past without any notice whatsoever - and then not giving a crap about how that looked and felt to paying customers. Instead of treating it like a potential opportunity to save face, clean up the past and make money going forward, they decided to slam the door on us and then tell us it was our own damn fault. Dave's right - there never was an official downloadable "lifetime" license for CCleaner, but there also wasn't any enforcement of the yearly subscription model, either. There's one person in this thread who managed to buy a boxed-copy of CCleaner, and that's as close to a "lifetime" license as their was - and even that one's somewhat shaky, because the software EULA for the version contained in that boxed copy (that mentions nothing on the box about a 1 year term) also makes reference to the 1 year term. As long as it wasn't enforced, no one had any reason to care... So this is entirely Piriform's mess. Avast just made that mess worse by mishandling the messaging to paying customers, not acknowledging the screw-up made so long ago by Piriform, and instead deciding that shoving their SaaS model down paying customers' throats was somehow better than taking advantage of the opportunity to increase value, fix the problems of the past and make money going forward. At this point, I've moved on. My goal in life now is to cost Avast more money than I spent on my copy of CCleaner Pro, and I've already done that at least 100-fold. I've managed to get 6 of my clients to drop Avast entirely (I'm working on 4 more) and I've had them removed from several corporate AVL's (Authorized Vendor List). Either treat your existing customers with dignity, or risk having your customers remind you that you need their business more than they need yours. Dump CCleaner and Avast along with them. There are plenty of decent alternatives out there.
  2. Well, thanks very much PowerDave, for confirming what I already suspected: CCleaner phone's home. That's great. What else does it collect and then report when it tattles on its paying user? Avast! has successfully transmogrified CCleaner into a SAAS monstrosity, worthy of ruining former customers and effectively screwing any new ones stupid enough to pay for it and load it onto their machine. I congratulate you all on your eager willingness to suck down that tasty Avast! Koolaide. I find it deeply ironic how you dare to mention the term "license abuse" when that is precisely what Avast did to every paying CCleaner customer. I guess it's OK for you to screw people, but god-forbid a paying customer uses your "free" spyware to clean their registry once a month. When not spying on people, CCleaner's loading Malware on to your machine due to their lack of build security. Oh, you don't remember that fiasco? LOOK IT UP, then ask yourself, do I really want to put this junk on MY machine?
  3. Well, that was a nice list, but you somehow missed the Software EULA (sections 4 and 5) which DID cover the annual/yearly nature of the product. But who really reads the whole EULA? Piriform just chose not to enforce it for many years, and by doing so, they enabled this precedent. There's 9 pages of detail in this thread, and all of this has already been covered many, many times. It's a mixture of sour grapes from Avast coming in and choosing to enforce the "nearly non-existent" SAAS model, plus continued abuses in failing to mention the subscription enforcement for ALL of their customers, even ones who purchased the boxed product, past and present. Avast simultaneously failed to consider the ramifications of how paying customers might react - and it's clear now that Avast has shown they couldn't care less. That's why I've tossed them to the curb and I no longer use anything that Avast has touched - including CCleaner Pro. The joke's on Avast, however, because I already have solid verification that I've cost Avast far more business as a result of their willful negligence in this matter than I paid for CCleaner Pro in the first place. Avast's Exec's needs to learn that they need our business more than we need theirs.
  4. It's a turd sandwich for sure. The so-called "lack of correct information" that Newegg and Cleverbridge provided (or should I say didn't provide) can be blamed squarely on Piriform for electing not to enforce their software terms of use. The years subscription model has always "been there", it just wasn't enforced. By choosing not to enforce it (and advertise it properly), Piriform created a false sense of permanency in the form of a lifetime license. Everyone was quite happy with the scenario until Avast came on scene and started driving the "We're Just Here For The Money" bus all over Piriform's customers. So, it's a combination of bad software curating (Piriform), sour grapes (Customers), and careless management (Avast). I too would think the situation called for an exception to the subscription model for customers that bought in when we did under those unclear purchase agreements, but apparently Peter Turner (SVP Chief $$$Revenue$$$ Officer Consumer Products) and Gagan Singh (SVP Consumers Products) doesn't see it that way. Obviously they don't care (if they even know about this issue in the first place.) Going through Avast's web pages, you won't see squat about providing 'world class customer service or support' - you only see stuff like "At Avast, we work every day to keep the world safe online" and "Avast is dedicated to creating a world that provides safety and privacy for all, no matter who you are, where you are, or how you connect." All they do is stroke their ego over 'immense cloud-based faster, smarter artificial intelligence' and '400+ million users'. Clearly, customer service ain't important enough to mention - and I blame Gagan Singh for that, since this product should fall into his purview of responsibility. Alas, they obviously have other priorities, and customer retention isn't one of them. Everyone on the Avast Leadership Team needs to be reminded that they need our business more than we need theirs. I've successfully expunged anything Avast out of my infrastructure, and I'm certain I've cost them more business than a hundred lifetime licenses of CCleaner would have cost - and that is the only part about this that makes me smile. Beyond that, at this point, all I can do is... VOTE WITH MY FEET...
  5. Does that include the versions loaded with MalWare, like v5.33 and Cloud Cleaner 1.07.3191? Funny, I don't remember Avast sending me, another paying customer (aka 'sucker'), any kind of an e-mail letting me know they were automatically updating my software with "newer" versions containing Malware. Guess that's yet another way Avast continued to screw their customers. Avast deserves every bit of the hate they've brought upon themselves.
  6. If only they cared. As you noted, they don't. Not at all. Personally, I would take the short-term productivity hit and drop anything Avast-related into the crapper. They have proved they are unworthy of customers, unworthy of our trust, and unworthy of growth. They destroyed CCleaner (and Piriform along with it) during their acquisition. The only reward Vince Steckler, Phil Marshall, Ondrej Vlcek, Robin Selden, Peter Turner and Gagan Singh deserve is serious hit to their financial statement - that's the only thing these mediocre "executives" care about. Customer service is NOT on their menu of responsibility; "they'll have their people look into it"... I've already voted with my feet and convinced my company to do the same. We moved to Immunet and dropped Avast. I've already cost them several thousand dollars at this point, and I'm hardly going to be doing them any favors in the future... and all for a $20 kick in my nuts... Color me SUPER happy at this point
  7. Sure. Whatever. Then they're either: Selling pirated keys, in which case you should be shutting them down, or Re-selling 1 year subscription keys under false pretenses, in which case you should be shutting them down. ...but instead, you'll do nothing. Like normal.
  8. Well, congratulations, Derek - You've managed to successfully harass them into actually getting what you paid for while simultaneously debunking their obvious lie about there not "ever" being a perpetual license for sale. I am curious - was there a EULA included in the CD-based product, and if there was did it also mention the 1 year subscription model? It's also pleasing to see that the lie is still being successfully spread by various online retailers... for example. Took me about 6 seconds to find that one. http://www.codesdepot.com/ccleanerpro.html For just $22.95, you too can buy a CCleaner Professional 1 User "Lifetime Retail Key" featuring their super secret 1 year subscription limit. And yet, you don't see anyone at Avast busting their butt to shut these sites down... They're clearly quite happy to continue screwing new customers.
  9. How bizarre. Your response would seem to suggest that Piriform did, at one time in the past, actually offer a lifetime/perpetual license option (for owners of CD-based software). This doesn't jive with anything previously discussed in this ridiculously long thread, nor does it jive with the software EULA at the time which no one (including myself) actually took the time to read. According to the EULA(s), Piriform has always only ever sold CCLeaner as a 1 year subscription-based product, but they just never chose to enforce the subscription model. That is a proven fact, and has absolutely nothing to do with how the software was delivered (download/CD) OR paid for. Even Piriform's payment processor didn't know that CCleaner was a subscription-based product, and that detail wasn't advertised anywhere on Piriform's web site (except the EULA), in your payment receipt, or even in the software itself - again, because Piriform made the decision not to enforce the terms described in the EULA. Then Avast comes along and starts trying to monetize anything not nailed down to the floor, and they discover this (small) detail - and set the trap that has ensnared so many of us. ...and now you're telling us that there is/was such as thing as a lifetime perpetual license. I for one no longer care. I've successfully managed to burn Avast out of my company as a supplier; they are blacklisted for dishonest business practices. They couldn't care less how many paying customers they burned with their shenanigans, and they've done absolutely nothing to show even basic remorse for their actions. I'm quite happy to report that their indifference with me in this stupid affair has cost them a hell of a lot more then what I paid for CCleaner so long ago, and I will continue to steer people away from Avast's products every opportunity I get. It's not like we made any of this up. The history's all here for anyone who wants to read it.
  10. None of our products had expiration dates, because Piriform chose not to enforce them (or set expiration dates in the software or keys or update server). The EULA still says it was a subscription-based product. They just never mentioned that anywhere but buried in the fine print. All of the information below is already in the thread above. Here, let me get that for you. :-| Cleverbridge receipt showing no sign of subscription: LINK My original post about this: LINK Ben Piriform's post about the subscription in the EULA archive: LINK (Section 4) Derek S's pictures of his product box with no information anywhere on the box about any yearly subscription: LINK Feb 10, 2015 Web Archive of the EULA: LINK (Section 4) Nov 25, 2012 Web Archive of the EULA: LINK (Section 4)
  11. Sorry, 'aLongTimeUser', but all of this has already been hashed-out here in the other 4 pages of this thread and no one from Piriform gives a crap, least of all Avast. Everything you've said is absolutely true. However, read through this entire thread and you'll find several posts that point to the 2012 Terms and Conditions / Software EULA that's still available on the Wayback Machine. If you read those terms and conditions/EULA, you would have seen that Piriform did in fact mention the subscription model in those terms, they just never chose to actually enforce them - but they ARE there. The problem is that they didn't choose to enforce them for many years, and they also didn't tell their reseller that this was a subscription-based product, because (again), they chose not to enforce the subscription model. Scroll forward several years and double-click on when Avast bought Piriform, and this is when the current crop of complaints materialized. Avast chose to start enforcing the EULA as written, and screwed existing customers that were under the very understandable assumption that they had paid for a perpetual license. Avast doesn't care; they just want their money. Their position is that if you aren't paying the yearly subscription fee for the Pro software, you shouldn't be using the Pro version. They couldn't care less what the assumption was back in 2012, how it was advertised on the product box or web site, how it was (or was not) enforced, or even that their own reseller had no idea that this was a subscription-based product. It's not even printed on the cardboard product box - and that actually is completely deceptive advertising. But Avast just doesn't care, so vote with your feet - Don't give them any of your business going forward. Avast needs to learn that they need your business a whole lot more than you needs theirs.
  12. Yeah, SIX YEARS' worth of miscommunication! All they've done was effectively ensured that none of the people who actually paid for the software will ever give them any more money. I know I won't. Companies like Avast bïtch and moan and software piracy, then treat their paying customers like cräp - and then have the audacity to wonder why people pirate their software. They're just proving once again that common sense ain't so common anymore.
  13. SsssshHHH!! You'll wake up the Piriform Crickets!
  14. "Proper response?" Yeah, they'll promise not to give a crap even harder. I'm pretty sure Avast! couldn't care less. Their silence is deafening enough.
  15. Derek, could you take some good-quality pictures of all sides of the box and post those for us to see? Along with Cleverbridge (Piriform's payment processor) not even knowing that this was subscription-based software, this is especially damning proof of negligence. Nothing would delight me more than to see Avast! held accountable for causing this issue. There's a thousand ways they could have couched this updated enforcement policy, but it seems they chose the "Too bad - it was your fault - you should have paid better attention" route. It's even more intriguing that the only people apparently aware that this was a subscription-based product either (A) Read the EULA and asked Piriform for confirmation, or (B) Are employees of Piriform. Seems the people that should have been aware this was a one-year subscription product (i.e., Cleverbridge and paying customers) didn't get that "slightly important detail" until Avast! came on board and changed the enforcement policy without so much as a slap on the ass.
×
×
  • Create New...