How does filezilla make money

Yet, nobody dares to hold those platforms responsible. Why do we still accept the violation of the principle of least privilege in this day and age? This account has been using HN exclusively to promote a pro-Microsoft agenda for a long time. That's a serious abuse of this site and I've banned it.

All: Agenda-driven and single-purpose accounts aren't allowed on Hacker News because they're incompatible with the intellectual curiosity this site exists for. Double that when the agenda or single purpose is advancing corporate interests. It doesn't matter what corp it is, btw; the last time we banned an account for doing this it was a different one. NiveaGeForce on June 24, root parent next [—].

This is a serious false accusation. Am I not allowed to prefer Windows? All I did was correct the rampant misinformation and bias against Windows that rarely gets challenged. And do you really think someone working for Microsoft would post something like this? I didn't say you work for Microsoft.

I have no way of knowing that, and it doesn't seem likely. But you can't use HN exclusively to promote one company over others. The reasons ought to be obvious. NiveaGeForce on June 25, root parent next [—]. I'm the most vocal about this pen issue, that could potentially cost MS billions of dollars if they need to recall those devices.

I don't disbelieve you but from our point of view it is beside the point. The point is that you've used HN primarily to argue for one company, and that's a serious abuse of this site. And we don't allow agenda-driven accounts or single-purpose accounts in general. NiveaGeForce on June 24, root parent prev next [—]. And yes, genuine non-paid Windows enthusiasts like me do exist, and I shouldn't feel ashamed of it. There is a perpetual hostility towards Windows users on this site, maybe you should address that first.

Microsoft itself is collecting a lot of telemetry even in Basic configuration [1], for example, if you use UAC privileges elevation popup they collect "the full command line arguments being used to elevate. Also they collect a lot of hardware identifiers including IMEI - unique phone identifier that allows to track it so later they can reliably prove that some user was using this computer at this time.

What a nice feature. They also collect information on files that are " part of an app and either have a block in the compatibility database or are part of an anti-virus program. How can we trust Microsoft after this?

NiveaGeForce on June 23, root parent next [—]. Do you rather trust arbitrary 3rd party Win32 apps, that have free reign to crawl your whole user profile and mess with the integrity of your system? If you're already on Windows 10, at the very least embrace UWP to get some control over your privacy.

This is reasonable. And, at this point it's important to note that the first comment in the chain advocated for moving off the platform.

It requires asking Microsoft for permission to compete with them. It gives MS permission to bar entire categories of software globally or in your particular market. More importantly it gives MS the position to impose whatever dictates it or even more likely every government in existence the right to impose whatever restrictions they like on any app maker in existence with the threat of instant non existence.

Want a social media platform to ban anyone who disagrees with the king no problem do it or you can't do business. Want your browser to censor whatever your locality wants?

No problem if it doesn't it doesn't get distributed. Want your OS to refuse to install apps that don't follow the store rules? No problem its in the governments interests and the companies. Linux package management works like an app store with an official source and the ability to add whichever sources you choose. A search of available packages shows results giving sources the priority set by the user. Updating the system updates packages from 3rd party sources same as others. The major limitation is the labour required to create packages for all the different platforms users prefer not artificial limits or money paid to the platform "owner".

Basically your cure is worse than the disease and since Microsoft wont fix the situation in a reasonable fashion so the only solution is to move off their platform. What is your ideal solution? Which platform should we move to? On Linux I can download Filezilla and it run it untrusted too.

So obviously there is no Linux distro that satisfies your requirements because this exact same issue can happen there. Same on Mac. Heck, even Windows is willing to warn you. I agree with you about the control aspect, but. Most package managers on Linux do not provide any sort of revenue stream. The main exception I'm aware of, the elementaryOS app center, provides a worse deal. I wonder if MS would have been on board with that around the time they were launching the Zune.

NiveaGeForce on June 23, root parent prev next [—]. There exist 3rd party package repositories on Windows too. Microsoft already provided a fix, called UWP. You don't need the MS Store for 3rd party repositories.

You: "No, the long term solution is to embrace the MS Store" Me: No solution which gives a single party absolute control over what software a user is allowed to run is a long term solution. There is also e. I install and update from Chocolatey whenever possible.

Getting off platforms is usually quite hard with most trying to be as sticky as possible. The common reason why people tend to stick to Windows is games, even if the situation has gotten better.

Personally I have come to the conclusion that the best solution is virtual machines with a linux base system. Put every game that is sticky to windows into its own little container and just have hardware passed through. That way every form of sticky platform only exist in a small pocket of virtual space. The tricky part is getting all this working as smoothly as if it was just one system that just happen to have really good sandboxing for untrustworthy platforms.

Enterprise users are often locked into ERP clients, for instance, that are Windows only. But the real killer reason enterprises use Windows is Active Directory. For instance I could have a white-list that didn't have this adware on it and could apply it by group-policy Fnoord on June 23, root parent next [—]. The killer feature of Windows is that people are used to running it as desktop, meaning a less steep learning curve.

It also adds Group Policy, which is less simple to replicate on Linux. Then it adds a huge pool of admins which have been through the vendor supplied training process. I can show people how to create a user and add them to my company defaults in minutes, and not just because they are familiar with Windows, but because they are familiar with the desktop metaphor I am a keen Linux user, I am typing this on Linux in fact. We have lots of processes running on Linux in fact. But I cannot replace the ease of AD in Linux.

And more than that, our ERP client only runs on Windows Except AD lets you do an awful lot more than this with Group Policy - you can configure and enforce endless amounts of settings on client machines from the simple - wallpaper for example - to software installs to executable restrictions This is a big plus for locking down mostly untrusted users eg average employees in a larger enterprise.

Edited to fix stupid autocorrect. Group Policy which is really a mostly-unrelated thing propagated through AD is probably the hardest-to-replace part of the equation. Is there a Windows license available to consumers that allows simultaneous installation on multiple VMs under a non-Windows-based hypervisor?

Not really no. I recall that linus tech tips had same question when they made a similar setup. The question about "how many installations does one license allow" does not seem to be much explored by the courts, so I am not that worried for personal setup like this. One could argue that multiple VM is just technical details for what is in practical terms a single user and a single machine. The opposite is true for my purposes I run linux and then use virtualbox to run windows 10 for the only app i'm using windows for, which is QuickBooks.

I gave up on closed source software decades ago. With Windows, every six months you have to reinstall your machine because of malware and of course the hour s of lost productivity per day compared to linux. Good luck with that. This stopped being true from like Windows 7. Please stop spreading FUD. If you take some care, don't just install any random piece of software you run across, only download software from trustworthy sources, etc. But it's not like catching a virus is inevitable fate on Windows.

Sohcahtoa82 on June 25, root parent prev next [—]. Not sure where you're getting this from. Vendors who have partaken in the "bundled crapware" model of distribution - Google, Amazon, Yahoo, Microsoft, Adobe, Oracle, etc, etc.

If you would be so kind enough as to show them how to make money perhaps they'll stop doing it. Which OS platform are you using that does not allow a user to execute binaries? I would rather they go out of business if they can't figure out another way to make money.

The fact that this is the default way to install software and regular users don't need to look beyond the official repos is why installing software on linux isn't this kind of shit show. Well, I do think there is some hypocrisy on the part of people including myself enjoying free software and services, when the revenue of those is generated by unaware people clicking on ads or accidentally installing crapware.

Sure, but things often work better when you pay people upfront rather than get something for free and let them fend for themselves. In the case of Linux packaging, there is no mechanism for monetization or advertising, so the point doesn't come up. I'd use Linux if it had the software that I want to use. So a bit of apples-oranges here Whoah, for a second I thought this was Looking at the official numbers of desktop Linux installed systems looks like it.

Why would we take that one, narrow specific segment of software taken as an example of the success or value of open source as a whole?

It would be as useful as comparing web server software market share as an indicator of whether Microsoft has succeeded as a company. Moving goal posts here? I thought the subject was desktop software. Yes, Linux won the server side, it is hard to fight against free beer. Now getting desktop software companies to invest in such market is another story. I guess I must have fallen into a time machine since I just purchased Photoshop last month. That would be which logical fallacy? Something where you take something I said to a nonsensical extreme?

I certainly never asserted that people did not pay for software. My point is that free software is very proven as a development, distribution, whatever method by now. Yes, it is indeed proven that when you pay people to develop software, it works great.

The license doesn't seem to make much of a difference. When you don't - your typical freeware on download. Both with workstation and server variants. Only for some other unscrupulous company to replace them? Ideally, the most profitable method should be ethical by nature, unlike the current situation in software and games, of course where the most profitable methods are among the least ethical. Ideally we can support good software by donating to it but this is challenging to.

Perhaps a software store for various platforms that defaults to charging money for open source software you haven't already paid for. Let the user set a multiplier that effects the price so it is reasonable for that user and let the user also change the price if they desire. They CAN pay zero for insert filezilla competitor here but the default is 3. This is probably already more than for example filezilla makes for selling out their users.

Joeri on June 23, root parent prev next [—]. I got tricked into installing adware as part of a java install, and took me many hours to get it back off my system. Having it be a percentage of the revenue instead of just a flat fee means its just a money-grab IMHO. Ironically Apple is arguing in court that Qualcomm is doing the same thing to them charging a percentage based on retail pricing and that the price is unfair. Don't tell apple how to make their living.

I didn't. That is very clear. Avoid FileZilla by all means. Digital-Citizen on June 23, parent next [—]. If what you say is true a more productive approach is to make a derivative of the last known non-malware release of FileZilla with a new name. FileZilla's code respects your software freedom FileZilla is licensed under the GNU GPL v2, last I knew , so there's no reason not to use that freedom to make a derivative which doesn't come with a tricky installer.

Rejecting free software when improvements can be had is an overreaction that could lead to a reduction in software freedom which would obviously be bad. Free software is the path to being able to trust the software you run. If you have any doubt, just ask us at trademarks filezilla-project. For the sake of clarity, nothing in this trademark policy requires you to ignore or supersedes any provision of the GNU GPL or any other applicable license. However, in any instance you cannot comply with both the terms of this trademark policy and the software license, you shall avoid to use the trademark altogether, unless for descriptive and lawful purposes.

If you want to include all or part of a FileZilla trademark in a domain name, you have to receive written permission from FileZilla project. People naturally connect domain names with organisations whose names sound almost the same.

Almost any use of a FileZilla trademark in a domain name is likely to confuse people, this way running on the wrong side of the needed thing that any use of a FileZilla trademark be non-confusing. People naturally associate domain names with organisations whose names sound similar. Almost any use of a FileZilla trademark in a domain name is likely to confuse consumers, thus running afoul of the overarching requirement that any use of a FileZilla trademark be non-confusing.

As a condition to receive the permission to use the FileZilla trademark under this trademark policy, you shall never register, attempt to register, have third parties to register on your behalf, obtain transfer or otherwise actively use a domain name which contains the "FileZilla" string or a confusingly similar one.

There is one additional broad category of things you can't do with FileZilla's trademarks: Produce changed versions of them. A changed mark also would raise the possibility of causing people confusion, this way violating FileZilla's trademark rights. Remember that our main aim is avoiding any use of a FileZilla Mark that can be confusing.

If you happen to know about a FileZilla trademark abuse all you have to do is fill out the relevant information via email to trademarks filezilla-project. The more information you supply when you file the report, the easier it is for us to evaluate and respond appropriately.

We have tried to make our trademark policy as comprehensive as possible. If you're considering a use of a FileZilla trademark that's not covered by the policy, and you're unsure whether that use would run afoul of FileZilla's guidelines, feel free to contact us at trademarks filezilla-project. Still, I strongly believe that solving the root cause of a problem is the correct thing to do.

Before deciding on implementing a new feature in FileZilla I look at whether a graphical FTP client is the right tool for the right task. One such example would be automation and scripted transfers, I think that this would be a much better fit for a simple command-line client.

After having decided to implement a new feature, there are two primary design considerations guiding the implementation of the new feature in FileZilla. The first is reliability. Each feature needs to work as advertised in all conceivable usage scenarios.

In addition I consider security an aspect of reliability as well: A security vulnerability can be seen as software that does more than what it is intended to do. In other words, users can rely on FileZilla doing exactly what it is intended to do, no more, no less. The second aspects is performance and scalability. Naturally FileZilla should be as fast as possible, nobody likes to wait longer than necessary on a task.

When implementing a feature I always consider what happens if somebody would use it to the extreme. For example most users probably only deal with a couple thousand files, yet FileZilla has been designed to handle directories containing millions of files totaling several terabytes.

Yes, the initial release had been very quiet. I registered a new project on SourceForge, set the project description, uploaded the first release and called it a day. Eventually the first users tried out FileZilla and sent valuable feedback. I kept improving FileZilla and in turn the user base kept growing with every release.

I had never expected this much success, but it keeps me motivated to continue with the project. There is also Gftp, which is most probably available in your distro. SquareWheel 7 months ago root parent prev next [—]. Last time I compared the two Filezilla was a lot faster on fast connections. Grabbing the same bunch of files from the same server it was as at times literally twice as fast as WinSCP.

If you're talking nearly 10 years ago, yes I saw that too, but WinSCP has long since improved dramatically. I'm probably talking years ago. The nice thing about FileZilla is that you don't have to qualify which OS you're using. Now here are 3 separate pages we probably didn't keep up to date on how to connect and download what you need from our servers.

Nah, they had a long runing bug where the client was -significantly- slower at transferring files than filezilla or plain old CLI. They fixed it a couple years ago though and I'd say now it's easily an equal without all the baggage. Though admittedly fewer features might be supported over the net. This often works the other way around, too; remote file managers like WinSCP can usually do local things just fine. For macOS, I'm spoiled with Forklift, which does a lot of things out of the box, sufficiently.

TBH, my remote servers list is taking a lot of space on the left pane. Will try it, thanks again. Agreed, but FZ has built in support for backblaze b2. Anyone have an alternative? Other than cyberduck, the performance was too low to be useful to me.

Good point! Last I was looking at this was before the B2 S3 api was available. Might consider switching to WinSCP now. KayL 7 months ago parent prev next [—].

This is unfortunately nothing new. Ironically, Sourceforge which many years ago had their own adware-adding program, i. I was still actively lurking around slashdot when the new guys came in and bought slashdot and sourceforge. I don't know if any of them are reading, but I think you've done a remarkable job.

It saddens me that I don't get to experience your improvements because Nevertheless, I'd like to thank you guys! The new Sourceforge team has generally done a great job. Here is a review that might help some people. The forum can be configured for users to be able to post without creating an account though only as a specific user named "Anonymous", not arbitrary names which is as important feature when creating software for users who aren't likely to have Github or Sourceforge accounts.

Sourceforge download statistics tracking of releases including graphing per country and with arbitrary timestamps is far superior to Github, which doesn't offer even private tracking of download numbers without directly using their API.

This is actually a really ridiculous situation. Cons: Sourceforge recently added the ability for the project administrator to mark any review as spam, which automatically hides it.

This single change has completely ruined the trustworthiness of Sourceforge's reviews, as unscrupulous application authors are able to mark all poor reviews as spam so users only see good reviews. Sourceforge's entire website seems to go into maintenance mode for a few minutes every 24 hours, which is frustrating for those in less favorable timezones. I find Github's well designed settings page much easier. Though admittedly Github has its share of UI quirks. New Github users are understandably initially confused by the concept of Pull Requests which should have been called Merge Requests and the fork user-interface.

As a developer familiar with both tools and git, PRs etc I find Github easier to use than Sourceforge, which is saying something. Many Sourceforge projects tend to have their source code mirrored on a rarely updated Github project, which then gets forked and developed without changes being upstreamed, which causes fragmentation. It's too easy for newbie users to download older releases Github has the same issue unless you create a Github Pages site to highlight the most recent release.

Conclusion: Sourceforge is actually a reasonable tool to develop open-source software in For new projects I would generally suggest sticking with Github and GitLab, but for existing projects on Sourceforge changing hosting to Github may not be required.

The real killer is lack of integration of third-party tools like CircleCI. That's enough to switch to Github. But you will likely miss the excellent download statistics, anonymous support forum and user review system. Nextgrid 7 months ago root parent prev next [—]. I disagree. It's not too bad if you use a search engine to search the site and an adblocker.

JeremyNT 7 months ago parent prev next [—]. This is a really good tip in general. SF is under new management and they seem to really be trying to right the ship. It's probably too late for them to gain back meaningful market share given how popular github has become, but credit where credit is due. I find it interesting that ads are considered acceptable and commonplace in Android and to a slightly lesser extent iOS apps; but on desktop they are seen as almost malware.

To be clear, I also avoid it when I can, and most of the time ad-free or open-source alternatives are available in this case I have been using WinSCP. I dislike the mobile app ecosystem with its plethora of garbage, privacy invading apps; and I am glad that desktop apps usually aren't like that. But if a program is much better than its alternatives and the ads are not too annoying, I guess I don't mind supporting its development via ads.

Being a poor person from a poor country, I couldn't afford purchasing the program or donating to it, so ads sound like one way of supporting a program I like so much though my ad views are probably worthless for the same reason. The only adware program I actually have is PotPlayer the only thing that comes close is KMPlayer, which I used before; but it's originally built by the same developer and added ads even earlier.

I think a few other programs I use had adware-bundled installers e. JDownloader, CDisplayEx, Even in the case of PotPlayer, it doesn't show ads, just an empty window maybe again because I am in a poor country?

What's the point of annoying myself if that's not even supporting the developer? Totally different beast. The Android and iOS variety are embedded in the App. On Windows they are almost always a third party application installed separately with it's own uninstaller and granted near admin rights to the machine.

It's the difference between inviting your friend over to your home and him showing up wearing a Nike shirt, or showing up with a dude you've never met who is spinning a sign. He can roam about your house without your knowledge and doesn't leave when your friend does.

Usually Android ads are embedded in the apps. Close the app and the ad goes away. Uninstall the app and you won't see its ads again. Just including ads in an application doesn't make it adware.

Adware infects the whole system, displaying popups and installing unwanted extensions in your web browser that follow you around. If FileZilla wants to include ads in the actual app that's one thing, but that's not what people are taking issue with. You haven't lived until you've had to repeatedly clean out forty-five different search toolbars that your clueless relative managed to install alongside Adobe Acrobat II2II 7 months ago parent prev next [—].

I suspect there are various reasons why advertising is accepted on mobile platforms and not on desktop operating systems. One could simply be a difference in the user base. I am fairly certain those who object to advertising on desktop operating systems also object to it on mobile platforms, but there is a large number of people who use mobile devices who rarely use traditional computers. Another difference is intended use. These are markets where advertising has been accepted for decades.

Traditional computers are more likely to be used for productivity, where advertising has never been widely accepted. There is also the nature of the software itself. Software on mobile devices have a lower perceived value since it offers less value at least in terms of features.

The publishers of the software desire some means of generating revenue, so consumers have not been left with much of an option. KMnO4 7 months ago root parent next [—]. If I install FileZilla and is has ads only in the application, I would probably consider that acceptable.

But instead, ads show up in my web browser, pop up from the systray, add themselves as shortcuts in my file manager, etc. I use iOS which is mostly immune to this, but I know showing notification ads on Android while the app is closed is met with the same amount of criticism.

How are notification ads even a thing? II2II 7 months ago root parent prev next [—]. That's a valid point. Is that even a thing these days? I seem to recall Google making changes to the notification system a few releases back that should have addressed that. Then again, I usually stick to apps distributed via F-Droid so I don't know what the typical user has to deal with.

This isn't an image display ad; it's straight up browser-hijacker malware, new search tab replacement, URLs-you-enter redirector, entering your bank URL might not go to your bank type of shit.

Unremovable and hidden also. To be clear, I don't consider ads "acceptable" on my phone, either. If I download an application and there are ads, there's a high likelihood I'll either block the ads or - if that proves impossible - I'll uninstall the app entirely. JohnTHaller 7 months ago prev next [—]. For clarification, FileZilla itself does not appear contain adware nor has it switched to ads within the app from my analysis.