Jump to content
CCleaner Community Forums

Chim

Experienced Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Chim

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Back when the new CCleaner GUI Look first came out, a lot of us brought up the issue / opinion of how ugly, horrible, Etc. it was. Eventually we were strongly urged to back off because supposedly the Devs were already aware that they had messed up and they would be better able to work on rectifying the situation if the detractors stayed off their backs. Well, we backed off ... and now several revisions later at v5.05.5176 the GUI Look is pretty much entrenched in that look that had a lot of us complaining. What happened to the alleged fixing of the look once we backed off? Because while there are now many ugly looks out there on websites as well as on Apps GUIs ... CCleaner's still surpasses all of them in having gone overboard with the watering down.
  2. When you bought your computer, did you buy it absolutely brand new? Are you the only owner of that computer ever? Anyone else use that computer now? If you bought that computer second hand, a previous owner could have installed various anti-viruses when they had it. I've had various 2nd and 3rd hand computers and when I check deep into files, folders and registry entries, I find remnants of one or more anti-viruses still roaming around aside of the anti-virus that's currently installed.
  3. So I guess we are to extract that after having released Windows Vista and Windows 7, Microsoft suddenly went ... OMG! We sooo shouldn't have gone there. We should have never made Windows fancy. That was a huge mistake. We're not smart enough to make an Operating System that's great, fast and awesome-looking. Let's sacrifice the LOOK so that we can still come up with an Operating System that's useful, great and still fast. It is an insult to the word "modern" to have it be associated with the flat, ugly, pastel, lazy look / style that extremely unfortunately seems to be becoming the norm. I guess software companies save a lot of money by going this childish, kindergarten, back to the 90s look. It is the equivalent of if the Powers That Be at the movie studios suddenly decided that using all the advanced, latest Special Effects of today were too expense and time-consuming and thus, they were going to go back to the Special Effects of the original Twilight Zone and Lost in Space days. It just makes no sense to have made such astronomical strides in this area and then just decide to go back almost 2 decades in technology.
  4. The level of agitation is because the new GUI warrants it. It's not hyperbole. The 5.00 GUI seriously surpassed even the new low levels that the likes of Foxit Reader, FileHippo, MBAM 2.0x, the various latest versions of MS Office Suite and various other software had gone down to with their new flat throwback, ultra economized looks. It might not be unanimous that everyone hates the new 5.00 GUI, but it is also by no means just a micro small, renegade group of disgruntled users who hate it ... as evidenced by the many comments to that point. As to the why the need for all the negative "me too" comments after the point was initially brought up? If only 5 or so people had spoken up regarding not liking the new 5.00 GUI, it would be way easier for Piriform to chalk it off to a very small, insignificant speed bump that came with the territory of releasing any new software ... and not something that might need to be fixed. It would have been very easy to go, "Oh well, 5 people didn't like the new GUI. That's to be expected." The more people that spoke up, the better chance there was of Piriform taking serious the idea that they possibly missed the target.
  5. Windows XP Fisher Price UI scheme? Well, right now we'd take Fisher Price, Mattel or Tonka over the 5.00 GUI. I guess if there is a positive it's that this latest 5.00 GUI look is bound to be rock bottom. It's hard to believe the next thing that comes along could be worse.
  6. Something doesn't add up. Computers and microprocessors are getting more powerful, faster, faster and faster and yet software GUIs are heading back to the look of the 8088 microprocessor days. Early last year I still had as my main computer a 3rd hand dinosaur computer with a Celeron processor and only 286 Meg RAM running Windows XP ... and it had no trouble displaying the old CCleaner GUI.
  7. For future reference, can you clarify, Andavari? Are you referring to that ANY Zip file would be removed ... or that any file above 1.95 Meg would be removed?
  8. I didn't say everyone or the majority. I said the masses ... as in a lot, as in more than the typical amount that happens when a new GUI is released. This as in out of all the software that's going the flat, ugly Metro look route lately, aside of Windows 8, I had not seen any other software's new GUI get trashed to this high degree by so many users as I am seeing CCleaner 5.00's new GUI get. avast got some heat for its change to the ugly look, but nowhere near what CCleaner 5.00's new GUI is getting. Anyway, if what we the people who hate the new CCleaner 5.00 GUI look is simply a false consensus, then what you are doing is simply spin doctoring. We're not questioning / trashing CCleaner's functionality. We know CCleaner is very good at what it does and that it is arguably, unofficially possibly the most well-known and most used of this app type. What we are commenting on is CCleaner 5.00's GUI look. So, whether CCleaner has had over one billion downloads amounting to roughly 7.1 million downloads per release in the past is moot as far as our current comments regarding CCleaner 5.00's GUI is concerned. CCleaner didn't have an ugly look before while amassing that impressive number of downloads. However, if Piriform decides to chalk off the negative commentary regarding CCleaner 5.00's GUI as just simply a 0.005% little group of disgruntled users, then that impressive number of downloads CAN decline. It's a risk. Maybe it won't decline, but it is a gamble. It boggles my mind why ANY designer, creator, manufacturer of ANY product would not want to have its product be undeniably the most impressive, revolutionary and professional looking of its class instead of jussst barely doing enough to look like its competitors ... or in this case, worse. Why be a simple follower when Piriform can be a Trailblazer? Make the competition nervous or outright scared of your design prowess instead of simply tossing the importance of your GUI's look into the basement of backburner status.
  9. Well ... I for one would prefer a PortableApps.com version of CCleaner over Piriform's Portable version. Why? Oh, there's nothing wrong with Piriform's version. But, since I do use the PortableApps.com platform on my Flash Drives, a PortableApps.com version of CCleaner would be much easier / much faster to install. Just Bada Bing Bada Bang ... BAMM! DONE! For that reason I always prefer the PortableApps.com version of whatever portable apps I use over whatever other versions might be available.
  10. That's the excuse I heard several times on the avast forums regarding the change to the ugly look by avast. I mean, none of us spends most of our entire days looking at our vehicles, but we also don't prefer to be driving an ugly rusted box with 4 wheels only because it manages to get us from point A to point B. I'd hate to see the car manufacturers suddenly start reverting to coming out with NEW designs that were of the 1930s and 1940s styles. Changing to the Metro look is equivalent to cellphones changing back to the Brick Phone look.
  11. So, IMO, it would easily be in Piriform's best interest to give itself an edge over it's competition by looking more professional than them instead of looking inferior.
  12. True ... to a certain extent you have a point that as FREE users of CCleaner, we can't 'demand' a GUI revert / fix. However, by the same token, the evidence is out there of what can happen when a new product or some aspect of it is just plain ole NOT liked by the masses. Exhibit A: Windows 8 has bombed. Exhibit B: As someone else pointed out ... New Coke bombed. And I'm sure we all know of many other products, high tech or otherwise that no amount of marketing was able to save and make users / customers like them. So sure, CCleaner is within its rights to stand its ground and stick with its new GUI. But, it risks its users going to the competition. For example, I for one, as I'm sure there are many others here, also use Glary Utilities and JetClean. Another situation to consider: As I pointed out on the avast forums when avast also went to the ugly look ... There are of course oodles and tons of not quite computer-savvy computer users out there. So, when they have to choose between 2 or 3 or more brands of a certain app for their computer, their ultimate decision CAN easily come down to which one looks the best / more awesome. It might be an Anti-Virus, a CD Burner, an Image Editor or whatever, but yeah, for many people, the tipping of the selection scale can come down to which one looks best / more professional. If an app's final product looks like an Alpha version work in progress created by a beginner Developer intern, the app can easily get pushed aside in favor of a better-looking app ... costing the company a customer / user.
  13. Oops! I just realized that even IF we were to be allowed to attach Zip files here ... the limit for uploading is 1.95 Meg and that Zip file for CCleaner 4.19.4867 Portable is 5.08 Meg. So, unfortunately, there goes a great plan down the drain. Doh!
  14. I lucked out. I still had my Setup file Zip of my CCleaner 4.19.4816 Portable in one of my backup Flash Drives that I hadn't backed up to the latest and greatest of everything yet. Since I'm new here on the Piriform Forums, I still don't know my way around here entirely yet. But, for those who want it, I COULD ... IF we're allowed to attach Zip files here ... attach that Setup file Zip of CCleaner 4.19.4816 Portable here. ARE we allowed to attach Zip files here? Or are they considered too risky and not allowed?
×
×
  • Create New...