I bought WinRAR and PGP, $30 each or less, but they offer a lot more than CC in my opinion (if you use command line RAR for automation etc).
To your question, I would but there should be a freeware version for marketing purposes. The donation tab should be retained for extra funds. It could be either open source or having a freeware and an alternate pay version with enhanced features. I still agree that the "hidden" versions being called "advanced" is a bit unfair, but we're all able to make our own choices and dig past the one-click browsing instinct.
Or would you stick with 1.27 and complain about the "spirit" of CCleaner, whatever that means.Ĭome on people, this is a good tool with a slim version. Would you really pay $10 for it if the next version was not free? So why are people so mad about CC getting some income? Sure, an open source cleaner would be great, with regular updates and support for hundreds of apps with dozens of customisation options.īut as the people who suggested that are probably aware, making something for free is only appealing up to a point. I'm amazed that people are so concerned that the installer "barely fits" on a floppy, or might take a few mins to download on dialup.Īs for being reluctant to recommend it to a friend, just send them the link to the "more versions" page, or directly to the slim version.Īnd I honestly think that it's good that some users will install the toolbar and support CCleaner's development.
0 kommentar(er)
