Talk:Daemon Tools

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Daemon Tools article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Expansion

I don't know personally, but wouldn't this be a good place to put reasons why Daemon Tools are useful? Aside from its actual function, what would it actually be used to do? Are there legitimate uses for it, aside from bypassing copyright protection? Thray 14:27, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

I agree, this article's bit about copyright infringment REALLY makes it seem like this program (and all others like it) have NO legitimate use, and that is ENTIRELY not the case. Needs heavy revision. --Anonymous 02:29, 23 April 2006 (CST)
That is a good idea, I'll probably make a section called Uses and then put a link to disk image emulator (since the reasons why people use this program would be similiar to other disk image emulation programs) and give a quick summary.
I really hope this software is released under a open source license (like the GNU GPL), too many good closed sourced programs like this, and DVD Shrink / DVD Decryptor are being threatened out of existance because of the copyright war. --ShaunMacPherson 19:09, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
There are indeed legitimates reasons to use this. People who have a lot of games or other software which require the CD to be in to use find it very irritating to constantly have to change the CD in the drive. Also, copying a CD to an image on the hard disk is a valid way to prevent scratching of an expensive original disk. And also, some people don't waste money on CD-ROM drives on all their machines, preferring to have just one machine with a CD drive and use that machine to make images which are moved over a LAN to the machine that uses the software. Ben Morris 18:11, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
I use it to test DVDs before I burn them to disk. The DVD authoring software produces a .iso file and I can mount it with Daemon Tools as though it was a real DVD... if my DVD player software plays it correctly, then I can burn disks knowing that they'll work. Mark Grant 15:05, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright infringement illegal?

The article says that "copyright infingement is illegal in most countries". It was my understanding that copyright infringement is always illegal, and in places where it is not, this is because it is not considered copyright infringement. That is to say, in countries that have copyright laws, infringing those will always be illegal, it is just that different things count as infringement in different countries. Also, copying of closed source copyrighted material is not necessarily copyright infringement, as most countries have fair use provisions (e.g. there is often an archival and/or personal use provision). --Superiority 00:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

It's infrigement from developers point of view. :) Rikis 08:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
You may have a point. However: If US - which has laws - stuff is copied in Uganda - which might have no such thing - it might still be called infringement by the US party, or am I seeing things too relatively? Zanaq 19:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Depends on the status of their treaties regarding intellectual property rights.


2CENTS: I think it has a strong 'anti-piracy' bias. There are many legitimate uses for the program and they should be addressed.

Copyright infringement could be a civil matter rather than a legal matter. Ie: If you violate copyright, you could face a lawsuit but no jail time. In that case, could it still be said to be illegal? - 71.197.117.166 21:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Spyware

I am changing "adware" to "spyware" in the Daemon Tools description because WhenU SaveNow is known to do affiliate cookie hijacking. Dajhorn 06:36, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adware/Spyware? Where?

I'm using daemon tools for a long time and i sever saw any spyware on it. If you mean optional trash you can toggle on install... then i may have disabled it every time. But i can't remember. And i definitely don't have spyware on my computer. I use many tools and check very often. And this is a pretty well-known spyware you're talking about. So: Where is it? You must add external references to this thesis, or else i'll remove the parts about the ad/spyware. (See "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable.") (I got captcha-enabled scripts to ensure this.) Because to me this looks like slander from alcohol soft. Please explain & verify! Thank you!—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.100.57.59 (talk • contribs) 23:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC).

It is indeed "optional trash you can toggle on install". Try installing it with every checkbox on to verify for yourself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thomas Castiglione (talk • contribs) 11:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

I just installed it straight off their web site. I think the "however the installation is optional and can be deselected during the install process" is disingenuous because it doesn't label it as spyware; it says "Daemon Tools Search Bar - sponsor displays contextual links and offers (Internet connection required)". I presume this is the spyware, but it's masquerading behind technogibberish. It doesn't flag it as spyware/adware or optional. If you didn't know any better (and if you weren't looking for it) it would be easy to miss. As for the "easily uninstalled", well, you have to know it's there. This is spyware by stealth. Because the existing text makes it out to be flagged out and easily deselected, well, that just isn't true. I'm changing the page on this basis. And to Daemon if you are listening, I think this really stinks. I will however keep my edits clear and unemotional. I also checked the WhenU web site which says it is "The SearchBar interface and new user enhancements, designed to maximize your online and desktop experiences." This doesn't make clear it's spyware/adware nature. Under the circumstances, I think it's fair to call this what it is. Shame on you, daemon. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.213.7.133 (talk) 12:53, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

This article seems to contradict the wikipedia entry on spyware. Specifically "Spyware is computer software that collects personal information about users without their informed consent. " Daemon tools insures you know whats you're installing, from beginning to end, and it can even be unistalled without any hassle at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.168.26.244 (talk) 10:32, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I changed it back to adware. Although it may be misleading, I would not consider its means of installation as deceitful. Any other changes should probably be fully thrashed out on this page before addition. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 19:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps the adware section should be moved to the end of the article, or atleast after uses.


Call it whatever you want, but daemon definitely knows the nature of this software. I haven't used daemon since the beginning, before it had this spyware/malware. So I just installed it thinking I could trust the source. I have had to uninstall about 3 applications that embedded themselves in my system. Two of them managed to install themselves into Firefox add-ons and tool bars. The first time I used a web browser I was redirected to a page that contained just a single image, and then my Firefox window was resized (I believe in IE this would have made it look like a system message, since the image had xp theme borders and title bar, but in Firefox it just looked silly). The image was a link to obvious malware "errcheck". Again, call it whatever, but if you saw this software on your system you would tread softly for the next few days, and feel violated in the process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.162.41.77 (talk) 08:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Windows 98 support?

When did they stop supporting Windows 98? I want to download the last version for windows 98 for my old laptop

[edit] Supported File Types

DAEMON Tools supports the following image files:

   * cue/bin
   * iso
   * ccd (CloneCD)
   * bwt (Blindwrite)
   * mds (Media Descriptor File)
   * cdi (Discjuggler)
   * nrg (Nero)
   * pdi (Instant CD/DVD)
   * b5t (BlindWrite 5)
   * isz (Compressed ISO images)

This is taken from the website itself. - Thero

[edit] Games Refusing To Run If Daemon Installed

I vaguely remember that The Sims 2 refused to run on my system while I had Daemon installed, it would always say 'please insert the correct disc' or whatever. I would think this would be one of the more well-known examples of such, though unfortunately I can't find any information on it right now. PolarisSLBM 13:42, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Copy protection systems have looked for disc emulation for a few years now. It's not specific to DAEMON Tools. Chris Cunningham 16:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Actually the article mentions that some programs look specifically for the drivers associated with DAEMON Tools, and refuse to run if it's installed.Balderdash707 (talk) 15:40, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming

If the product is "styled DAEMON Tools by its creators," why shouldn't the article refer to it thus, and be thus named? 71.243.129.191 17:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the article should be renamed to "DAEMON Tools" obviously. --85.210.2.164 (talk) 19:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (capital letters)#All caps and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks). - Cyrus XIII (talk) 19:32, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Version history

Can someone describe the feature difference between pre-adware (v3) vs post-adware (v4)? Is the newer version able to handle more protection types, etc.? Ham Pastrami (talk) 22:03, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cleanup

I've cleaned up the article a bit. I've listed the editions and their differences. I also removed the uses section, as it just mimics the list found in optical disc authoring software. Andareed (talk) 17:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Security Concerns

I understand why Andareed reverted my changes on the daemon tools page so I've condensed it and moved it into security concerns section. Please see WhenU, Gatory, page on why such separate section are neccessary to advise users of the potential problems with installing adware supported software. Such information must not be misplaced inside other sections since it cloaks it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.162.166.188 (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Both Kazaa and Messenger Plus! Live have longer sections devoted to its included adware, so an adware section for Daemon Tools seems reasonable to me, as long as it stays NPOV, which was my original concern. I've renamed the section to "Adware". Andareed (talk) 01:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Bundled 'Sponsor' Adware / Spyware

Yes, DT Basic includes it, and yes the noted citation [2] shows that you have to install the sponsor, but this is not true. I have been using DT for a number of years now, and when they went public with their commercial product I was on of the loudest outspoken critics on their forums, saying they needed to keep it free. Basically, you can install DT Basic for free, without installing the sponsor at all and after that the program runs fine regardless of whether you installed the sponsor or not.

The citation, as I stated, is correctly linked, but it is *that* page that is cited that needs to be changed - the sponsor is not *mandatory* it is optional.

I'll try to bring this up on the DT forums to see if they will make an amendment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnlgalt (talk • contribs) 10:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I made a change trying to clarify as best as I can. I've used D-Tools forever but I always just pulled the version out of my download directory. Well, I went to grab it today and saw all this LITE stuff so I checked here to see what the deal was. When I saw this mandatory adware I was concerned. I looked around and confirmed that it is just like it has always been with version 4.x. It tells you on install that there is an option for it and you can say no. Then you go on your merry way. So yes, maybe the FAQ needs to be fixed but the information on the page is just outright wrong. You don't have to. I don't have time to read and memorize the wiki editing rules so maybe y'all will slap me down and call me Ginger but something just seems really wrong about having wrong information and not fixing it because it comes from a FAQ. 68.102.180.134 (talk) 17:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The problem is this represents original research. I don't doubt what you added is correct, but we need a reputable source to say this. Andareed (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lite GUI

Can someone explain/confirm why the comparison chart says that the Lite edition does not have a graphical interface? This seems kind of silly. Ham Pastrami (talk) 06:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Lite only includes a tray-icon; I've updated the table to reflect this. Andareed (talk) 12:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)