Corels costumer relation and communication policy

[afx]

Facebook ranks 2nd behind google in most used web sites, neglecting it would mean neglecting millions of potential/actual customers.

There is a huge difference between supporting users already on Facebook and forcing users to go there.

And just because you opted to dump lots of info online, does not mean others are inclined to do so.

Twitter ranks 10th, so again a must use tool for anyone seriously looking at getting to as many people as you can.

In contrast to facebook, it is a broadcast service and anyone can use RSS feeds to obtain information via twitter.

I tweeted a request yesterday morning to see if anyone locally had an item I need for this weekend, within two hours I'd picked one up and saved myself buying it for two days use at a cost of £300. A couple of bottles of wine and we are both happy.

Just because you are happy with it does not mean other will be.

As far as I know, Corel don't have any forums apart from these, and as these are user to user, you cannot classify them as a proper corel forum, and that I do Agree that is a major disappointment, a company should offer all services to all people, but if it doesn't, you have to make do with what's there. Refusing to use some aspects of it is very much like cutting off your nose to spite your face, in my opinion.

Different people have different levels of what form of abuse they are willing to accept.
Forcing people to use Facebook is a definite no-go and shows a lack of consideration for customer needs.

cheers
afx

[skier-hughes]

Nobody is forcing people to use facebook, it is there for you to use if you want to, you and several others here feel they don't want to, but that is no reason to slag it off as a means of communication, which some here have been doing. I'm just giving another point of view to balnace the argument.

Mind you, I'd be interested to know why you use google + with all of googles terms and conditions and yet you think facebook is born from the devil

[afx]

Nobody is forcing people to use facebook, it is there for you to use if you want to, you and several others here feel they don't want to, but that is no reason to slag it off as a means of communication, which some here have been doing. I'm just giving another point of view to balnace the argument.

What that Corelguy posted sounded very much like you have to use facebook, that is what people object to.

Mind you, I'd be interested to know why you use google + with all of googles terms and conditions and yet you think facebook is born from the devil

Check their history, check how Facebook constantly screws their users and then check what google does. Quite a difference.

cheers
afx

[skier-hughes]

I wouldn't put them as any different to each other -

To the question - Does google sell it's users personal data?

"According to the German magazine Stern it does. Stern bought several data packets that contained several hundred address lists for 1.50 euros plus value-added tax. For another 12 cents they bought the user’s telephone number. They called up the people on the lists (just as an advertiser who buys the information would) and told them everything they knew about them and where they had gotten the information. Needless to say people were pissed.

The fact that Germany has very strict laws regarding the protection of personal data (the Bundesdatenschutzgesetz) does not seem to matter – or apply. The problem is that names, addresses, birth dates, occupations and other criteria can be freely bought and sold as long as the customer does not expressly oppose it. How can they oppose it if they aren’t aware it is happening?"


Anyway, I see it as choice

[ashmoore]

I find it so funny (and slightly sad) that people think that google still 'does no evil' when their business model makes no secret that (just like Facebook) we are its product that it sells to its advertisers. That is why they do everything for free - so you store more of your data with them to increase their vectors to advertise to you. To think otherwise is naive at best.
Why do businesses advertise with Google? Because they know so much about their product (you) that the advertiser gets better results.

But the issue with Corel using Facebook, Twitter, Google+ is that they already have a mechanism right here with this forum - but instead they see fit to use all avenues EXCEPT this one.
So rather than having a focussed group, they basically ignore their current customers (here) and target new ones with FB and its peers.

That this is happening at a time when even the previous slug speed of Adobe and its competitors has changed. Adobe now drops a new point release of LR every 3-4 months with new cameras and fixes, this is their standard schedule and mostly happens like clockwork. They now also have open and readable forums, a working feedback mechanism that we can all read and see requests turning into new features, regular blogs from project leaders and others.
They have changed to keep up with their customers and products like LR4 are showing the difference - Corel needs to do the same and reconnect with their customers - and fast.

[afx]

"According to the German magazine Stern it does. Stern bought several data packets that contained several hundred address lists for 1.50 euros plus value-added tax. For another 12 cents they bought the user’s telephone number. They called up the people on the lists (just as an advertiser who buys the information would) and told them everything they knew about them and where they had gotten the information. Needless to say people were pissed.

I tend to follow the relevant news sites quite well and never heard of this. Can you provide a credible reference please?
So far I could find nothing on the Stern pages that would support this.

Anyway, I see it as choice

It is not a choice when Corel supports only this way.

cheers
afx

[tomsi42]

I have, but for what I use it for it doesn't bother me, my services are advertised all over the internet, as is my phone number, my address, my pictures and tons of my details. If people are to use my services, pick me above others they need this info, they need it quick and easy.

Have you really read Facebook's Terms & Conditions and really reflected over the consequences if they really enforced them?

Section 2.1 is enough to say no.

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

My bold and underscore.

[skier-hughes]

Section 2.1 is enough to say no.

For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it.

My bold and underscore.

And the problem with that is?

If I don't want them to share anything with the world I don't give it to them to share. If I had young children (mines now 24) and I didn't want the world to see him I wouldn't post pictures of him on facebook. I know anything I post on there will be shared, so I use it to share things I want sharing.

I shop at sainsburys and I know each time I buy something and use my store card they log it against me, they send me offers based on what I've bought, or what they'd like me to buy based on previous purchases. They sell this info to third parties and people like my local council buy it so they can find out all about the people who live in their area.

Why do I use my store card? To get the benefits they pay me for giving them my info, but also, some of the people, like the local council, can then do things to benefit me, they tailor the services they offer to suit the demographic, making them more effective.

Should I stop using google to search for help? I could, and go back to the old way, using as library, finding books to give me data to find a manufacturer, then his phone number and ring him. Hope they have someone who can answer the problem. Maybe I have to write a letter, wait for days for a reply. Maybe find a friendly reseller that won't mind talking to me.

Or, I use google, find an answer in minutes, or somewhere on-line to ask such as a forum and normally get the problem sorted in a short time. The payment, giving google my details to use as they see fit.

I honestly cannot believe that everyone here who hates facebook for the way they share info NEVER uses google because they do the same.

I'm not saying facebook and twitter are ideal or the best way to communicate, I'm just saying they are there as an extra tool. One of many to use. I don't just use one video editor, and most ASP users, I suspect, don't use just this one tool. We have what we have, so we should try to make best use of it.

[silvershoes]

Facebook can only use what you give it.

Not remotely true. If you believe that, you are kidding yourself and have no idea how databases work. Facebook tracks users and nonusers alike, they don't need what you give it. They can match by IP address and any number of other fields, just like Google. You don't even need to go near the place, any site you visit with a "like" button sends the info home to Facebook unless the user specifically blocks it.

I could set up an email address just for facebook, make up a name and details....

That's specifically against the Facebook TOS, and sooner or later you'd get caught. Facebook aggressively combs their database and requires users to verify themselves periodically. There have been a lot of complaints on security sites about this, but if they didn't the user data they sell would soon become worthless.

Plus once you've joined Facebook, there's no clean way out. They tell you right up front they'll keep your info, they just won't show it.

You shouldn't be advising people to do something that will burn them in the end.

Facebook ranks 2nd behind google in most used web sites, neglecting it would mean neglecting millions of potential/actual customers.

But the flip side of that is by using Facebook, you're also ignoring the millions of potential/actual customers who refuse to use it, not least because of security concerns. Are you really willing to do that?

You're confusing a high usage ranking with all potential customers. It's a mistake a lot of companies are making these days so you've got company, but in the end it hurts the business. You could have had millions more sales, and you arbitrarily chose to limit your customer pool. That's not good business in anybody's book.

[skier-hughes]

Facebook can only use what you give it.

Not remotely true. If you believe that, you are kidding yourself and have no idea how databases work. Facebook tracks users and nonusers alike, they don't need what you give it. They can match by IP address and any number of other fields, just like Google. You don't even need to go near the place, any site you visit with a "like" button sends the info home to Facebook unless the user specifically blocks it.

And the difference between that and Google is?????? ZERO. Google tracks all this info, this post will be easy for anyone to find and the data in it will be used to make a fuller profile on me. I imagine 99.9% of sites allow google tracking so just about anywhere I go is being noted. So why should I or anyone else be bothered if Facebook do something similar, it's too late, Google got all that info years ago

I could set up an email address just for facebook, make up a name and details....

That's specifically against the Facebook TOS, and sooner or later you'd get caught. Facebook aggressively combs their database and requires users to verify themselves periodically. There have been a lot of complaints on security sites about this, but if they didn't the user data they sell would soon become worthless.

And when they send me an email I receive it, so I can vefirfy it! So if it appears they don't like me being called Gary Hunter a 40 year old guy from London, I can become 24 year old Georgina Hunslet from Bath instead.

Plus once you've joined Facebook, there's no clean way out. They tell you right up front they'll keep your info, they just won't show it.

Yep, so what's the problem with that, if you only give them information you don't mind them having?

You shouldn't be advising people to do something that will burn them in the end.

I'm not, I saying you can make a choice, but just because you don't like it, don't think everyone else won't either and shouldn't be given that choice.

Facebook ranks 2nd behind google in most used web sites, neglecting it would mean neglecting millions of potential/actual customers.

But the flip side of that is by using Facebook, you're also ignoring the millions of potential/actual customers who refuse to use it, not least because of security concerns. Are you really willing to do that?

That's why you have the choice, here, facebook, twitter, email support, phone support, knowledge base........

You're confusing a high usage ranking with all potential customers. It's a mistake a lot of companies are making these days so you've got company, but in the end it hurts the business. You could have had millions more sales, and you arbitrarily chose to limit your customer pool. That's not good business in anybody's book.

No, giving people choice expands the help given, it encompasses more people and is good for business. Why do people strive to be on page one of google, or why do shops want to be either on the high street or the alrge out of town stores....... because they all ahve high footfall and that's where you need to be. Facebook has high useage so you need to have a presence, People now watch tutorial videos on YouTube so you need those, it's all about offering choice and that's what's being given. Currently that choice doesn't sit with your ideas of what is needed, but it's all that's we have.

[thufor]

Facebook can only use what you give it.

Not remotely true. If you believe that, you are kidding yourself and have no idea how databases work. Facebook tracks users and nonusers alike, they don't need what you give it. They can match by IP address and any number of other fields, just like Google. You don't even need to go near the place, any site you visit with a "like" button sends the info home to Facebook unless the user specifically blocks it.

Here's a good paper on this:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... id=1717563

And the difference between that and Google is?????? ZERO.

I don't want Facebook account, nor anything to do with Facebook. Neither does Corel ask anybody to create Google+ account... So how is Google relevant to ASP and Corel's lack/broken lines of communication with their customers?

Yep, so what's the problem with that, if you only give them information you don't mind them having?

I've just shown (read the paper) that there is no "you give them only what you want" -- they get much more than that without you having a way to opt out, they get what they want.

[FrankX]

Well, the thing is, that neither Twitter nor Facebook are the appropriate medias when it comes to problem solving, helping, giving suggestions with ASP.
A forum (with subforums, plus a wiki ) ist much more suitable!

[skier-hughes]

And the difference between that and Google is?????? ZERO.

I don't want Facebook account, nor anything to do with Facebook. Neither does Corel ask anybody to create Google+ account... So how is Google relevant to ASP and Corel's lack/broken lines of communication with their customers?

Yep, so what's the problem with that, if you only give them information you don't mind them having?

I've just shown (read the paper) that there is no "you give them only what you want" -- they get much more than that without you having a way to opt out, they get what they want.

I said GOOGLE, not google +.

Everyone is saying that Facebook harvest your information, all of it, including things you don't want it to have.

I'm saying GOOGLE has done this for years and yet you are not complaining about that.

I, as in ME, do not see the difference.

I post a question here google harvest all my information.
I go to facebook and ask a question, facebook harvest all my information.

What is the difference?

Frankx, that is your opinon and that is fine, but 48,810 other people seem to think otherwise. This forum has 9,127 members, seems to indicate that some people like to use facebook.

I agree it's not right for everyone, but why argue against limiting choice.

[FrankX]

In fact, I don't think facebook is bad for communication, I only think it is not suitable for things like we discuss here in this forum.
Facebook is good for spreading news, for announcements - I check the facebook site of ASP every day in hope to see the news of an update - and for that I don't even have to sign up!

[tomsi42]

And the problem with that is?

Other than blatant disregard of general copyright practices and their "all your stuff is my stuff" attitude, you mean?