Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Crappiest Mac Software Publisher? (Poll to follow)

majordude

majordude

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Apr 28, 2007
2,443
75
Hootersville
Okay, Microsoft just released an update to Office and not only is it not available for download from it's very own auto-update feature, it trashes some installs! Perfect! :p

Over the years, I've been the victim of Symantec's (Norton) garbage, Smith Micro's crap and MacSoft's buggy ports. Who is the worst?

Nominate your "favorite" and let's have a poll in a few days. :p
 
I vote for Symantec - Norton Utilities in particular. It was a godsend on Mac OS 9, but is notorious for trashing Mac OS X installations.
 
EA is kinda low on my list as their software is pretty buggy.

AOL is also floating low with their infinite betas
 
Colorbyte Software, ImagePrint Rip. It's exorbitantly expensive, tech support is largely provided by a Yahoo user group. The phone tech support that exists is evasive, they will tell you to buy an upgrade (more large sums of money) to fix the problem, and when questioned about easier solutions, become defensive and seem to deny any knowledge of them. It's almost as if they'd been instructed not to tell people how to fix stuff so they'll have to buy more.

I did get some key tech info not mentioned elsewhere out of them once after a lot of roundabout questioning and prying.
 
AOL is pretty bad, and always has been. I haven't used it in 10 years, but my Dad put the latest on my Mom's iMac. Needless to say, she stopped using it the next day.

Oh, and LogMeIn breaks with every other release. I wish they'd get their Mac/Safari support straight.
 
AOL and Norton (Symantecs) if you're talking large firms. I've seen some really crappy stuff from little guys too, but they're not usually worth talking about.

Microsoft has ups and downs. I actually thought Office 2004 was decent, though obviously still had plenty bugs. I hate 2008. I dislike Messenger, though it does have a few nice points.

Anyways, you get the picture.

jW
 
My vote is a three way tie between Microsoft, Symantec, and Intuit. I'm beginning to wonder if Intuit ever plans on updating Quicken for Mac again. Either way, I've long since given up on ever seeing feature parity out of them with their Windows version. :rolleyes:
 
Symantec without a doubt. To be fair though, they're also totally useless on the Windows side.
 
Intuit

Bill Campbell's fat arse sits on the Apple board and to date there "still" isn't feature parity with the windows version. Fuggers
 
nuckinfutz said:
Intuit
Click to expand...

Most companies offer software years in advance, like car companies. There should be a Quicken 2009 on the market right now. Instead, we have Quicken 2007. :mad:

At some point you would think these idiots would make product names that were evergreen. Quicken 6 or Quicken Ultra... who the hell would know if those were old or released an hour ago? :apple:
 
Any company that primarily develops for Windows and then ports to Mac without worrying too much about following standard GUI conventions.

Real Player for example. MS Office is rotten too, mangled keyboard short cuts and just for not feeling like a true Mac application even if it looks like one sort of.
 
For me it's a toss up between Roxio and Adobe. Roxio products are rather pricey and more often than not will not work when a new version of OS X is released. With Adobe, their products are very pricey, incredibly bloated, scatter garbage all over your computer, and they are uber slow to update their products. In fact I don't think Adobe even updates current titles, they just wait until the next version comes out and then make it compatible and always seem to be two steps behind the current OS/hardware offered by Apple.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back