What is Freeware – what is not?

freewareLast week I published an article regarding my freeware reviews, you can catch up with that article here: Freeware Reviews: The do’s and don’ts. The article elicited a couple of interesting comments regarding what actually constitutes freeware these days. One reader mentioned that “The definition of ‘FREEware’ is no longer what it used to be” and another suggested to “include a refresher of just exactly what Freeware means and how it distances itself from Freeware with ads and those who ask for contributions, etc“. So, what follows is my take on today’s freeware, what constitutes freeware, and what does not.

Wikipedia defines freeware thus: Freeware (portmanteau of “free” and “software”) is software that is available for use at no monetary cost or for an optional fee, but usually (although not necessarily) closed source with one or more restricted usage rights.

My own definition is as follows: Software (generally closed source) which can be downloaded and used completely free of charge and without limitations.

There is little doubt that the original intent, or spirit, behind the freeware movement has been seriously corrupted over the years. These days, so-called freeware is often merely a vessel used to promote premium (or payed for) versions. Or comes loaded with parasitic extras such as advertizing modules and toolbars, a practice which has become all too common place. However, I do not believe that the actual definition of freeware has changed, just that the term is now often used far to loosely.

For example, the free versions in a ‘fremium’ distribution model do not, in my opinion, constitute freeware. These free versions almost inevitably include limitations, usually missing or disabled features, and are often released with the specific purpose of enticing users to cough up for the full-featured premium edition. These are “free” versions, not freeware.

Adware, Donationware, Foistware, Nagware, etc.

bundlingThese are all derivative terms used to indicate some additional element, but are they still essentially freeware? In my opinion, and in most cases, yes. They may not be good freeware, or desirable freeware, but they are freeware nonetheless. I find the term “donationware” a tad unfair in particular. I see no harm in a developer requesting donations to assist with further development and, ultimately, keep the software free.  Of course, as with most things, there are always degrees. If a freeware product is constantly initiating popups requesting a donation, does that then make it “nagware”?

There are similar degrees involved with the term “adware”. Does a single ad placed unobtrusively in a freeware’s main interface constitute adware? Some might say yes, others might say no. The amount of ads, the frequency, the point where they become invasive or disruptive is often purely subjective. So, who can judge at exactly what point something should be labeled “adware”?

These days, any discussion involving freeware is almost certain to also include references to advertizing modules, toolbars, and bundling in general. The ubiquitous toolbars in particular have become a huge problem for freeware fans everywhere. Again, it is all a matter of degrees. Provided the bundling is benign and totally transparent with clearly defined options to decline, I don’t see a huge problem. Surely at some point the end user must take some responsibility for his or her own actions… it’s not as if there haven’t been enough warnings. Two sayings come to mind, caveat emptor – (let the buyer beware) and be prepared – (boy scout motto).

I am not for one minute condoning these practices, what I am saying is they are obviously here to stay, they are not going away anytime soon. Complaining about the situation is not productive, learning how to deal with it is.

Best Practices to Help Avoid Unwanted Bundling, Toolbars, etc.

downloads freewarebb  Of course, there is no defense against those products which go ahead and install the extras anyway, or install the extras without prior notice or an option to decline. These are just very bad practices and difficult to avoid… but not impossible. Here are some of the methods you can utilize to help avoid these bad freewares and unwanted extras in general:

  • Use your search engine to check a software’s reputation: Look for reviews, user reviews in particular. Look for recommendations from reputable sources, such as DCT.
  • Visit the software’s home page: Read through all the information included on the site. Look for genuine testimonials – genuine testimonials will usually be clickable, leading to an original source.
  • Download from a reputable/reliable source: Download  direct from the developer where possible. Avoid CNET.download.com and other sites which show scant regard for users’ safety. I recommend MajorGeeks, FreewareBB, and FileHippo as generally reliable external sources.
  • Scan the downloaded file through Virus Total: Virus Total scans files through multiple anti-virus engines, up to 48. Virus Total scans primarily for malware but will often also flag toolbars and other PUPs (Potentially Unwanted Programs).
  • Carefully monitor each and every installation: Do not just click on through an installation, pause and check the information included in each screen.
  • Install first in a virtual environment: The term “virtual environment” tends to scare off many users, it should not. Toolwiz TimeFreeze is a very simple and easy to use freeware, check out my review here: TimeFreeze: easily create a secure virtual environment.
  • Create a System Restore Point prior to installation: System Restore has improved dramatically from Vista through Windows 7 and 8… use it! Some products automatically create a restore point prior to installation, many don’t. Do not rely on the software, manually create you own system restore point prior to commencing any installation.

Bottom line, freeware today is certainly not what it used to be. More and more developers, big and small, are seeking more productive and beneficial ways to monetize their efforts. I can’t say that, in many cases, I can blame them. Perhaps we’ve been spoiled, perhaps our expectations of something for nothing in return are misplaced. Bad freeware has always been around and always will be, just seems like there is more around these days than used to be.

When it all comes down to it, we are all indiviuals with different levels of tolerance and acceptance, I don’t believe it’s up to freeware reviewers such as myself to overly categorize products. I adopt a pretty simple philosophy; in most cases, if any unsavory elements are present, I will not review nor recommend the software…. end of story. Occasionally, if I believe the software is of the highest quality and ads are not overly intrusive or aggressive, or any bundling is readily identifiable and avoidable, I will still publish a review. However, those reviews will ALWAYS include a warning by way of cautionary explanation.

Regardless, if it wasn’t for freeware, we’d all likely be a heck of a lot poorer.

Cheers… Jim

About The Author

11 thoughts on “What is Freeware – what is not?”

  1. Jim, your easy-to-read-and-understand description of the do’s and don’t’s relating to freeware is the best that I have ever read. Over many years I learned to avoid the ‘nasties’ and ‘sneakies’ which are bundled in freeware, by reading many ‘tech-site’ articles with various snippets, much of which is ‘geek-speak’. You have covered the lot in one fell swoop. Unfortunately there are still innumerable people who suffer from the Lead a Horse to Water syndrome, including some of my rellies, friends and the voice on the ‘phone, “Help, my computer is …. #^&+$%~D.

    Kind Regards,


    1. Cheers Jonno. In some respects, people are often their own worst enemies. Not gullible, not naive, just overly trusting. Education is the best remedy, all we can do is hope that they are listening.

      Best mate… Jim

  2. Jim, you mentioned we’d be poorer if not for Freeware. That might of been the case years ago when software was almost as expensive as hardware is today, but programs bundled into the Shareware class has really dropped the prices with regards to many software programs and utilities. Same with the Free and Premium packages. You’re given the option to have more for a price, or be happy with less. All depends on what one was after in the first place. It’s only the greedy who want everything for nothing. I’ve found that to be happy with software (free or one that you spend some money on), one must use it, and be at a lose when it’s not there (on another computer), Mindblower!

  3. Jim, just keep on doing what you do! I find it at least interesting, if not useful.

  4. Thanks for the mention of CNET to beware of. I assumed the opposite and and glad to be notified of this. I usually only use free ware that has been reviewed and approved through Kim Komando web site and I hope she isn’t misleading like CNET. Again, very surprising to learn this about CNET. Thanks again.

    1. You are most welcome Mandy. These days, most leading tech/freeware journalists advise against using CNET download.com. CNET’s priority is skewed toward income generation rather than security concerns, often to the detriment of user safety. I’ve lost count of the number of bad freeware, bundled with all sorts of nasties, listed on download.com.

      Kim who?? Sounds like a lady I’d like to have guarding the front door. 🙂 Seriously, Kim is not well known in Australia. I had a quick look through Kim’s freeware recommendations and she appears to mostly stick with the staples; freeware which is established, well-known and popular. No problem there.

      Cheers… Jim

  5. I don’t know if you’re right when you say that CNet and some of the other well known download sites have scant regard for users’ safety? But they definitely have no qualms about advertising programs as Free, when they are nothing more than very limited demo versions that hope to get you hooked into buying their full versions! Over the years, I have been caught out several times by that and I find it a very deceitful practice.

    1. Hey Sheri,

      I don’t know if you’re right when you say that CNet and some of the other well known download sites have scant regard for users’ safety?

      You have misquoted me… I did not say “other well known download sites”, merely “other sites”.

      I guess you’ll just have to take my word for it then. 🙂 Seriously, CNET is notoriously unfussy about what freeware it chooses to list. There are download sites which do rigidly vet freeware, refusing to list any which include PUPs (Potentially Unwanted Programs) or exhibit other generally unacceptable behavior, but CNET is not among them.

      Appreciate your comment,
      Cheers… Jim

  6. I have developed a dislike for what I call whineware- where the developer of the so-called free app or program has to repeatedly, usually by nag screens, tell you all about how hard he works for nuthin because he is SUCH a good person tho humble, and oh, can’tcha just buy him a cuppa coffee, canya huh, yeah, that’s it, your credit card number goes THERE, and oh, thank you, you have saved a starving developer….

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top


Get great content like this delivered to your inbox!

It's free, convenient, and delivered right to your inbox! We do not spam and we will not share your address. Period!