Talk:TrafficShaperXP

Initial draft

I created this page after being unfortunate enough to install this shitty, misleading program; while it could clearly use more work, I think this is a notable program simply for the misleading limitations on bandwidth (which are not optional). Hopefully this Wikipedia page will warn people away from it when they Google for information about it. Please let me know if this requires improvement. Also, this program clearly isn't freeware, due to the limitations it adds; what could it be classed as instead? Arfed (talk) 20:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Arfed, I appreciate your effort to warn people about the limitations of the software before they use it. Keep it mind, however, that it is Wikipedia policy to maintain a neutral point of view. So far, it seems that you have done a pretty good job of staying neutral in your description of the product, despite your own negative feelings, so good job on that! However, to give a more balanced perspective, perhaps you could provide a bit more description about what the program does. As a layperson, I don't have a very clear idea what this program is used for. I would also suggest that, in order to satisfy Wikipedia's policy of no original research, you provide some reliable, third-party sources for the criticism; as it is right now, it is just coming from you, which goes against policy because the criticism cannot be verified. If you have a hard time finding good, neutral, third-party sources (not the company's website, competitor's website, or you) then it might be a sign that the subject is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article, in which case it could become a candidate for deletion. As for the question about categorization, isn't it freeware? According to Wikipedia's article, freeware is a product that "fully functional for an unlimited time with no cost" but it does mention that there can be an "optional fee". Isn't that what this program is doing: offering a free, not-so-great but fully functional product, with the option of spending more for another one? If I'm wrong, however, I'm not surprised; I know very little about the ins and outs of software, downloads, etc. Other than this, I would say that you have a nice start to an article here. I hope my advice helps, and best of luck with the article! Rising*From*Ashes (talk) 22:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Hi Rising*From*Ashes, thanks for giving me pointers on how to improve the article, I'll try and add to the description/article a bit. Do you think these would be good enough sources for notability and third party criticism? http://www.softpedia.com/get/Network-Tools/Bandwidth-Tools/Bandwidth-Controller-Personal-Edition.shtml http://elitefreeware.blogspot.com/2008/02/traffic-shaper-xp-shapes-your-network.html http://download.cnet.com/Traffic-Shaper/3000-2085_4-10649096.html http://download.cnet.com/Traffic-Shaper/9241-2085_4-10649097-1.html (criticism)

As for its status as freeware, what it does is forcibly limit the entire connection bandwidth of your computer, until you uninstall it (so far as I can see); such that if your internet connections maximum speed is 600kbs (kilobytes, not bits), then it only allows you to use 150kbs. So the limitations go beyond the program itself, and affects your entire computer, which leads me to think that classifying it as freeware might not be accurate, due to overextended limitations Arfed (talk) 00:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I've updated the article page a bit now, after finding a proper review source Arfed (talk) 00:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Adding the sources really helps to establish that your points are valid, rather than original research. Good work! It looks quite a bit better, in my opinion. Rising*From*Ashes (talk) 02:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)