How to Interpret a Top Download List on Your Favorite Download Sites

I. Introduction: Could the Top Download List on Your Favorite Download Sites Be Inaccurate?

Well it's the winner, it's at the top of the top downloads, and there is no way that that many people could be wrong. Or could they!

Want to know how to help your free software reach the top of the charts? Do you want it to be in the top 20 of the Top Downloads on some popular download site?

Simple: Place a download link from your site to theirs, divert all your downloads to them, advertise it as the "Recommended Download" (even if it seems to suggest that the preferred download site is "better" than its closest rivals), advertise the download site with a pretty logo or a big bold link with bold borders, and advertise on their download site!

AVG Free is perhaps one of the most successful and it uses the tactic above by providing only one major download link (to CNET), with a tiny alternate link to its own site down out of the way.

Or you could pick the quiet, sneaky approach like Malwarebytes Anti-Malware successfully does by pretending that your preferred download site is just an extension of your own website for all "in-house" downloads. The visitor clicks on an ordinary "download here" link and suddenly they get a download from CNET!

The trade off is that if you want to get high on a download list, you have to pick only one or two. If you try to spread the wealth, then you might spread it too thin and end up low on all the lists. So only pick one main site to redirect your downloads (probably Download.com), and maybe avoid Avira's possible error of linking to three well known sites.

Oh and I almost forgot: if you create several new versions of your software and make it somewhat difficult to just click "update" from within the program, then users will have to download more often! Send them to your site, them redirect them to the appropriate target download site! But if you do this too often and you have stiff competition, then users may switch over to the competition. Aristotle's "golden mean," which places the virtues as a mean between extremes, is a good rule to follow.

Now of course this is a bit sarcastic and it is not a charge against any products, and they wouldn't go to the top without also having some high quality features or usefulness but it is still fun to see who tries to "cheat" the charts!

What are you waiting for? All the other kids are doing it! And they are.

But the problem is that it makes every site's Top Download lists less meaningful except as an anecdote. Certainly not as a proper measurement of user enthusiasm. It is certainly not an objective measurement of Top Downloads, not when some products play the system for some download sites and not others. It isn't just unfair to the other sites, it messes up the Top Download stats for every site! It does not measure what it says it measures: a better name is "Top Downloads and Redirects To Us List."

Example #1

The funniest example of this is CCleaner on FileHippo.com:

CCleaner has a "powered by Filehippo" widget on its site. It also has a large "Download from FileHippo.com (more downloads)" link. Now, you would think "more downloads" would mean it would take you to Download.com, MajorGeeks, etc., but no that would be competition: it takes you to FileHippo.com of course!

CCleaner is almost always #1 on Filehippo and rarely #1 on any other site I can find. It messes up the Top Downloads on all sites all at once. Now they are all inaccurate because it probably would be on the charts for some other sites.

Example #2

Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and AVG Free both send to Download.com.

Malwarebytes Anti-Malware (MBAM) has a list of large icons to a few other download sites on the right side of the screen, but if you try to download the free version from the left side of the screen it sends you straight to Download.com. This doesn't seem like a mistake since MBAM is doing such a good job on the charts. It is a way of quietly picking your one, favorite download site to send most of your downloads while also sending some downloads to other good download sites.

MBAM seems successful by pretending that Download.com is an extension of their site and pretending that it is natural that when you click "Download free trial version," you go directly to the preferred download site. And the other download options on MBAM's website are more like references than like official download links and they are out of the way. Jaangle does this same clandestine redirect tactic to good effect from Snapfiles.com.

Though, MBAM gets a negative blotch for labeling its free version a "trial" version, usually meaning it will only work for a limited period of time; it's actually just a stripped down free version of their full pay version. This might scare away a few potential downloaders, which may be good for their pay version and business but not so good for the top download charts.

Example #3

It's interesting that SUPERantispyware (SAS) doesn't redirect downloads from its website download page to CNET or some other site like everyone else does. SAS lags on most Top Download lists and it doesn't make CNET's security starter kit. But Gizmo's Freeware site found that it provides better scanning/removal than MBAM! SAS doesn't send visitors to any download site and lets them download from its own website. Big mistake!

Example #4

Avira gives center stage to Download.com and then lesser props to MajorGeeks and Softpedia. This is probably an error; they should not spread the wealth to three well known sites. And perhaps it is a bigger mistake to place the alternate download links directly below the recommended download, which gives them too much weight and suggests a decision to the visitor: "you may pick this download link, that download link, or maybe this other one." No, you want the visitor to just click a "download" link and never notice that any alternatives exist!

The end result is that they lag behind other antivirus products, and not because they are worse!

Conclusions

Good tip: Check the download page of any product's website that you see on a top download list. See if it might be on that list for more reason than its great programming prowess! But even if they don't, since all the other kids are doing it, all the site's top download lists suffer.

The fatal flaw is that some sites do not direct their downloads to download sites at all. Some just let users download from their own sites. This is why it messes up the download stats and they are somewhat unreliable to measure what they say they measure. If a product chooses 1 download site to redirect its downloads to, then it steals potential downloads away from other sites.

The perfect case scenario would be if download sites refused to allow products linked to their site to redirect from product download pages. This would make the top downloads less flawed, but this would only work if all download sites did it as well.

II. Most Informative Top Download Lists*:
*These are ranked by number of weekly downloads (if applicable) and quality of information provided.

1. Download.com/CNET (#1 has over two million weekly downloads; by far the best information setup: includes user ratings, editor's ratings, total number of downloads by previous week, total number of weeks on the Top 50 chart, total number of downloads, and date added for the newest product version! And if you click you get: a publisher description, user reviews, an editor's review sometimes, etc.)
2. Softpedia.com (#1 has just over a hundred thousand weekly downloads; includes user ratings; if you click it has user reviews, sometimes an editor's review, product description, total downloads, etc.)
3. MajorGeeks.com (#1 has less than a hundred thousand weekly downloads; includes user ratings but must click first; has editor picks but scattered everywhere; has a list of Top Freeware Picks nearby but it does not match editor picks exactly)

III. Other Less Informative or Difficult to Access Top Download Lists* (*Alphabetical order):

• CleanSofts.org (number of downloads unknown)

• FileForum-Betanews.com (#1 seems based on total downloads; includes user ratings)

• FileHippo.com (number of downloads unknown)

• FreewareFiles.com (#1 seems based on total downloads; includes user ratings but must click first; has an editor's choice list nearby)

• kaldata.net (#1 seems based on total downloads; includes user ratings)

• NoNags.com (requires membership to view; didn't include for that reason)

• Snapfiles.com (number of downloads unknown; includes user ratings and a user's choice list nearby)

• Tucows.com (number of downloads unknown; includes excellent editor "cow" ratings if you click)

New Poll:
Vote For The Best Download Site

List of Sites:
Best Windows Freeware/Shareware Download Sites

Rizar