A newer version of SiteLauncher is available.Or, Learn More About SiteLauncher
Full user review
"Inadequate info from CNET editors"
Reviews on the Mozilla add-on site are overwhelmingly positive.
My intent here is to 'review' the CNET editors' process rather than the product itself. Consequently, have given the product 3 stars so as not to unfairly skew the average rating.
Here's my issue 'CNET guys' : it's not the first time I've encountered positive and/or encouraging reviews and articles (this one, for cripes sake, is the lede story on today's download.com website) for products that are in beta, RC, or experimental status without that being indicated.
The Mozilla Add-on website makes it clear that this add-on is still considered experimental:
"Experimental add-ons are meant for advanced users to test add-ons before they are made available and reviewed for general use. Many add-ons may be in prototype form. Experimental add-ons may be alpha, beta or pre-production in quality, performance and features.
Caution should be used when installing experimental add-ons, as they have not been tested by an editor and may harm your computer configuration."
Okay, many of us are willing to play around with software that's not yet production ready, but I think that part of CNET's responsibility is to make clear what it is touting. If the product is not out of beta, if it's still experimental, you need to let us know. If you can't be bothered, hey, I could use another job.