Ad-aware

[Shane]

Well, it's been weeks now. I've e-mailed them twice asking how I'm supposed
to acquire my copy of Ad-aware Plus as per my 2000 purchase that included
lifetime updates. I've had initial acknowledgment of both e-mails but no
further response. I shall henceforth consider Lavasoft to have become a new
Symantec - their products don't work and they don't give a puck about their
customers. I shall assume they have decided lifetime updates promised in the
early days was a mistake. I expect that in court they will try to argue that
Ad-aware 2007 is a different product - and, indeed, that that is why they
named it so!

I shall spread the word that they - like Symantec - are not the sort of
company it's wise to trust your valuables with! Of course, it doesn't seem
to hurt Symantec - which is what the cynical puckers will be counting on.
Like with NAV and NIS there're always plenty of mugs who will argue that
it's the best product on the market! Plenty of customers for the medicine
show!


Shane

 

[webster72n]

Re: Ad-aware


Shocks, another bummer!!!...
When will it end??? <H>.


"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ex%23ZmlwwHHA.3364@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> Well, it's been weeks now. I've e-mailed them twice asking how I'm
supposed
> to acquire my copy of Ad-aware Plus as per my 2000 purchase that included
> lifetime updates. I've had initial acknowledgment of both e-mails but no
> further response. I shall henceforth consider Lavasoft to have become a
new
> Symantec - their products don't work and they don't give a puck about
their
> customers. I shall assume they have decided lifetime updates promised in
the
> early days was a mistake. I expect that in court they will try to argue
that
> Ad-aware 2007 is a different product - and, indeed, that that is why they
> named it so!
>
> I shall spread the word that they - like Symantec - are not the sort of
> company it's wise to trust your valuables with! Of course, it doesn't seem
> to hurt Symantec - which is what the cynical puckers will be counting on.
> Like with NAV and NIS there're always plenty of mugs who will argue that
> it's the best product on the market! Plenty of customers for the medicine
> show!
>
>
> Shane
>
>

 

[Ogg]

Re: Ad-aware

Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who have
similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and wondering the
same things. The recommendations there alternatively suggest you contact
Element 5 folks if you purchased your original Adaware that way. The
chatter in the forums also seems to indicate that some of the user records
got lost in the transfer to their new system or something like that. The
key is to be persistent and be prepared to prove original purchase.

From what I gather in the forums, many are not pleased with the new Adaware
2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime server over the net.



"Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote..
> Well, it's been weeks now. I've e-mailed them twice asking how I'm
> supposed to acquire my copy of Ad-aware Plus as per my 2000 purchase that
> included lifetime updates. I've had initial acknowledgment of both e-mails
> but no further response. I shall henceforth..

> I shall spread the word that they - like Symantec - are not the sort of
> company it's wise to trust your valuables with! Of course, it doesn't seem
> to hurt Symantec - which is what the cynical puckers will be counting on.
> Like with NAV and NIS there're always plenty of mugs who will argue that
> it's the best product on the market! Plenty of customers for the medicine
> show!

 

[Alias]

Re: Ad-aware

Ogg wrote:
> Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who have
> similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and wondering the
> same things. The recommendations there alternatively suggest you contact
> Element 5 folks if you purchased your original Adaware that way. The
> chatter in the forums also seems to indicate that some of the user records
> got lost in the transfer to their new system or something like that. The
> key is to be persistent and be prepared to prove original purchase.
>
> From what I gather in the forums, many are not pleased with the new Adaware
> 2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime server over the net.

I'm thinking of uninstalling it. It never finds anything.

Alias
>
>
>
> "Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote..
>> Well, it's been weeks now. I've e-mailed them twice asking how I'm
>> supposed to acquire my copy of Ad-aware Plus as per my 2000 purchase that
>> included lifetime updates. I've had initial acknowledgment of both e-mails
>> but no further response. I shall henceforth..
>
>> I shall spread the word that they - like Symantec - are not the sort of
>> company it's wise to trust your valuables with! Of course, it doesn't seem
>> to hurt Symantec - which is what the cynical puckers will be counting on.
>> Like with NAV and NIS there're always plenty of mugs who will argue that
>> it's the best product on the market! Plenty of customers for the medicine
>> show!
>
>

 

[Heirloom]

Re: Ad-aware

+1 on everything in the thread..........
Heirloom, old and don't need anymore headaches

"Alias" <aka@maskedandanonymous.info> wrote in message
news:ufFpSr1wHHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Ogg wrote:
>> Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who have
>> similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and wondering
>> the same things. The recommendations there alternatively suggest you
>> contact Element 5 folks if you purchased your original Adaware that way.
>> The chatter in the forums also seems to indicate that some of the user
>> records got lost in the transfer to their new system or something like
>> that. The key is to be persistent and be prepared to prove original
>> purchase.
>>
>> From what I gather in the forums, many are not pleased with the new
>> Adaware 2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime server
>> over the net.
>
> I'm thinking of uninstalling it. It never finds anything.
>
> Alias
>>
>>
>>
>> "Shane" <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote..
>>> Well, it's been weeks now. I've e-mailed them twice asking how I'm
>>> supposed to acquire my copy of Ad-aware Plus as per my 2000 purchase
>>> that
>>> included lifetime updates. I've had initial acknowledgment of both
>>> e-mails
>>> but no further response. I shall henceforth..
>>
>>> I shall spread the word that they - like Symantec - are not the sort of
>>> company it's wise to trust your valuables with! Of course, it doesn't
>>> seem
>>> to hurt Symantec - which is what the cynical puckers will be counting
>>> on.
>>> Like with NAV and NIS there're always plenty of mugs who will argue that
>>> it's the best product on the market! Plenty of customers for the
>>> medicine
>>> show!
>>

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

Ogg wrote:
> Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who
> have similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and
> wondering the same things. The recommendations there alternatively
> suggest you contact Element 5 folks if you purchased your original
> Adaware that way. The chatter in the forums also seems to indicate
> that some of the user records got lost in the transfer to their new
> system or something like that. The key is to be persistent and be
> prepared to prove original purchase.
> From what I gather in the forums, many are not pleased with the new
> Adaware 2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime server
> over the net.

Hadn't noticed that. I installed the Personal version - weeks ago now! - and
more or less immediately uninstalled it. Particularly given the build or its
definitions immediately had issues. But my position was to judge it on my
Plus build - and judge Lavasoft, for instance, if after releasing a flawed
product they supply me, a long-time registered user, with my copy and tell
me it's 'great!' and it turns out to be flawed also. Boy will I judge them
for that! Except that not only don't I have it, frankly all I have is
silence (which in my book is suspicious in itself).

I'm not really surprised there are other problems - and the one you mention
is a dreadful one for an anti-spyware tool!

I have contacted Element 55 - and have done so almost every time a new build
has come out: I've had to get on to them and ask how I get my copy. In fact
I haven't been notified rather than have to chase it up, since Element 5
took it over, When it was a small operation of Swedes in Germany (as far as
I could tell!) it was efficient, friendly and considerate. Having said that,
when I have been in touch with Element 5 over the years they have been
themselves polite, friendly and the fact that I had to contact them
notwithstanding, efficient too! Except that last one is virtually
meaningless, at least in the cold, hard world of business.

I really did not expect to be apparently ignored. But I will not be treated
that way. I have - of course - proven original purchase many times over the
years and what I sent them this time was their communication to *me* from
the SE release in which they told me when I registered, what e-mail I used
and what the order no. was. I sent them this information this time around,
copy/pasted from their communication and including the sig of their
colleague who provided the above information. They have had this.

Persistence can only be the key *if* anyone has actually received their
copy. Do you know that to have happened? Otherwise I think Class Action will
be the key.

Shane

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

Alias wrote:
> Ogg wrote:
>> Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who
>> have similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and
>> wondering the same things. The recommendations there alternatively
>> suggest you contact Element 5 folks if you purchased your original
>> Adaware that way. The chatter in the forums also seems to indicate
>> that some of the user records got lost in the transfer to their new
>> system or something like that. The key is to be persistent and be
>> prepared to prove original purchase. From what I gather in the forums,
>> many are not pleased with the new
>> Adaware 2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime
>> server over the net.
>
> I'm thinking of uninstalling it. It never finds anything.
>

And notice how much it's being hyped? Just like Norton in fact. Does anyone
here believe Ad-aware 2007 is as popular as it's being claimed? Or maybe
they're just quoting the rent-a-review mags who always make Symantec
products out to be A1 too. Either way it's BS. By the hype alone we know
that Lavasoft is itself BS these days.

Reckon I'll have to write this up as a readable argument, put it on my
webpage and spread the link. It's time their name reflected what they've
become.


Shane

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

I'm sure we all know 55 is a typo!


Shane, aka Sh-sh-sh-sh-shane

Shane wrote:
> Ogg wrote:
>> Check out the Adaware Support Forums. There are plenty people who
>> have similarly purchased the lifetime upgrade since year 2000 and
>> wondering the same things. The recommendations there alternatively
>> suggest you contact Element 5 folks if you purchased your original
>> Adaware that way. The chatter in the forums also seems to indicate
>> that some of the user records got lost in the transfer to their new
>> system or something like that. The key is to be persistent and be
>> prepared to prove original purchase.
>> From what I gather in the forums, many are not pleased with the new
>> Adaware 2007 and the manner it operates as a fulltime realtime server
>> over the net.
>
> Hadn't noticed that. I installed the Personal version - weeks ago
> now! - and more or less immediately uninstalled it. Particularly
> given the build or its definitions immediately had issues. But my
> position was to judge it on my Plus build - and judge Lavasoft, for
> instance, if after releasing a flawed product they supply me, a
> long-time registered user, with my copy and tell me it's 'great!' and
> it turns out to be flawed also. Boy will I judge them for that!
> Except that not only don't I have it, frankly all I have is silence
> (which in my book is suspicious in itself).
> I'm not really surprised there are other problems - and the one you
> mention is a dreadful one for an anti-spyware tool!
>
> I have contacted Element 55 - and have done so almost every time a
> new build has come out: I've had to get on to them and ask how I get
> my copy. In fact I haven't been notified rather than have to chase it
> up, since Element 5 took it over, When it was a small operation of
> Swedes in Germany (as far as I could tell!) it was efficient,
> friendly and considerate. Having said that, when I have been in touch
> with Element 5 over the years they have been themselves polite,
> friendly and the fact that I had to contact them notwithstanding,
> efficient too! Except that last one is virtually meaningless, at
> least in the cold, hard world of business.
> I really did not expect to be apparently ignored. But I will not be
> treated that way. I have - of course - proven original purchase many
> times over the years and what I sent them this time was their
> communication to *me* from the SE release in which they told me when
> I registered, what e-mail I used and what the order no. was. I sent
> them this information this time around, copy/pasted from their
> communication and including the sig of their colleague who provided
> the above information. They have had this.
> Persistence can only be the key *if* anyone has actually received
> their copy. Do you know that to have happened? Otherwise I think
> Class Action will be the key.
>
> Shane

 

[Mike M]

Re: Ad-aware

> Or maybe they're just quoting the rent-a-review mags who
> always make Symantec products out to be A1 too

PC Pro arrived this morning (can it really be the September edition??) and
has a rudimentary review of AV apps. Of the 13 analysed, Norton somehow
managed to come in at No. 11 just beating OneCare and with Panda trailing
last. Whilst I was not surprised to see Kaspersky rated No 1 it was
interesting to see that AntiVir was 3rd and AVG free 5th.
--
Mike


Shane <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote:

> And notice how much it's being hyped? Just like Norton in fact. Does
> anyone here believe Ad-aware 2007 is as popular as it's being
> claimed? Or maybe they're just quoting the rent-a-review mags who
> always make Symantec products out to be A1 too. Either way it's BS.
> By the hype alone we know that Lavasoft is itself BS these days.
>
> Reckon I'll have to write this up as a readable argument, put it on my
> webpage and spread the link. It's time their name reflected what
> they've become.

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

Mike M wrote:
>> Or maybe they're just quoting the rent-a-review mags who
>> always make Symantec products out to be A1 too
>
> PC Pro arrived this morning (can it really be the September
> edition??) and has a rudimentary review of AV apps. Of the 13
> analysed, Norton somehow managed to come in at No. 11 just beating
> OneCare and with Panda trailing last. Whilst I was not surprised to
> see Kaspersky rated No 1 it was interesting to see that AntiVir was
> 3rd and AVG free 5th.

Gawd 'elpus! Mind you I've found myself thinking it was winter this summer!
Yet I see Fairford was apparently a success. The Thunderbirds, especially.
But I remember seeing the Lightnings doing their 'going ballistic' party
piece and dissappearing into cloud about two hundred feet up! There've been
some spectacular roars from above the clouds today but I didn't see as much
as a contrail!

Meanwhile, I set Server 2008 up. Interesting. I actually have 'Aero' up and
running now and am getting my first look at 'Vista' beyond a sneer as I walk
past row upon row of it in the computer stores. So far I'm mostly getting
fed up with Explorer acting like an internet browser. Ish. I haven't seen an
Up button yet, just the Back button, which I'm getting fed up moving to. Now
I'm using Alt - <up arrow> which kind of seems to defeat the purpose.

Anyway, none of the trad AVs instal because they think I'm actually running
a corporate server. Be nice if they'd just ask. I tried AntiVir, but it
wouldn't install. atm the only AV 'solution' I have running is Windows
Defender! I even tried installing NAV 2005! (I hope you weren't swallowing
when you read that). In the name of beta testing, I hasten to add!

There is some good stuff, such as the nVidia Vista driver that installs no
prob and gives the widescreen resolution I'm already used to. Most of the
important stuff has Vista drivers which install in this one just fine. Seems
funny to suddenly have all those pretty icons. I guess a lot of work went
into those. Meanwhile TweakUI XP doesn't install but 1.33 does - and runs,
probably as well on that as on Millennium! And - again - the schemes from 9x
can be imported into it just as in XP and you can have not only the ME
version of the Classic theme, you can have manipulate those hidden settings
such as border thicknesses, still!

I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would be.
It's a Server, for Chrissake!


Shane


>
>> And notice how much it's being hyped? Just like Norton in fact. Does
>> anyone here believe Ad-aware 2007 is as popular as it's being
>> claimed? Or maybe they're just quoting the rent-a-review mags who
>> always make Symantec products out to be A1 too. Either way it's BS.
>> By the hype alone we know that Lavasoft is itself BS these days.
>>
>> Reckon I'll have to write this up as a readable argument, put it on
>> my webpage and spread the link. It's time their name reflected what
>> they've become.

 

[Mike M]

Re: Ad-aware

Does Server 2008 even have Aero? Surely not? Or have they put it in the
recent CTP build but if so I wonder why since most servers need only the
most rudimentary of graphics and often run headless.

> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!

OK, they must have changed something. I wonder why?
--
Mike


Shane <shanebeatson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Gawd 'elpus! Mind you I've found myself thinking it was winter this
> summer! Yet I see Fairford was apparently a success. The
> Thunderbirds, especially. But I remember seeing the Lightnings doing
> their 'going ballistic' party piece and dissappearing into cloud
> about two hundred feet up! There've been some spectacular roars from
> above the clouds today but I didn't see as much as a contrail!
>
> Meanwhile, I set Server 2008 up. Interesting. I actually have 'Aero'
> up and running now and am getting my first look at 'Vista' beyond a
> sneer as I walk past row upon row of it in the computer stores. So
> far I'm mostly getting fed up with Explorer acting like an internet
> browser. Ish. I haven't seen an Up button yet, just the Back button,
> which I'm getting fed up moving to. Now I'm using Alt - <up arrow>
> which kind of seems to defeat the purpose.
> Anyway, none of the trad AVs instal because they think I'm actually
> running a corporate server. Be nice if they'd just ask. I tried
> AntiVir, but it wouldn't install. atm the only AV 'solution' I have
> running is Windows Defender! I even tried installing NAV 2005! (I
> hope you weren't swallowing when you read that). In the name of beta
> testing, I hasten to add!
> There is some good stuff, such as the nVidia Vista driver that
> installs no prob and gives the widescreen resolution I'm already used
> to. Most of the important stuff has Vista drivers which install in
> this one just fine. Seems funny to suddenly have all those pretty
> icons. I guess a lot of work went into those. Meanwhile TweakUI XP
> doesn't install but 1.33 does - and runs, probably as well on that as
> on Millennium! And - again - the schemes from 9x can be imported into
> it just as in XP and you can have not only the ME version of the
> Classic theme, you can have manipulate those hidden settings such as
> border thicknesses, still!
> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

Mike M wrote:
> Does Server 2008 even have Aero? Surely not? Or have they put it in
> the recent CTP build but if so I wonder why since most servers need
> only the most rudimentary of graphics and often run headless.
>
>> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
>> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!
>
> OK, they must have changed something. I wonder why?
>

I just glimpsed as I scrolled through some directory via a browse box, or
long list of search results (in Agent Ransack, which runs fine) - I forget
what precisely else I glimpsed it whilst doing, but I saw a folder called
'Aero'. I got the idea it was empty, but perhaps I just didn't realise (and
it was a browse dialogue) that I was looking at it via a filter and as there
were none of that file type in there it just looked empty. I was busy so
didn't look into it further at that stage - though I certainly intended to
come back and investigate! Then I found an option to add components
(classified in a way I'm unfamiliar with - and so have forgotten) including
for the Desktop. It certainly looked as though it was to do with eye candy!
I chose four modules (?) from a selection of maybe a dozen and it then set
them up. It took quite a time. I get the idea the entire DVD was copied to
the disk - though it happened quickly if so! But maybe it downloaded this
stuff. Then it rebooted and continued, though not for much longer. It
appears to have installed the likes of Windows Mail and a photo slide and a
number of items of this ilk. And among them was Aero! First listed in the
Themes applet as the Vista theme. I selected that - but as I'd already
reverted to as many 'Classic' features as I could, I had to reverse those
before I could see that it was indeed Aero. Also, I'd downloaded a .gadget
sidebar thing - just to see what it was. But at first nothing happened.
D-clicked it. Nothing. After installing Aero it suddenly came to life, as
though the file association came with it!

As for why I suppose the DVD was copied to the HDD: first inkling was when I
copied it to D, along with the XP disc and the Office discs etc, then went
into the registry to point the Source to it and found it pointing to C:
rather than to the DVD drive. And when you consider that first I tried
installing on an 8GB drive and though it did, there was less than 60MB free
space remaining!

Who knows. No doubt the answers will be forthcoming!


Shane



>> Gawd 'elpus! Mind you I've found myself thinking it was winter this
>> summer! Yet I see Fairford was apparently a success. The
>> Thunderbirds, especially. But I remember seeing the Lightnings doing
>> their 'going ballistic' party piece and dissappearing into cloud
>> about two hundred feet up! There've been some spectacular roars from
>> above the clouds today but I didn't see as much as a contrail!
>>
>> Meanwhile, I set Server 2008 up. Interesting. I actually have 'Aero'
>> up and running now and am getting my first look at 'Vista' beyond a
>> sneer as I walk past row upon row of it in the computer stores. So
>> far I'm mostly getting fed up with Explorer acting like an internet
>> browser. Ish. I haven't seen an Up button yet, just the Back button,
>> which I'm getting fed up moving to. Now I'm using Alt - <up arrow>
>> which kind of seems to defeat the purpose.
>> Anyway, none of the trad AVs instal because they think I'm actually
>> running a corporate server. Be nice if they'd just ask. I tried
>> AntiVir, but it wouldn't install. atm the only AV 'solution' I have
>> running is Windows Defender! I even tried installing NAV 2005! (I
>> hope you weren't swallowing when you read that). In the name of beta
>> testing, I hasten to add!
>> There is some good stuff, such as the nVidia Vista driver that
>> installs no prob and gives the widescreen resolution I'm already used
>> to. Most of the important stuff has Vista drivers which install in
>> this one just fine. Seems funny to suddenly have all those pretty
>> icons. I guess a lot of work went into those. Meanwhile TweakUI XP
>> doesn't install but 1.33 does - and runs, probably as well on that as
>> on Millennium! And - again - the schemes from 9x can be imported into
>> it just as in XP and you can have not only the ME version of the
>> Classic theme, you can have manipulate those hidden settings such as
>> border thicknesses, still!
>> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
>> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!

 

[Shane]

Re: Ad-aware

I did mean to add (to the other reply that hasn't shown up yet but
presumably will have by the time you read this!): I've got the XP 64 trial
downloading, so I guess that'll be the one I'm looking at next. Though it
completed just as I looked to see how it was doing! Yesterday I installed
the 64-bit Fedora and verified for my curiosity that my Athlon64 really
works! An iso that my 32-bit XP can't even verify!

I should have a bit of fun looking for 64-bit software!

I nearly downloaded Server 2003, too! Then came over all rational and closed
the page instead.

I did, however, install WFWG3.11 in VPC, just to set it up with the S3 Trio
drivers and get a better display than I can remember ever seeing 3.x on
before. In fact, I wondered if perhaps I'd just become the first person ever
to put 3.x on a widescreen LCD monitor??? And if I was really mad as opposed
to just fashionably so...


Shane






Mike M wrote:
> Does Server 2008 even have Aero? Surely not? Or have they put it in
> the recent CTP build but if so I wonder why since most servers need
> only the most rudimentary of graphics and often run headless.
>
>> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
>> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!
>
> OK, they must have changed something. I wonder why?
>
>> Gawd 'elpus! Mind you I've found myself thinking it was winter this
>> summer! Yet I see Fairford was apparently a success. The
>> Thunderbirds, especially. But I remember seeing the Lightnings doing
>> their 'going ballistic' party piece and dissappearing into cloud
>> about two hundred feet up! There've been some spectacular roars from
>> above the clouds today but I didn't see as much as a contrail!
>>
>> Meanwhile, I set Server 2008 up. Interesting. I actually have 'Aero'
>> up and running now and am getting my first look at 'Vista' beyond a
>> sneer as I walk past row upon row of it in the computer stores. So
>> far I'm mostly getting fed up with Explorer acting like an internet
>> browser. Ish. I haven't seen an Up button yet, just the Back button,
>> which I'm getting fed up moving to. Now I'm using Alt - <up arrow>
>> which kind of seems to defeat the purpose.
>> Anyway, none of the trad AVs instal because they think I'm actually
>> running a corporate server. Be nice if they'd just ask. I tried
>> AntiVir, but it wouldn't install. atm the only AV 'solution' I have
>> running is Windows Defender! I even tried installing NAV 2005! (I
>> hope you weren't swallowing when you read that). In the name of beta
>> testing, I hasten to add!
>> There is some good stuff, such as the nVidia Vista driver that
>> installs no prob and gives the widescreen resolution I'm already used
>> to. Most of the important stuff has Vista drivers which install in
>> this one just fine. Seems funny to suddenly have all those pretty
>> icons. I guess a lot of work went into those. Meanwhile TweakUI XP
>> doesn't install but 1.33 does - and runs, probably as well on that as
>> on Millennium! And - again - the schemes from 9x can be imported into
>> it just as in XP and you can have not only the ME version of the
>> Classic theme, you can have manipulate those hidden settings such as
>> border thicknesses, still!
>> I didn't think the degree of Vista eye candy available in this, would
>> be. It's a Server, for Chrissake!