Sign in to follow this  
leroy35959

Remember how fast Adaware SE used to be

Recommended Posts

You users of Adaware SE remember how fast it used to down load the definitions file well now it takes 10-15 times longer. Even to manually download the definitions zip file takes almost a minute or more on my 3mb DSL. It used to take 5-10 seconds. Please if any of you have noticed this problem reply to this post. Last time I posted I got no response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You users of Adaware SE remember how fast it used to down load the definitions file well now it takes 10-15 times longer. Even to manually download the definitions zip file takes almost a minute or more on my 3mb DSL. It used to take 5-10 seconds. Please if any of you have noticed this problem reply to this post. Last time I posted I got no response.

 

Same here

Adaware SE was a Jackrabbit

Adware 2007 is a fat stupit lazy elephant

 

good luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

AAW SE relied on technology at least 5 years old - yes, it was familiar and scanned more quickly that AAW 2007. That said, AAW 2007 was completely re-written to meet the current and yet-to-emerge threats out there these days.

 

It scans far more thoroughly (both Smart and Full scans) and therefore takes longer. Which would you rather have - a familiar faster scan or a newer, more thorough and more accurate scan for modern malware?

 

Since I have a new (Nov 2007) quad-core system built to my own specifications, I personally don't see much difference in scan times (maybe just a few minutes) - I would still rather have new technology on my previous 4-year-old system, even if it did take 10 mins longer, than older and less effective malware protection.

 

I realise that this may provoke a few indignant responses, however it is the simple truth...

 

Regards,

 

spike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AAW SE relied on technology at least 5 years old - yes, it was familiar and scanned more quickly that AAW 2007. That said, AAW 2007 was completely re-written to meet the current and yet-to-emerge threats out there these days.

Retort: lulz

 

Who doesn't love company faces?

Spyware Blaster was recently updated, now it looks fancy and runs as fast as it used to, and it was updated to make the checking of Firefox blocks faster. Spybot is also updated and faster (well after they fixed the slow boot bug).

 

It scans far more thoroughly (both Smart and Full scans) and therefore takes longer. Which would you rather have - a familiar faster scan or a newer, more thorough and more accurate scan for modern malware?

An older, faster program (that was equally accurate) and wasn't as bloaty.

 

Since I have a new (Nov 2007) quad-core system built to my own specifications, I personally don't see much difference in scan times (maybe just a few minutes) - I would still rather have new technology on my previous 4-year-old system, even if it did take 10 mins longer, than older and less effective malware protection.

The scanning isn't so much a problem as the borked update system. It takes (comparatively) forever to query the update server and download the update. There is obviously some sort of bug in the update code.

Edited by Cartigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Retort: lulz

Who doesn't love company faces?

????????????

 

Look at the word "volunteer" - mean anything to you?

 

Yet another of your less than helpful other posts (anyone interested, look here) I am not surprised at the tone of your comments - not a single positive word in 20 posts. Free speech at its best... a random selection of your comments:

 

I want to hear their real explanation, not the PR one that assumes people using their program are standard computer users who just use outlook express and surf the internet on IE.
I feel bad for anyone who actually paid for this program.
Considering they have far bigger fish to fry than Vista compatibility, I would give it a while.
Not working with Vista is the least of its problems.
Because after months of very public tests, they still managed to rush it out ahead of time with more bugs than games released in the mid-90s.
Then it is either bloatware or untrustworthy shareware pretending to be freeware

and finally:

 

Posted on: Jun 10 2007, 02:20 AM

I already uninstalled it and will not install any future Ad-Aware products until they get their act together.

Yet still posting negatively about it 9 months later...

 

Given that this is a user-community, peer-support forum for AAW Free users (licensed users have access to paid Support), the occasional constructive comment of benefit to other users might go down better than cheap pot-shots. Whatever your personal opinion of my contributon to the forum (I repeat that I am a volunteer, not a "company face" - look here for 110 pages of helpful replies) actually assisting other users by posting useful advice would be a better use of your time. Again, just free speech and a personal view-point... this time, mine - not yours.

 

As to the speed of updating, down here in NZ at the end of a very long, 1990's trans-pacific cable link from Australasia to the US, I get my updates withn 1 - 3 mins from start to finish. That's on adsl on an ageing, suburban copper network (yet to be replaced with fibre) - my parents, on a fibre-optical loop downtown, get them within about a minute usually.

 

Obviously there will be variables depending on connection type, location (country), network congestion etc - for some it will take longer, others less. Anyone getting the "SSL download failure" message, please see this Software Updates post.

 

I'm not getting into a protracted debate with Cartigan - I had a feeling that something like this would occur, hence my comment above "I realise that this may provoke a few indignant responses, however it is the simple truth..."

 

Spike

 

NB: If anyone feels strongly enough about any issues raised, please start your own Topic under your own by-line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not a single positive word in 20 posts. Free speech at its best... a random selection of your comments:

If it wasn't a terrible program, maybe I would have a more 'positive' record.

 

Yet still posting negatively about it 9 months later...

You would think they could have worked out its problems in 9 months wouldn't you?

 

Given that this is a user-community, peer-support forum for AAW Free users (licensed users have access to paid Support), the occasional constructive comment of benefit to other users might go down better than cheap pot-shots.

Oh ok then. Use Ad-Aware SE. There. At least its manual update works (I tried it with AA2007 when the update server was down temporarily and it didn't show that it had updated definitions in the program - even after restarting the service). I suggest using majorgeeks.com to get it.

 

As to the speed of updating, down here in NZ at the end of a very long, 1990's trans-pacific cable link from Australasia to the US, I get my updates withn 1 - 3 mins from start to finish. That's on adsl on an ageing, suburban copper network (yet to be replaced with fibre) - my parents, on a fibre-optical loop downtown, get them within about a minute usually.

That's the problem. Even though the update sizes are nearly twice the size of SE definition files, for whatever odd reason, there is something screwy with AA 2007's update procedure, not the download itself. A progress bar would be a beneficial feel good addition to the program.

Edited by Cartigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A progress bar would be a beneficial feel good addition to the program.

If you update Defs throught the Web Update tab (rather than the main Status screen), there already is a progress bar.

 

I have suggested in the past that the Update button on the Status screen should take a user to the Web Update tab, as there appears to be a number of users who haven't yet noticed the progress bar there - as far as I am aware, this is on the "to do" list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you update Defs throught the Web Update tab (rather than the main Status screen), there already is a progress bar.

 

I have suggested in the past that the Update button on the Status screen should take a user to the Web Update tab, as there appears to be a number of users who haven't yet noticed the progress bar there - as far as I am aware, this is on the "to do" list.

Why not put it in the already existing pop up window? Since they insist on having one.

Edited by Cartigan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why not put it in the already existing pop up window?

Sorry, don't understand what you are saying - do you mean "Put new Defs in the Software Updates GUI"?

 

If so, the two update processes function differently - therefore Sofware Updates have their own GUI.

 

Since they insist on having one.

The Software GUI allows for incremental updates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The original poster here asked why are downloads of updates are taking longer.

 

It is because they are much larger as new malware detections are added. You can thank the growth of malware for that.

 

See the article here which explains the glut of new malware released over the past year:

Anti-Virus Firms Scrambling to Keep Up

Sophistication of Viruses and Other Threats Poses Big Challenges for Companies, Consumers

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...d=moreheadlines

 

More malware to cover means larger definition files updates.

 

The rest of this discussion has gone way off topic from what the original poster has asked. I'm therefore closing this thread.

 

@Cartigan - arguing with the kind people who volunteer to answer your questions isn't what this forum is about. I suggest you choose your comments carefully in the future if you wish to participate here.

 

See here:

What is this Forum about?

http://www.lavasoftsupport.com/index.php?showtopic=15529

 

We don't allow abusing others in this forum and you are very close to the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this