Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Computer maintenance

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 7:54:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
sophisticated computers.

But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other troubles.

These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
such as:

1 - anti virus facilities
2 - firewall facilities
and increasingly these last few days
3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
4 - registry cleaner

Possibly
5 - performance monitor & tweaker

I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out there

Aerticeus

ps - recommendations anyone?

A

More about : computer maintenance

Anonymous
December 2, 2004 7:54:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:04 GMT, Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com>
wrote:

>Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
>sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
>sophisticated computers.
>
>But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other troubles.
>
>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>such as:
>
>1 - anti virus facilities
>2 - firewall facilities
>and increasingly these last few days
>3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
>4 - registry cleaner
>
>Possibly
>5 - performance monitor & tweaker
>
>I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out there
>
>Aerticeus
>
>ps - recommendations anyone?

Defragment (yes even NTFS)
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:06:33 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Aerticeus wrote:
> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
8< (snip)
> ps - recommendations anyone?

I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
all free downloads - check them out!

Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Related resources
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:06:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
<pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:

>Aerticeus wrote:
>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>8< (snip)
>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>
>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>all free downloads - check them out!

Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:06:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

YAG-ART wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>
>> Aerticeus wrote:
>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer
>>> maintenance 8< (snip) ps - recommendations anyone?
>>
>> I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>> useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>> Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix
>> kills them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW,
>> these are all free downloads - check them out!
>
> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot

Download the latest v1.98.2 version of HijackThis:
http://aumha.org/downloads/hijackthis.exe
or
http://tools.radiosplace.com/HijackThis.exe

--
Frank ess
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 8:06:35 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>
>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>8< (snip)
>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>
>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>all free downloads - check them out!
>
> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot

That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried to
update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL. Are
they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe side.

Don Dunlap
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 9:48:54 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

YAG-ART wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:04 GMT, Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
>>sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
>>sophisticated computers.
>>
>>But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other troubles.
>>
>>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>such as:
>>
>>1 - anti virus facilities
>>2 - firewall facilities
>>and increasingly these last few days
>>3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
>>4 - registry cleaner
>>
>>Possibly
>>5 - performance monitor & tweaker
>>
>>I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out there
>>
>>Aerticeus
>>
>>ps - recommendations anyone?
>
>
> Defragment (yes even NTFS)
Groovy!

For what it is worth

I have switched to Firefox and Thunderbird for NGs only - my PDA works
too darn well with Outlook)

And cannot believe the performance uprate.

CCleaner, Spyblaster and Spybot - search and destroy (all freebies) seem
to have given this 'pooter a new lease of life

Aerticeus
December 2, 2004 10:08:34 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Aerticeus wrote:

> YAG-ART wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:04 GMT, Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
>>> sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and
>>> very sophisticated computers.
>>>
>>> But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other
>>> troubles.
>>>
>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer
>>> maintenance such as:
>>>
>>> 1 - anti virus facilities
>>> 2 - firewall facilities
>>> and increasingly these last few days
>>> 3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
>>> 4 - registry cleaner
>>>
>>> Possibly
>>> 5 - performance monitor & tweaker
>>>
>>> I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out
>>> there
>>>
>>> Aerticeus
>>>
>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>
>>
>>
>> Defragment (yes even NTFS)
>
> Groovy!
>
> For what it is worth
>
> I have switched to Firefox and Thunderbird for NGs only - my PDA works
> too darn well with Outlook)
>
> And cannot believe the performance uprate.
>
> CCleaner, Spyblaster and Spybot - search and destroy (all freebies) seem
> to have given this 'pooter a new lease of life
>
> Aerticeus

Any problems with the CCleaner?

--

JD..
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:32:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Don Dunlap wrote:
> "YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
> news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>
>>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>><pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>
>>>>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>>
>>>8< (snip)
>>>
>>>>ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>
>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>
>>Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>
>
> That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried to
> update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL. Are
> they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe side.
>
> Don Dunlap

Hi Don...

Sounds like you haven't yet upgraded to Adaware SE...

Take care.

Ken
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:32:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"Ken Weitzel" <kweitzel@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:T4Krd.396593$Pl.295402@pd7tw1no...
>
>
> Don Dunlap wrote:
>> "YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
>> news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>>><pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>>>
>>>>8< (snip)
>>>>
>>>>>ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>>
>>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>>
>>>Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>>
>>
>> That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried
>> to update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL.
>> Are they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe
>> side.
>>
>> Don Dunlap
>
> Hi Don...
>
> Sounds like you haven't yet upgraded to Adaware SE...
>
> Take care.
>
> Ken
>

No I haven't! I try that now.

Thanks
Don Dunlap
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:32:05 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"Don Dunlap" <dondunlapremve@direcway.com> wrote in message
news:1f4f1$41af7191$452346c4$1939@allthenewsgroups.com...
>
> "Ken Weitzel" <kweitzel@shaw.ca> wrote in message
> news:T4Krd.396593$Pl.295402@pd7tw1no...
>>
>>
>> Don Dunlap wrote:
>>> "YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
>>> news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>>>><pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer
>>>>>>maintenance
>>>>>
>>>>>8< (snip)
>>>>>
>>>>>>ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>>>
>>>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these
>>>>>are
>>>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>>>
>>>>Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>>>
>>>
>>> That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I
>>> tried to update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find
>>> the URL. Are they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on
>>> the safe side.
>>>
>>> Don Dunlap
>>
>> Hi Don...
>>
>> Sounds like you haven't yet upgraded to Adaware SE...
>>
>> Take care.
>>
>> Ken
>>
>
> No I haven't! I try that now.
>
> Thanks
> Don Dunlap
Ken,

I downloaded it and tried it. It found two questionable files that it
flagged and no one else had found. They were not a problem though, since I
knew what they were, but at least it was more discriminating than before.

Thanks
Don
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:54:00 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote in
news:MMHrd.679$gj.478@newsfe2-win.ntli.net:

> Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
> sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
> sophisticated computers.
>
> But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other
> troubles.

Most of them related to Photoshop CS, apparently.

I've noticed a severe problem with the Windows swapfile blowing up in 2.4
gigs pluswhile CS is working, then not downsizing after CS exits.
Systemwide performance than drops into the toilet.

The same behavior is not apparent when running PS 7.01.

In addition to the known conflicts with Antivirus and utilities such as the
Norton recycle bin, it's looks like PSCS has some memory issues, especially
on systems with gobs of RAM.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 10:59:24 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

YAG-ART <right@here.now> wrote in
news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>
>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer
>>> maintenance
>>8< (snip)
>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>
>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix
>>kills them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW,
>>these are all free downloads - check them out!
>
> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot

While I've found that to be true, I've also found running one, then the
other, is better yet.

Hell, occasionally I find a nasty that neither can remove. Fortunately, not
on my machines. It's amazing what not using Outlook and Internet Explorer
can do for your security.
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 11:25:57 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:10:09 -0500, "Don Dunlap"
<dondunlapremve@direcway.com> wrote:

>
>"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
>news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>>8< (snip)
>>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>
>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>
>> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>
>That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried to
>update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL. Are
>they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe side.

I didn't have any problems. Are you running Ad Adware SE?
Anonymous
December 2, 2004 11:25:58 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
news:ecuuq0djju7j4o4d875b3hqn0v8dj9phur@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:10:09 -0500, "Don Dunlap"
> <dondunlapremve@direcway.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
>>news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>>> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer
>>>>> maintenance
>>>>8< (snip)
>>>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>>
>>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>>
>>> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>>
>>That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried
>>to
>>update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL.
>>Are
>>they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe side.
>
> I didn't have any problems. Are you running Ad Adware SE?

I was just pointed to it. I have downloaded it and used it.

Thanks
Don
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 12:19:55 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In rec.photo.digital Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote in
>news:MMHrd.679$gj.478@newsfe2-win.ntli.net:

>> Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
>> sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
>> sophisticated computers.
>>
>> But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other
>> troubles.

>Most of them related to Photoshop CS, apparently.

>I've noticed a severe problem with the Windows swapfile blowing up in 2.4
>gigs pluswhile CS is working, then not downsizing after CS exits.
>Systemwide performance than drops into the toilet.

>The same behavior is not apparent when running PS 7.01.

>In addition to the known conflicts with Antivirus and utilities such as the
>Norton recycle bin, it's looks like PSCS has some memory issues, especially
>on systems with gobs of RAM.

Hmm. I've got a gig of memory on a 2.8 Ghz machine
with 4 gigs of swap. I've had no issues with PSCS.
Indeed I love it.

---- Paul J. Gans
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 1:43:13 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Excellent advice! One more thing to add to the list...defragment the hard
drive.

Bill Crocker


"Aerticeus" <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote in message
news:MMHrd.679$gj.478@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
> Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
> sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
> sophisticated computers.
>
> But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other troubles.
>
> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
> such as:
>
> 1 - anti virus facilities
> 2 - firewall facilities
> and increasingly these last few days
> 3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
> 4 - registry cleaner
>
> Possibly
> 5 - performance monitor & tweaker
>
> I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out
> there
>
> Aerticeus
>
> ps - recommendations anyone?
>
> A
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 5:33:51 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:04 GMT, Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com>
wrote:

>Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
>sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
>sophisticated computers.
>
>But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other troubles.
>
>These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>such as:
>
>1 - anti virus facilities

NOD32

>2 - firewall facilities

Outpost

>and increasingly these last few days
>3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor

Spy Sweeper or SpyBot Search and Destroy plus Adaware (Spysweeper will
deal with Spysweeper AND adware - S&D is really best for spyware, and
Adaware for adware, so you need them both if you go that route).

>4 - registry cleaner

Common sense

>Possibly
>5 - performance monitor & tweaker

www.sysinternals.com for lots of useful free apps

>I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out there
>
>Aerticeus
>
>ps - recommendations anyone?
>
As above.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 5:34:42 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
<pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:

>Aerticeus wrote:
>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>8< (snip)
>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>
>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>all free downloads - check them out!
That's because they use hidden processes which SmartFix blocks.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 5:35:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 14:10:09 -0500, "Don Dunlap"
<dondunlapremve@direcway.com> wrote:

>
>"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
>news:tcouq01bu3i7imkdi88i36j10ko359liig@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 17:06:33 +0000, Pattern-chaser
>> <pattern-chaser@merrick.britishlibrary.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Aerticeus wrote:
>>>> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
>>>8< (snip)
>>>> ps - recommendations anyone?
>>>
>>>I have found 'spybot - search and destroy' and 'SpywareBlaster' to be
>>>useful, and I used to use 'Defendgate SmartFix' until I installed
>>>Mozilla Thunderbird and Firefox as my email and browser. SmartFix kills
>>>them both stone dead as soon as I power them up! Oh well. BTW, these are
>>>all free downloads - check them out!
>>
>> Ad Adware does a better job for me tha SpyBot
>
>That's strange - I have just the opposite results. The last time I tried to
>update Adware though, I got a rejection that it couldn't find the URL. Are
>they out of commission? I usually run both just to be on the safe side.
>
Adaware is better at catching Adware. SS&D is better at catching
Spyware - if you don't use something better than either, you need
both.

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 5:40:41 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 19:59:24 GMT, Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com>
wrote:


>Hell, occasionally I find a nasty that neither can remove. Fortunately, not
>on my machines. It's amazing what not using Outlook and Internet Explorer
>can do for your security.

Actually, the security in Outlook 2003 is miles better. If you set it
up right of course. However, by default it won't download any that's a
binary except html or rtf. And you can kill that by setting it up to
only show text. Plus it won't allow the opening of any attachment
without you explicitly clicking and then selecting open - and it then
still asks you if you'd rather save to disk first. This function can
also be blocked so that no attachments can be opened without an
administrator permission. We actually swapped back to using it so we
could use the excellent InBoxer spam control.

Of course, you still need a full armoury of AV, firewall etc.

And IE is still a nightmare :) 

--

Hecate - The Real One
Hecate@newsguy.com
veni, vidi, reliqui
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 6:35:13 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul J Gans <gans@panix.com> wrote in
news:coo0tr$kh4$4@reader1.panix.com:

> In rec.photo.digital Eric Gill <ericvgill@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote in
>>news:MMHrd.679$gj.478@newsfe2-win.ntli.net:
>
>>> Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has
>>> very sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS
>>> and very sophisticated computers.
>>>
>>> But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other
>>> troubles.
>
>>Most of them related to Photoshop CS, apparently.
>
>>I've noticed a severe problem with the Windows swapfile blowing up in
>>2.4 gigs pluswhile CS is working, then not downsizing after CS exits.
>>Systemwide performance than drops into the toilet.
>
>>The same behavior is not apparent when running PS 7.01.
>
>>In addition to the known conflicts with Antivirus and utilities such
>>as the Norton recycle bin, it's looks like PSCS has some memory
>>issues, especially on systems with gobs of RAM.
>
> Hmm. I've got a gig of memory

C'mon, Paul- that's a drop in the bucket anymore.

Seriously, it's 2+ gig machines that seem to see most problems.

> on a 2.8 Ghz machine
> with 4 gigs of swap. I've had no issues with PSCS.
> Indeed I love it.

I like the new features. The problems I've experienced are something else
altogether.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 10:54:29 AM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

On 2004/12/2 11:54 AM, "Aerticeus" <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote:

> These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
> such as:
>
> 1 - anti virus facilities
> 2 - firewall facilities
> and increasingly these last few days
> 3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
> 4 - registry cleaner
>
> Possibly
> 5 - performance monitor & tweaker
>

Adding RAM is often a useful step to improve performance, watching trends in
a performance monitor can tell you if this is needed.

>
> ps - recommendations anyone?
>

Reading between the lines, it sounds like you assumed a MS Windows platform.
I find that getting away from MS products removes many of the concerns.
Replace IE with Firefox and Outlook/OE with a non-MS email client eliminates
the many of the common security weaknesses there. Going to a Mac or LINUX
platform does the same at the OS level.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 12:44:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

> IE is evil incarnate.

Not since Service Pack 2; IE is now, in my opinion, safer than Opera.
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 2:30:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

I have done a tremendous amount of research to find what works best for me.
I have 5 puters networked together. I use:
-Ad Aware SE professional
-Ad Watch SE (bundled with the above)
-Spyware Blaster
-Spybot Search and Destroy
-Norton Anti-Virus (which I don't particularly like)

I NEVER have a problem, EVER!
My main puter is a P4 with 1 gig ram, so they can all run without clogging
anything.
If I had to use just one along with Norton, it would be the Adaware SE.



"YAG-ART" <right@here.now> wrote in message
news:tbouq015rfivcra9juppc7db1l6fufmg4m@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 16:54:04 GMT, Aerticeus <spoofed@spooked.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Ahem ... it has come to my attention that quite a few people has very
> >sophisticated camera kit, very sophisticated software eg PSCS and very
> >sophisticated computers.
> >
> >But then? They experience performance hits, time lags and other
troubles.
> >
> >These may be avoided in many cases by some routine computer maintenance
> >such as:
> >
> >1 - anti virus facilities
> >2 - firewall facilities
> >and increasingly these last few days
> >3 - spy bot identifier and exorcisor
> >4 - registry cleaner
> >
> >Possibly
> >5 - performance monitor & tweaker
> >
> >I thought I'd mention it just in case it proves helpful to people out
there
> >
> >Aerticeus
> >
> >ps - recommendations anyone?
>
> Defragment (yes even NTFS)
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 9:14:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bob Haar wrote:

>
> Reading between the lines, it sounds like you assumed a MS Windows platform.
> I find that getting away from MS products removes many of the concerns.
> Replace IE with Firefox and Outlook/OE with a non-MS email client eliminates
> the many of the common security weaknesses there. Going to a Mac or LINUX
> platform does the same at the OS level.
>

Hi Bob

I put this message on several NGs and there has been some very
interesting developments.

One of which is: I think I'll turn my old box into a linux machine
The second is: I am seriously pondering a dual cpu Mac G5 for my next
bit of kit (there are consequences I have to dwell on first)

The third is a great big round of thanks and acknowledgements to Tacit
for a most excellent write up

quote
Yep. I found a nasty neither could remove--a variant on VX2--on my
girlfriend's
computer some weeks ago, and spent about six hours tracing where it came
from,
how it got installed on her computer, and where the money went. It's
surprising
how much money there is in spyware and adware, and even more surprising
who is
making the money.

If you're interested, I posted a detailed description of how it was
installed
and (more importantly) who made money from it at

http://www.livejournal.com/users/tacit/125748.html
unquote

Aerticeus
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 9:14:44 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 2004/12/3 1:14 PM, "Aerticeus" <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote:

> I put this message on several NGs and there has been some very
> interesting developments.
>
> One of which is: I think I'll turn my old box into a linux machine

This is a reasonable approach, but even dumping IE for a non-MS web browser
like Firefox eliminates some of the paths for getting spyware, etc. Into you
computer. The tight integration of IE, Outlook and Windows is one of the big
reasons that malware works so well on the Windows platform.

I am NOT saying that you shouldn't move to LINUX, only that there are other
options if you really need to stay with a Windows platform.

> The second is: I am seriously pondering a dual cpu Mac G5 for my next
> bit of kit (there are consequences I have to dwell on first)

Mac OS X is a joy - all the human interfacing goodies that are traditional
with Apple at the GUI level, combined with a tried-and-true UNIX OS under
the hood. If you go that route, I don't expect that you will regret it.


>
> If you're interested, I posted a detailed description of how it was
> installed
> and (more importantly) who made money from it at

Interesting and frustrating tale - thanks for posting the link
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 9:56:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Aerticeus wrote:

<snip>


> If you're interested, I posted a detailed description of how it was
> installed
> and (more importantly) who made money from it at
>
> http://www.livejournal.com/users/tacit/125748.html

Thanks for this... interesting reading.

And for what it's worth, I added the sites you mentioned
to my hosts.dat (re-directed back here, of course)

I live not far from the address you quoted for one of
the Canadians, and I'm sorry 'bout that behaviour.

I can only say that Canadians as a whole are much like
peoples everywhere. A few saints, a whole bunch of
ordinary hard working honorable good folks, and a few
not-so-good people.

Take care.

Ken



> unquote
>
> Aerticeus
Anonymous
December 3, 2004 10:32:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ken Weitzel wrote:
>
>
> Aerticeus wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>> If you're interested, I posted a detailed description of how it was
>> installed
>> and (more importantly) who made money from it at
>>
>> http://www.livejournal.com/users/tacit/125748.html
>
>
> Thanks for this... interesting reading.
>
> And for what it's worth, I added the sites you mentioned
> to my hosts.dat (re-directed back here, of course)
>
> I live not far from the address you quoted for one of
> the Canadians, and I'm sorry 'bout that behaviour.
>
> I can only say that Canadians as a whole are much like
> peoples everywhere. A few saints, a whole bunch of
> ordinary hard working honorable good folks, and a few
> not-so-good people.
>
> Take care.
>
> Ken
>
>
>
>> unquote
>>
>> Aerticeus
>
>
Hi Ken

It's OK - with the way wires twist around the world the perpetrators may
be anywhere?

A
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 1:53:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Bob Haar wrote:
> On 2004/12/3 1:14 PM, "Aerticeus" <spoofed@spooked.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I put this message on several NGs and there has been some very
>>interesting developments.
>>
>>One of which is: I think I'll turn my old box into a linux machine
>
>
> This is a reasonable approach, but even dumping IE for a non-MS web browser
> like Firefox eliminates some of the paths for getting spyware, etc. Into you
> computer. The tight integration of IE, Outlook and Windows is one of the big
> reasons that malware works so well on the Windows platform.
>
> I am NOT saying that you shouldn't move to LINUX, only that there are other
> options if you really need to stay with a Windows platform.
>
>
>>The second is: I am seriously pondering a dual cpu Mac G5 for my next
>>bit of kit (there are consequences I have to dwell on first)
>
>
> Mac OS X is a joy - all the human interfacing goodies that are traditional
> with Apple at the GUI level, combined with a tried-and-true UNIX OS under
> the hood. If you go that route, I don't expect that you will regret it.
>
>
>
>>If you're interested, I posted a detailed description of how it was
>>installed
>>and (more importantly) who made money from it at
>
>
> Interesting and frustrating tale - thanks for posting the link
>
The old box really is an old one - putting linux on it is one way for me
to see what the 'rave' is about

Now the G5 .... dual .... there is some good news

Aerticeus
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 12:11:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

Hecate writes:

>BTW, not that I've come across one in a long time, but there's an
>extension for Firefox that will allow you to right click and "view in
>IE" for any misbehaving sites you come across. :) 

I generally figure anything that doesn't display correctly in Firefox is
not that interesting anyway. The one exception: I still use Internet
Exploder is when I visit windowsupdate.com.

Dave
December 4, 2004 3:32:03 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"Michael A. Covington" <look@www.covingtoninnovations.com.for.address&gt;
wrote in news:41b0801c$1@mustang.speedfactory.net:

>
>> IE is evil incarnate.
>
> Not since Service Pack 2; IE is now, in my opinion, safer than Opera.

I've never used Opera and never new it was that unsafe, thanks for the tip,
I'll be sure to avoid it.

I have read reviews that say that even after SP2, IE is still horribly
unsafe (though a little less than it used to be).

I think I'll stick with Mozilla at this stage. I really like the tabbed
browsing as well as how the popup blocker works.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 12-Nov-04)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 3:32:04 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"MarkH" <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote in message
news:77isd.6173029$6p.981904@news.easynews.com...
> "Michael A. Covington" <look@www.covingtoninnovations.com.for.address&gt;
> wrote in news:41b0801c$1@mustang.speedfactory.net:
>
>>
>>> IE is evil incarnate.
>>
>> Not since Service Pack 2; IE is now, in my opinion, safer than Opera.
>
> I've never used Opera and never new it was that unsafe, thanks for the
> tip,
> I'll be sure to avoid it.
>
> I have read reviews that say that even after SP2, IE is still horribly
> unsafe (though a little less than it used to be).
>
> I think I'll stick with Mozilla at this stage. I really like the tabbed
> browsing as well as how the popup blocker works.
>
>
> --
> Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
> See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 12-Nov-04)
> "There are 10 types of people, those that
> understand binary and those that don't"
>
I just switched over to Mozilla, but I did notice that Microsoft hasn't come
out with a single update since SP2. I believe that is the longest I have
ever seen them go without an update. I can't remember the exact date that
SP2 came out, but it has been a couple of months I think.

Don Dunlap
Anonymous
December 4, 2004 6:37:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

"Michael A. Covington" <look@www.covingtoninnovations.com.for.address&gt;
wrote in news:41b0801c$1@mustang.speedfactory.net:

>
>> IE is evil incarnate.
>
> Not since Service Pack 2; IE is now, in my opinion, safer than Opera.

After three major vunerabilities were discovered within hours of it's
release, I'm kind of doubting this is even vaguely true.
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 12:04:50 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

A (and others)...

As one of those having performance problems with PSCS I absolutely agree with
the idea of doing regular computer maintenance.......

Unfortunately, 'cause in my "real" life I'm a computer consultant that does data
modeling and database design, both of which are astronomically resource hogs, I
always have to keep the machines running as well as possible.......

Which is why its so annoying that CS is causing such problems!

I got so desperate I even posted my performance problems over in the Adobe user
support forum, hoping that someone from Adobe or somewhere would care enough to
contact me to take and image and see if the problem is more than my machine...
You'd think being this old and cynical I wouldn't still be naive enough to think
ANYONE from ANY company would actually give a damn...

Oh, well, still having frequent VERY bigtime slowdowns with CS... On BOTH the
main machine AND the laptop.
Anonymous
December 8, 2004 7:56:43 PM

Archived from groups: comp.graphics.apps.photoshop,rec.photo.digital,comp.graphics.apps.photoshop (More info?)

JD wrote:

>
> Any problems with the CCleaner?
>

Not a bit - it runs sweet-de-sweet

Aerticeus
!