Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Do we have to use EasyShare?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
January 10, 2005 8:08:53 AM

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

My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128 MB
SD card and 32 MB internal memory.

My own experience with Easy Share software is negative: too much junk, too
little performance. I recommended other software (ACDSee 6.0.3).

Here's the question: With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak
software needed to acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via the
camera USB cable? If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have to
load (shudder) the EasyShare application?

More about : easyshare

Anonymous
January 10, 2005 8:08:54 AM

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

> If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient?
Very likely.

>Or does she have to load (shudder) the EasyShare application?
Probably not.

Umm.. why don't you just load the camera connection component, and then
see if it works? While the Kodak software is pretty painful, it is
relatively easy to partially install/uninstall.
January 10, 2005 8:08:54 AM

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

John wrote:

> My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128
> MB SD card and 32 MB internal memory.
>

Spend $15 for a card reader. I've found most people have less problems using
a card reader than the camera download software and cables.
--

Stacey
Related resources
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 8:08:54 AM

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

John wrote:
> My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128 MB
> SD card and 32 MB internal memory.
>
> My own experience with Easy Share software is negative: too much junk, too
> little performance. I recommended other software (ACDSee 6.0.3).
>
> Here's the question: With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak
> software needed to acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via the
> camera USB cable? If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have to
> load (shudder) the EasyShare application?
>
>
She can get bye with just the Camera Connection Software, or even use a
card reader and dispense with even that Kodak software. You do NOT need
the Easyshare software at all.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:18:34 PM

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

http://www.picasa.com/picasa/
And $10 card reader or just install the camera connection and leave the easy
share spyware alone.


"John" <jhNOTELVISfricks@REALLYhotNOTCOLDmail.com> wrote in message
news:F5oEd.3178$pZ4.2126@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128
MB
> SD card and 32 MB internal memory.
>
> My own experience with Easy Share software is negative: too much junk, too
> little performance. I recommended other software (ACDSee 6.0.3).
>
> Here's the question: With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak
> software needed to acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via
the
> camera USB cable? If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have
to
> load (shudder) the EasyShare application?
>
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 12:18:35 PM

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

On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:18:34 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "One Million
Pictures" <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://www.picasa.com/picasa/
>And $10 card reader or just install the camera connection and leave the easy
>share spyware alone.

Card reader will allow you to access the photos on the SD card, but not the
internal memory.

________________________________________________________
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:05:22 PM

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

One Million Pictures wrote:
> http://www.picasa.com/picasa/
> And $10 card reader or just install the camera connection and leave the easy
> share spyware alone.
>
>
> "John" <jhNOTELVISfricks@REALLYhotNOTCOLDmail.com> wrote in message
> news:F5oEd.3178$pZ4.2126@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128
>
> MB
>
>
>
Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
automatic check if you wish.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 1:06:00 PM

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

Ed Ruf wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:18:34 GMT, in rec.photo.digital "One Million
> Pictures" <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.picasa.com/picasa/
>>And $10 card reader or just install the camera connection and leave the easy
>>share spyware alone.
>
>
> Card reader will allow you to access the photos on the SD card, but not the
> internal memory.
>
> ________________________________________________________
> Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
> See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
True, but you can copy the internal memory pictures to the card.
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 6:30:14 PM

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

Greetings John,

No, you can use just the CCS or Camera Connection Software. It is a
separate installation if you want it to be. Sorry to hear that you had
trouble with this software in the past. If you want to review what
happened, I am glad to share with you and come up with some answers. Let me
know.

If you want to use only the CCS part of the EasyShare System, you can by
going to the download page after you have logged into the Kodak website as a
member. Follow the prompts from either the save prompt or the Open option.
If you choose the Save option you will have to note where the file is being
downloaded. Go to that location on your hard drive and click on the
'install_easyshare.exe' file. Or, if you choose the OPEN option
(recommended) Follow the prompt windows till you come to the choice page
that includes Modify, Repair, Remove buttons. Click on the 'radio' button
for 'Modify.' On the resulting page you will find other options. Select
any of them that are not current, i.e. Camera Connection. When you do the
system will download and install that feature. Of course if you choose all
three, it will download and install the entire program.

Talk to you soon, John, let me know if you need help.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


"John" <jhNOTELVISfricks@REALLYhotNOTCOLDmail.com> wrote in message
news:F5oEd.3178$pZ4.2126@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128
MB
> SD card and 32 MB internal memory.
>
> My own experience with Easy Share software is negative: too much junk, too
> little performance. I recommended other software (ACDSee 6.0.3).
>
> Here's the question: With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak
> software needed to acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via
the
> camera USB cable? If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have
to
> load (shudder) the EasyShare application?
>
>
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:34:44 PM

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

"John" <jhNOTELVISfricks@REALLYhotNOTCOLDmail.com> wrote in message
news:F5oEd.3178$pZ4.2126@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> My niece got a Kodak EasyShare DX7630 camera for Christmas. She has a 128
> MB
> SD card and 32 MB internal memory.
>
> My own experience with Easy Share software is negative: too much junk, too
> little performance. I recommended other software (ACDSee 6.0.3).
>
> Here's the question: With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak
> software needed to acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via
> the
> camera USB cable? If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have
> to
> load (shudder) the EasyShare application?
>
>

I have a DX6340 and have been able to see the camera memory card and
download without any Kodak software at all!
Didn't work all the time though. :-(
I now use a card reader and find that fantastic - much better than the Kodak
software.

Gerrit - Oz
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:51:43 PM

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

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:xJxEd.12$3N5.10@fe07.lga...

> Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
> it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
> software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
> programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
> automatic check if you wish.

Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share used
the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and this
most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with no
relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.

Kiah
--------
Anonymous
January 10, 2005 11:51:44 PM

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

One Million Pictures wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:xJxEd.12$3N5.10@fe07.lga...
>
>
>>Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
>>it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
>>software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
>>programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
>>automatic check if you wish.
>
>
> Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share used
> the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and this
> most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with no
> relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
> remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
> knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
> must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.
>
> Kiah
> --------
>
>

Backweb is also capable of doing nothing at all. Just because you have
the ABILITY to do something, doesn't mean you ARE doing it. YOU have the
capability of rob, rape, and murder, but I wouldn't accuse you of DOING
it without proof. Spyware is software that DOES something illicit, not
just software that CAN do something. If you have some evidence that the
Kodak implementation of Backweb is doing something that you can point to
as extracting information, please present it.



--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
January 11, 2005 12:19:27 AM

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

"One Million Pictures" <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zVBEd.113376$K7.91371@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:xJxEd.12$3N5.10@fe07.lga...
>
> > Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
> > it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
> > software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
> > programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
> > automatic check if you wish.
>
> Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share
used
> the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and
this
> most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with
no
> relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
> remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
> knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
> must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.
>
> Kiah
> --------
>
>

BackWeb's web site lists its Privacy Policy and it makes reference to
"polite" pop-ups. Apparently, BackWeb's popups do not occur when a user is
actively using his computer, but rather they appear after some predetermined
period of idleness. Apparently, BackWeb considers that to be acceptable.

BackWeb gives NO instructions on how to remove their software from your
computer.

I am as open-minded as the next guy, but the fact is that the computer owner
is given NO advance notice that this software is being inserted into his
computer, and thus is denied the right to make a choice as to whether he
wants it.

What is worse is that one does not ordinarily associate such clandestine
practices with the Kodak name.

I would not have downloaded EasyShare Software had Kodak disclosed that
BackWeb was incorporated into it. I believe that a reputable company like
Kodak should recognize an OBLIGATION to disclose to consumers what they are
downloading--and give them the opportunity to decline the download if they
are dissatisfied with the software. And this disclosure should be plainly
visible--not hidden within the boilerplate of the Terms and Conditions, in
obscure language. In addition, the ability to completely delete BackWeb
should be clearly stated.

I do not think that is asking too much--all I want is a fair shake. I
believe that Congress is considering a bill that would make it mandatory for
consumers to be advised of software like BackWeb BEFORE they download it,
and also be given clear removal instructions if they want to get rid of it
once it is on their hard drive. Kodak EasyShare, as far as I can determine,
presently complies with neither of these two objectives.

I am one of those grumpy, territorial old men that believes that what goes
on my computer should remain MY choice. BackWeb represents a new and
sinister variation on the old Malware/SpyWare model, because they act as
though their "polite" pop-ups represent a sort of moral high ground that
distinguishes them from ordinary SpyWare vendors. Their popups are
unwelcome and intrusive--whether they are "polite" or not.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:19:28 AM

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

Jeremy wrote:
> "One Million Pictures" <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:zVBEd.113376$K7.91371@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>>news:xJxEd.12$3N5.10@fe07.lga...
>>
>>
>>>Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
>>>it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
>>>software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
>>>programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
>>>automatic check if you wish.
>>
>>Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share
>
> used
>
>>the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and
>
> this
>
>>most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with
>
> no
>
>>relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
>>remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
>>knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
>>must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.
>>
>>Kiah
>>--------
>>
>>
>
>
> BackWeb's web site lists its Privacy Policy and it makes reference to
> "polite" pop-ups. Apparently, BackWeb's popups do not occur when a user is
> actively using his computer, but rather they appear after some predetermined
> period of idleness. Apparently, BackWeb considers that to be acceptable.
>
> BackWeb gives NO instructions on how to remove their software from your
> computer.
>
> I am as open-minded as the next guy, but the fact is that the computer owner
> is given NO advance notice that this software is being inserted into his
> computer, and thus is denied the right to make a choice as to whether he
> wants it.
>
> What is worse is that one does not ordinarily associate such clandestine
> practices with the Kodak name.
>
> I would not have downloaded EasyShare Software had Kodak disclosed that
> BackWeb was incorporated into it. I believe that a reputable company like
> Kodak should recognize an OBLIGATION to disclose to consumers what they are
> downloading--and give them the opportunity to decline the download if they
> are dissatisfied with the software. And this disclosure should be plainly
> visible--not hidden within the boilerplate of the Terms and Conditions, in
> obscure language. In addition, the ability to completely delete BackWeb
> should be clearly stated.
>
> I do not think that is asking too much--all I want is a fair shake. I
> believe that Congress is considering a bill that would make it mandatory for
> consumers to be advised of software like BackWeb BEFORE they download it,
> and also be given clear removal instructions if they want to get rid of it
> once it is on their hard drive. Kodak EasyShare, as far as I can determine,
> presently complies with neither of these two objectives.
>
> I am one of those grumpy, territorial old men that believes that what goes
> on my computer should remain MY choice. BackWeb represents a new and
> sinister variation on the old Malware/SpyWare model, because they act as
> though their "polite" pop-ups represent a sort of moral high ground that
> distinguishes them from ordinary SpyWare vendors. Their popups are
> unwelcome and intrusive--whether they are "polite" or not.
>
>
>
I believe that Backweb is adequately explained in the EULA, and it is
quite simple to prevent it from getting out with a good firewall
program. As for removing it, I really wouldn't know. That should be
covered, in fact, it should be required that ALL programs list
themselves in the 'run/install' dialog, and that they be completely
removable from there. Frankly, Backweb bothers me a LOT less than those
programs that I load and then can't uninstall because they munge the
install.log file in some way. It took me about an hour to get rid of
one such this weekend.

But accusing Kodak of installing spyware is rather like that joke about
the game warden who said he was going to cite the lady for fishing
because she had 'all the necessary equipment in the boat, even though he
didn't see her fishing, and there was no bait, or fish in her boat. She
told him to give her the citation, and when they got back to shore, she
was going to charge him with rape. When he asked how she came to the
point, she said, 'Well, you have all the necessary equipment, and we are
alone.'


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 12:16:45 PM

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

One Million Pictures <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>
>> Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
>> it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
>> software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
>> programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
>> automatic check if you wish.
>
> Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share used
> the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and this
> most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with no
> relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
> remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
> knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
> must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.

What does Spybot Search & Destroy say about BACKWEB, and does SS&D
ordinarly recommend removing BACKWEB?
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:57:56 PM

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

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:JAGEd.2257$Gf4.1955@fe07.lga...
> But accusing Kodak of installing spyware is rather like that joke about
> the game warden who said he was going to cite the lady for fishing
> because she had 'all the necessary equipment in the boat, even though he
> didn't see her fishing, and there was no bait, or fish in her boat. She
> told him to give her the citation, and when they got back to shore, she
> was going to charge him with rape. When he asked how she came to the
> point, she said, 'Well, you have all the necessary equipment, and we are
> alone.'
>
>
> --
> Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

Humor aside Ron, Backweb was first installed on Compaq and HP systems
without refrence to to why it was actually there. Your analogy of the lady
in the boat is as bad as the woman in black, carrying an automatic Uzi under
her habit, who walked into a jewish cafe and killed 30 people with it. If
she had been aprehended prior to this, your attitude would see her totally
untouchable until she pulled the trigger. Not too good is it?

The fact is Backweb has been identified in the past as spyware. If it serves
no purpose towards downloading images from a camera or editing and printing
them... What's it doing concealed in an otherwise inocent program? What is
the big secrecy from Kodak about it's existance? The only capability Backweb
has is to act as a server and harvest information. What exactly has that got
to do with getting pictures out of a camera?

Kiah.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 1:57:57 PM

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

One Million Pictures wrote:
> "Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
> news:JAGEd.2257$Gf4.1955@fe07.lga...
>
>>But accusing Kodak of installing spyware is rather like that joke about
>>the game warden who said he was going to cite the lady for fishing
>>because she had 'all the necessary equipment in the boat, even though he
>>didn't see her fishing, and there was no bait, or fish in her boat. She
>>told him to give her the citation, and when they got back to shore, she
>>was going to charge him with rape. When he asked how she came to the
>>point, she said, 'Well, you have all the necessary equipment, and we are
>>alone.'
>>
>>
>>--
>>Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
>
>
> Humor aside Ron, Backweb was first installed on Compaq and HP systems
> without refrence to to why it was actually there. Your analogy of the lady
> in the boat is as bad as the woman in black, carrying an automatic Uzi under
> her habit, who walked into a jewish cafe and killed 30 people with it. If
> she had been aprehended prior to this, your attitude would see her totally
> untouchable until she pulled the trigger. Not too good is it?
>
> The fact is Backweb has been identified in the past as spyware. If it serves
> no purpose towards downloading images from a camera or editing and printing
> them... What's it doing concealed in an otherwise inocent program? What is
> the big secrecy from Kodak about it's existance? The only capability Backweb
> has is to act as a server and harvest information. What exactly has that got
> to do with getting pictures out of a camera?
>
> Kiah.
>
>
You have the word of two Kodak reps that the ONLY thing it does in their
implementation is to provide automatic updating, which can be turned
OFF. There is no secret that it is there, and they haven't tried to
hide the fact that it is there. FYI, HP includes it on all their
computers, and seems to install it as well with printer drivers, for the
same purpose. Perhaps it CAN do all those other things, but that
doesn't mean it IS doing them. IF you don't want it, don't install
their software, and/or tell your firewall program to keep it from
accessing the internet.

If you persist in ignoring my answers, there is nothing more I can say.

It appears that you don't believe in 'innocent until proven guilty'.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 2:02:46 PM

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

"Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com> wrote in message
news:cruoe0$kb7$1@news.kodak.com...
> Greetings John,

> If you want to use only the CCS part of the EasyShare System, you can by
> going to the download page after you have logged into the Kodak website as
a
> member.

> Ron Baird
> Eastman Kodak Company
>
>
Hey Ron...
If he bought the camera in the first place, why does he have to become a
"member" of Kodak just get software to get at his images? Maybe this is why
many camera stores I've been to have Kodak cameras on the shelves but are
not really interested in selling them? Isn't it about time Kodak stopped
behaving like a "we know what's best for you" company and started selling
what people actually want?

Kiah
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 2:02:47 PM

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

One Million Pictures wrote:
> "Ron Baird" <ronbaird@kodak.com> wrote in message
> news:cruoe0$kb7$1@news.kodak.com...
>
>>Greetings John,
>
>
>>If you want to use only the CCS part of the EasyShare System, you can by
>>going to the download page after you have logged into the Kodak website as
>
> a
>
>>member.
>
>
>>Ron Baird
>>Eastman Kodak Company
>>
>>
>
> Hey Ron...
> If he bought the camera in the first place, why does he have to become a
> "member" of Kodak just get software to get at his images? Maybe this is why
> many camera stores I've been to have Kodak cameras on the shelves but are
> not really interested in selling them? Isn't it about time Kodak stopped
> behaving like a "we know what's best for you" company and started selling
> what people actually want?
>
> Kiah
>
>
>
You don't HAVE to load a single byte of Kodak software to get your
pictures out of your camera. A card reader will do the job quite nicely.
EasyShare is intended as a way for non-computer-literate people to have
easy access to their digital camera images, without concerns about
technical details, such as periodic program updates, file managers, and
card readers. If you don't need these features, don't install/use them.
It's really that simple.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 3:57:10 PM

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

Bill Tuthill wrote:
> One Million Pictures <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
>>>it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
>>>software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
>>>programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
>>>automatic check if you wish.
>>
>>Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share used
>>the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and this
>>most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with no
>>relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
>>remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
>>knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
>>must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.
>
>
> What does Spybot Search & Destroy say about BACKWEB, and does SS&D
> ordinarly recommend removing BACKWEB?
>

Microsoft's new Spyware remover considers is a low threat spyware which
is mostly used to deliver updates, and/or ads.



--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
January 11, 2005 6:06:05 PM

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

"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
news:JAGEd.2257$Gf4.1955@fe07.lga...
> >
> I believe that Backweb is adequately explained in the EULA, and it is
> quite simple to prevent it from getting out with a good firewall
> program.

Obsure references to it in the EULA are insufficient. And it is not enough
to try to block it with a firewall program--the notion that they should be
allowed to install something into your computer, and then leave you with the
challenge of trying to figure out how to disable it, is absurd. Especially
in view of the fact that their software is offered to a group of computer
users that are less sophisticated about such matters.


As for removing it, I really wouldn't know.

Go to BackWeb's site, and see for yourself. They tell users to contact the
software vendor that originally inserted it into your comouter! How very
convenient!


That should be
> covered, in fact, it should be required that ALL programs list
> themselves in the 'run/install' dialog, and that they be completely

That's what I said, too.

> removable from there. Frankly, Backweb bothers me a LOT less than those
> programs that I load and then can't uninstall because they munge the
> install.log file in some way.

It bothers me.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 9:17:11 PM

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

Bill Tuthill wrote:
> One Million Pictures <million_pics@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>"Ron Hunter" <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in message
>>
>>
>>>Sigh. Easyshare is a lot of things, some of them negative, but spyware
>>>it is NOT. It has an automatic update check, which 90% of good
>>>software these days has, like PhotoShop, Norton AV, and Firewall
>>>programs. This does NOT make it spyware, and you can turn off the
>>>automatic check if you wish.
>>
>>Pardon me for pointing out your mistaken assumption Ron but Easy share used
>>the common spyware application : BACKWEB as part of it's functions and this
>>most definitely is spyware. It is capable of harvesting information with no
>>relevance whatsoever to the host software and sending that information to
>>remote destinations other than the originating developer without the
>>knowledge or permission of the PC owner. If that is not spyware, then it
>>must have been Bill Gates I saw in soup kitchen line up last week.
>
>
> What does Spybot Search & Destroy say about BACKWEB, and does SS&D
> ordinarly recommend removing BACKWEB?


Hi...

Don't know what Spybot thinks - though it's not in spybots
re-directed hosts list

Spysweeper however considers it to be a medium level threat.

And making it worse; there are a large number of phony
really malicious versions of backweb out there.

Google for backweb; there's lots. Including removal
instructions.

Ken
January 11, 2005 10:22:40 PM

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

Thanks, Ron Hunter and Ron Baird and others for your response to my post.

Some of you went off on a tangent. It was interesting, but you may not have
really read my request:

*************************************
"Here's the question:

With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak software needed to
acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via the camera USB cable?
If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have to load (shudder)
the EasyShare application?"
***********************************

Most of you recognize that Windows 98, unlike Windows XP, requires specific
drivers in order to acquire pictures via USB-connected card readers and
cameras.

Card readers - always my preference - aren't helpful when retrieving images
from the camera internal memory.

My first digital camera was a Kodak DX3500, with EasyShare 1.4, and I
quickly came to dislike the degree to which EasyShare took over my choices
of digital image management.

The Kodak Camera Dock was certainly easy to use, but it forced one to use
EasyShare, and it modified the file date and time making it impossible to
use Windows Explorer to see the date/time of the image creation.

I followed Ron Baird's advice to download the new version, and I did install
the camera connection component. It operates as promised, with the old
DX3500 as well as the new DX7630.

As usual with "free" software for digital cameras, scanners, and printers,
Kodak EasyShare has plenty of ways to get you to spend money on Kodak
products. I'll buy their products anyway, when the price and features are
right for me. When I'm spending valuable time (remember, time is money) on
digital image management and processing, I want fast software, easy to use,
with features that give me choices instead of limiting my choice.

For that, I'll pay. After all, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Anonymous
January 11, 2005 10:22:41 PM

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

John wrote:
> Thanks, Ron Hunter and Ron Baird and others for your response to my post.
>
> Some of you went off on a tangent. It was interesting, but you may not have
> really read my request:
>
> *************************************
> "Here's the question:
>
> With Windows 98, what's the minimum amount of Kodak software needed to
> acquire pictures from the camera internal memory via the camera USB cable?
> If Kodak Camera Connection sufficient? Or does she have to load (shudder)
> the EasyShare application?"
> ***********************************
>
> Most of you recognize that Windows 98, unlike Windows XP, requires specific
> drivers in order to acquire pictures via USB-connected card readers and
> cameras.
>
> Card readers - always my preference - aren't helpful when retrieving images
> from the camera internal memory.
So, copy from internal memory to the card..
>
> My first digital camera was a Kodak DX3500, with EasyShare 1.4, and I
> quickly came to dislike the degree to which EasyShare took over my choices
> of digital image management.

It doesn't take over mh choces, I use either Windows Explorer or
Photoshop Elements.
>
> The Kodak Camera Dock was certainly easy to use, but it forced one to use
> EasyShare, and it modified the file date and time making it impossible to
> use Windows Explorer to see the date/time of the image creation.

I have a dock. Makes a nice charger and camera holder. You don't HAVE
to use it for trqnsfers, and I usually don't.
>
> I followed Ron Baird's advice to download the new version, and I did install
> the camera connection component. It operates as promised, with the old
> DX3500 as well as the new DX7630.
>
> As usual with "free" software for digital cameras, scanners, and printers,
> Kodak EasyShare has plenty of ways to get you to spend money on Kodak
> products. I'll buy their products anyway, when the price and features are
> right for me. When I'm spending valuable time (remember, time is money) on
> digital image management and processing, I want fast software, easy to use,
> with features that give me choices instead of limiting my choice.

That's why I use PSE3.
>
> For that, I'll pay. After all, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
>
>
!