Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View


Avast v. 5.0.462, WinXP SP3

I currently only run the File System Shield which would seem to lay over and
duplicate the Mail, Web, P2P and IM Shields but I am unsure if the Network
and Behaviour Shields are similarly covered. Any good reason to start more
Shields?

As an unrelated but welcome footnote v. 5.0 has a smaller commit footprint
than v. 4.8 on this system, which is a refreshing trend. Developers very
often seem unable to understand that a clean, light and simple tool that
provides a specific and narrowly defined application well is still far more
useful in program maturation than a coat hanger / toaster combo that tweets.

Thanks


--
 



Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



Jack wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Learn to cross-post:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossposting
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/usenet/xpost.html

A point not made is that N multi-posted copies will consume N times the disk
space for each of the separate copies of the same post.  Cross-posted
messages have just *one* copy on the server with links in the newsgroups
back to the same single copy.  Multi-posting wastes disk space on the
server.  Yes, your post may be small but remember that you consume N times
the space on one server and then do so again on all the newsgroups servers
worldwide.  You waste more bandwidth getting N copies of your multi-posted
message distributed to all the newsgroups servers worldwide.  Cross-posting
has just one copy of the message on an NNTP server, and only one copy gets
propagated to other NNTP servers.

To those visiting the newsgroups, cross-posting helps them see ALL the
replies from those in the other RELATED newsgroup to which you linked your
post.  That way, they don't waste their time duplicating similar replies.

Don't cross-post to more groups than needed if at all.  Many consider
cross-posting to more than 4 groups as rude and may filter out your post.
The more groups you add, the less likely that they are related, the less
accurate or focused are the targeted groups, or some of the included groups
may already be encompassed by an included parent group.  If they are
subgroups under a topic, choose whether you will be specific or general in
the targeted groups to which you post.  Usenet-ignorants that shotgun their
posts across multiple groups trying to capture as large an audience as
possible will offend netizens with the poor aim.  Multi-posting instead of
cross-posting when shotgunning across multiple groups evidences you as a
newbie, troll, or spammer.  

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended




Quoted text here. Click to load it
< Self-appointed Usenet Policeman crapola snipped >

"Officer..do you mind showing me your badge?"

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Don't be silly.
Someone has to explain why multi-postying in many groups is not the best
way to ask a question.

--
Fred W. (NL)

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well then why have you taken this timeless , pointless and never-ending
Usenet crusade for truth about cross-posting upon yourself ?

What's next..the inevitable top posting vs. bottom posting debate?
I should have top posted this just to watch you take the bait.

Ponder this my friend....if cross-posting was so wrong, evil and
ineffective..why oh why has it been in the NNTP protocol since day #1 ?

And supposing if it is now discovered to be a wrong thing..why do news
servers still happily cross post according to the users discretion ?

Little Charlie's Blues Pages
http://www.soundclick.com/LittleCharlie

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



Bad Boy Charlie wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

You've missed the point. Cross-posting (to relevant groups) is *far*
better than *multi*-posting to them.

"Learn to cross-post" is the expected response to one who multi-posts.

--
   -bts
   -Four wheels carry the body; two wheels move the soul

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



On Thu, 11 Mar 2010 15:36:25 -0600, Bad Boy Charlie

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Just to clarify, crossposting is good. Multiposting is bad.

Crossposting is posting a single message to multiple groups at once.
Multiposting is posting that same message multiple (separate) times.


Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Oh, dear, another one of those: "There are no rules, because I say so".

What "crusade"?
A "crusade" of one message?
Your fantasy makes you see things that are only in your mind.
 :-P

--
Fred W. (NL)

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended



wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

So is 100% of our so-called 'Reality'....only in your mind.

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended




Quoted text here. Click to load it

I run them all and, as of .462, using the default settings. Works fine,
no noticeable performance hits and, at least potentially, some gain in
protection, so why not run 'm all?

The web shield did seem to slow down normal browsing in the earlier V5
releases. I tried turning off the "intelligent stream scanning" (with it
off, it works in download everything and then check mode, vice checking
on the fly) and disabling the web shield altogether (which helped). But,
as of the current point release, using the default settings is okay on
my boxes.

--
Rich Webb     Norfolk, VA

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended




Quoted text here. Click to load it

Doggone you Jack!  I had just applied for my US patent for a coat
hangar/ toaster that also Tweets!.....well..there goes my fortune!! I
don't recall in a long time reading such a witty analogy. Nice job...

I used Avast (free home version) off and on for several years and
oftentimes pondered that same question you post here. I never pursued it
at any great length but did turn some 'shields' off and some on and back
and forth without really knowing the security overview / risk of my ala
carte approach. To me it always remained a nebulous thing. Frankly that
scenario does not make me feel warm and fuzzy all over.  

Recently I have purchased and am using Norton Internet Security 2010 and
am very pleased. Since Norton's revamping of it's full line of security
products starting with the 2009 releases the footprint and resource
issues that plagued Norton in the prior years (and the bad press) are
gone forever. A free and 100% fully functional trial download of NIS
2010 is available here:
http://www.symantec.com/norton/downloads/trialsoftware/offer.jsp?pvid=nis2010

It is an opt-out 30-day trial. You'll need to submit a payment method to
obtain and use the software. No charges until after the 30 day trial is
over. I didn't find that too invasive and after a couple weeks of using
it just let it automatically charge me the purchase price. Naturally you
can cancel on any day before the 30 days and no charges occur.

Symantec security products have really been improved the past 2 years
and reviewers  are commenting accordingly. Even with bloat and waste the
past years (prior to the 2009 product line) in NAV and NIS were always
near the top if not at the top of AV testing agency score results. They
still do to this day.

Re: Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended




Quoted text here. Click to load it
running W2K here.
Quoted text here. Click to load it
not that I am aware of but I have the behavior shield activated anyway.  
Also using Privatefirewall 7.0 along with a hosts file so I did not  
install the web or network shields.

Quoted text here. Click to load it

I agree with you
--
This post was created using Opera@USB: http://www.opera-usb.com
Virus Removal Instructions  
http://sites.google.com/site/keepingwindowsclean/home
Max's Favorite Freeware  
http://sites.google.com/site/keepingwindowsclean/freeware

Site Timeline