Recent Posts

751

General Software Discussion / Re: Undelete utilities?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 18, 2010, 03:31 PM »

Thanks Innuendo and sajman99.  Having thought about it for a while (and before I read your messages), I decided perhaps I should indeed install it on a flash key, as several people suggested, so I did.  After reading your messages, I thought perhaps I'll put it on my hard drive as well, but the program apparently doesn't want to be installed in more than one place at a time.  It told me I had already installed it, and did I want to uninstall it from where I had it.  I decided to leave well enough alone. 

Thanks again to cmpm for calling attention to the offer of a free copy.

752

General Software Discussion / Re: Undelete utilities?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 18, 2010, 09:48 AM »

I guess it's the latter !  They have this warning in case you just want to recover files from C: and are about to install Easeus on the same C: hence risking making the recovering process a failure, because space used by the lost files you want to recover might be reused by the installation process.

-MerleOne (March 18, 2010, 02:31 AM)

I guess both her statements are true then. In any case, she shouldn't install it on drive c:

-PhilB66 (March 18, 2010, 03:30 AM)

Thanks, guys, for your responses. However, Phil, I don't see how your response arises from what Merle said.  Merle indicates that the warning does not apply to installing DRW on my C drive unless I'm doing so to deal with a current problem on my C drive.  Since I'm NOT dealing with a current problem, and hence installing the program won't damage any current files I'm trying to recover, why do you say I shouldn't install it there? 

753

General Software Discussion / Re: Undelete utilities?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 17, 2010, 10:39 PM »

Well, I went to install Easeus Data Recovery Wizard and came upon the following warning: "We strongly recommend never installing Data Recovery Wizard on the same drive that you want to recover data from. Installation to the same drive will cause a permanent data loss and less chance to restore.
Current installation path: C:\Program Files\EASEUS\EASEUS Data Recovery Wizard 5.0.1"

I'm not sure whether that means I shouldn't install it on drive C (my only hard drive--it's not partitioned) if I ever plan to recover data from that drive, or whether it just means that if I already have a problem on that drive and want to try to recover data NOW, I shouldn't install DRW on the same drive.  If it means the latter, I'll install it, but if it means the former, I guess I won't bother.  Does anyone know for sure which one is meant?

754

General Software Discussion / Re: Undelete utilities?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 17, 2010, 03:22 PM »

Thanks very much, Merle, for your quick and helpful reply.  I'll take your advice.

755

General Software Discussion / Re: Undelete utilities?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 17, 2010, 11:41 AM »

Speaking of Easeus Data Recovery Wizard.
3 day give away.
http://www.techsuppo...d-3-day-giveaway.htm

-cmpm (March 16, 2010, 02:04 AM)

I just downloaded the zip file and unzipped it, yielding a setup file.  Do I have to actually install it within the three-day offer to have a free license, or is just downloading it enough?  I'd rather not install it right now unless I have to to take advantage of the offer.

756

General Software Discussion / Re: Firewalls are wonderful things except when they aren’t.

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 12, 2010, 08:43 AM »

With regard to a brief note, yes good idea. However most people won't see or read it. I go to a lot of time and effort writing comprehensive documentation and very few people every read it.

-nevf (March 12, 2010, 03:56 AM)

Yes, I'm sure most people skip the comprehensive documentation, at least at the start.  But if you just have a brief, eye-catching note at the start of the installation that says "Important!" or "Before you begin" or something like that, perhaps people will read it.  Maybe a note wherever people download Surfulater as well.

757

General Software Discussion / Re: Boxer editor 14 released - paid upgrade, $29.00 - text wrap at last

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 11, 2010, 10:57 PM »

I think a number of years ago I did ask for bookmarks, back before Boxer offered them at all.  Boxer was my primary text editor, but I eventually switched to UltraEdit because it offered bookmarks (as far as I know, they're unlimited) and better unicode support than Boxer did.  I think Boxer eventually added unicode support, but by then I was happily using UltraEdit.

It used to be that Boxer was substantially more expensive than UltraEdit.  Over time, though, UltraEdit has become more expensive and perhaps Boxer has dropped its price a bit.  At any rate, i think the two are now similarly priced both for first purchase and for updates.

758

General Software Discussion / Re: Firewalls are wonderful things except when they aren’t.

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 11, 2010, 10:46 PM »

Your article makes some good points.  I'm surprised, though, that the user you mention (Peter) didn't tell his firewall to permit Surfulater, since he was installing the program.  Perhaps it might be a good idea for you to include a very brief note at the start of Surfulater's download instructions suggesting that the user make sure his/her firewall permits Surfulater to have full access to the Internet.

759

General Software Discussion / Re: Recommend anti-spyware, please?

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 10, 2010, 03:02 PM »

One of the things I love about MBAM is that, even according to the company, there's almost never a need to run a full scan: the Quick Scan is designed to do the job, and a Quick Scan generally takes < 10 minutes.  That being the case, I tend to run it every day.  Moreover, I don't care what kind of system resources it takes, since it's so fast.   

760

General Software Discussion / Re: Boxer editor 14 released - paid upgrade, $29.00 - text wrap at last

« Last post by cyberdiva on March 03, 2010, 06:49 PM »

I think what's being described must somehow be different from wordwrap.  I used Boxer for many years before switching to UltraEdit, and I'm 100% sure that Boxer had wordwrap then.  I wouldn't have been able to tolerate a text editor without that very basic feature.

761

General Software Discussion / Re: Recommend anti-spyware, please?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 27, 2010, 01:32 PM »

Malwarebytes seems to miss tracking cookies that SuperAntiSpyware will find.

-cmpm (February 27, 2010, 10:55 AM)

It's true that Malwarebytes doesn't pay all that much attention to tracking cookies.  They're relatively harmless, and lots of other programs can catch them if you're concerned about them.  Malwarebytes focuses on more serious malware.  It's designed to find serious malware that most of the antivirus programs miss.  I've got Malwarebytes paid version on both my desktop (running WinXP Pro) and my netbook (running Win7), and I love it.  As has been said, the paid version offers real-time protection and also IP protection.  It will warn you and block malicious web sites, though you can turn this feature off if you don't want it, or turn it off for certain websites.

Three other things I really like about Malwarebytes:
1) it offers a very useful but speedy quick scan.  I have found it to be several times faster than the quick scan offered by SuperAntiSpyware.  The scan is the same for both free and paid versions.
2) If you buy the paid version, you get a lifetime license.  You never have to pay for upgrades.
3) The Malwarebytes website offers an astonishing degree of help, whether or not you've bought their program.

I guess I've become something of an enthusiast about Malwarebytes, so I should add that I have absolutely no connection to the company.  I'm just a very satisfied user of Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Pro.

762

General Software Discussion / Re: Why OpenOffice? Why Microsoft Office? Each one makes their argument

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 23, 2010, 12:17 PM »

Yes, you're right about SoftMaker Office 2010 for Windows, it was released in December IIRC. The Linux version is still in beta testing, however.

-TucknDar (February 23, 2010, 11:08 AM)

Oops, sorry, I somehow lost sight of the fact that it was the Linux version being referred to. 

763

General Software Discussion / Re: Why OpenOffice? Why Microsoft Office? Each one makes their argument

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 22, 2010, 10:05 PM »

I'm under the impression that Softmaker 2010 is now out of beta.  I haven't tried it, but I was impressed the few times I've used the 2008 version.

764

General Software Discussion / Re: Feb 9, 2010: Windows Patch Leaves Many XP Users With Blue Screens?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 12, 2010, 07:49 AM »

Many thanks, CleverCat, f0dder, and Bamse, for your helpful and reassuring replies.  The explanation about the patch causing havoc only on systems already infected makes some sense and would also explain why not everyone is affected.  I hope it turns out to be true.

765

General Software Discussion / Re: Feb 9, 2010: Windows Patch Leaves Many XP Users With Blue Screens?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 11, 2010, 10:24 PM »

I have my updates set to Notify.  It was only after waiting a day, having my husband assure me he had encountered no problem, and going to one or two web sites to see whether anyone was reporting problems (and finding none) that I downloaded and installed the updates.  So I was taken aback by mouser's message at the start of this thread.  At this point, I'm perplexed and am wondering what triggered the widespread problems and yet didn't affect my husband's system or mine (knock on wood    ).

766

General Software Discussion / Re: Feb 9, 2010: Windows Patch Leaves Many XP Users With Blue Screens?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 11, 2010, 06:41 PM »

I'm both puzzled and nervous after reading this article.  Both my husband and I have computers running WinXP Pro with SP2, and we both installed all the patches Microsoft issued this Tuesday.  Neither of us has experienced the problem described in the article, and yes, we both have rebooted more than once since installing them.  It wasn't clear from my hurried reading what percentage of people who installed the patches (esp. the one that has been identified as the probably culprit, KB977165) are encountering this problem.  Does anyone have any additional knowledge about this?   

767

General Software Discussion / Re: What is the currently best Desktop Search software?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 10, 2010, 06:21 PM »

Hmm... I'm using IE 8 - I guess the website is optimized for IE? Alternatively, I've seen some pages render like that when my interet connection is about to fail (wireless link to the router gets reset).

-Darwin (February 10, 2010, 05:09 PM)

Hmmm....interesting.  You're right--after reading your message, I opened the page in IE 8, and it looked just like yours.  I then opened it in Opera 10, and it looked just like yours.  But in Firefox 3.6, my default browser, it's screwed up.  Of course, it's only Firefox that warns about the site's being a baddie.  I wonder whether in addition to the warning, FF also degrades the formatting.   

768

General Software Discussion / Re: What is the currently best Desktop Search software?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 10, 2010, 04:53 PM »

Thanks, Darwin, for the screenshot.  It looks somewhat different from the page I got/get.  The formatting on yours is much better.  I've attached a screenshot that I just took so you can see the difference. 

769

General Software Discussion / Re: What is the currently best Desktop Search software?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 10, 2010, 11:13 AM »

I just went to the likasoft site.  Firefox did its best to discourage me from doing so.  Apparently Firefox is using advisories from Google to decide what sites to block.  I was interested to see that Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Pro with IP Protection enabled and the latest definitions loaded did NOT flag the site as dangerous.  OTOH, the page I reached looked surprisingly lame.  I don't usually visit it, so I have no way of knowing whether it usually looks so amateurish, but it looked like a page I would design with my exceedingly basic and outmoded web-construction skills.  That made me wonder whether it's the real page.   

770

Living Room / Re: Browser Wars: Why did you choose yours?

« Last post by cyberdiva on February 05, 2010, 11:04 PM »

I started years ago with Netscape, then switched to Opera because I loved some of its innovative built-in features, plus the fact that I could customize it.  I used Opera for years (even when it cost money), but eventually I switched to Firefox because it rendered more sites correctly than Opera did.  Opera kept insisting on perfect adherence to "standards," which was fine in the abstract but sucked in real life.  Firefox is still my default browser.  I now value it primarily for some of its extensions, but I'm increasingly frustrated with how sluggish it has become.  If Opera (which I find much faster) had extensions, I'd switch back to it in a heartbeat.  I've been interested in what people have said in recent threads here about Chrome.  I'm somewhat wary about putting yet more of my online life in Google's hands, but I may eventually give Chrome a try.

771

General Software Discussion / Re: AVAST! 5 released

« Last post by cyberdiva on January 22, 2010, 05:06 PM »

Hi, Tuxman.  That's strange, since one of the things I really like about Avast is that I've had NO false positives.  I don't tend to get much malware, and just about all the "findings" that various security programs have produced in the last few years have been false positives.   

772

General Software Discussion / Re: AVAST! 5 released

« Last post by cyberdiva on January 22, 2010, 04:18 PM »

Two days ago, I upgraded from Avast 4.8 to Avast 5 free on my Windows7 netbook.  As soon as I did so, I was unable to access the Internet!  I tried several things, and disabling Outpost Firewall Pro gave me back my Internet access.  I went through several scenarios, including uninstalling Avast5 free and reenabling Outpost Firewall (this, too, permitted me to access the Internet).  Today, I tried again to install Avast5 free, and again I found myself unable to access any web sites.  I should add that I did NOT have this problem between Outpost Firewall Pro and Avast 4.8.  Anyway, I decided for the time being to uninstall Avast 5 free and install Microsoft Security Essentials.  That seems to be working, but I'd really prefer to be using Avast 5  .  I've sent messages to the Avast and Outpost forums to see whether I can get any insight into what the problem is and what if anything I can do about it.

773

General Software Discussion / Re: Win 7 XP Mode is Hardware-Dependent

« Last post by cyberdiva on January 16, 2010, 01:16 PM »

I agree with Stoic Joker.  I was unaware that some PCs--even new PCs--might not be able to run XP Mode.  If one is buying a new PC that runs Windows 7 Professional or Ultimate, how can one make sure before buying it that it has this feature?  Or do all PCs sold with Windows 7 Professional and Ultimate have this?

774

Found Deals and Discounts / Re: AnVir Task Manager 5.0.4 at GOTD

« Last post by cyberdiva on January 13, 2010, 12:34 PM »

There's much to like about AnVir Task Manager, but to be honest I don't trust the company.  They try to get you to include something called Registry Cleaner Pro when you're installing AnVir TM.  It turns out that Registry Cleaner Pro isn't even their program--it's from another company!  It will apparently scan your registry for free, but several people at GAOTD have reported that if you want it to fix the registry "problems" it finds, you have to buy the program (and I bet AnVir gets a cut).  This seems like a really unsavory thing to be including in the installation process.  

775

Living Room / Re: Ten Words You Need to Stop Misspelling

« Last post by cyberdiva on January 03, 2010, 09:56 AM »

One of the problems with English is that there are no consistent rules for spelling or pronunciation.

-mrainey (January 03, 2010, 08:14 AM)

Yes!  One of the classic examples is that in English, it is possible to pronounce ghoti as "fish":

pronounce the gh like the gh in enough
pronounce the o like the o in women
pronounce the ti like the ti in nation