News and Reviews > Mini-Reviews by Members

Ad Muncher: keeps the brain intact while surfing the Net - beats AdBlock!

<< < (14/15) > >>

app103:
And yes, I too have noticed that your AOL issue has gone unresolved despite at least 2 other reports coming in about it. Jeff claims "I do not have an AOL account so I cannot verify". At least that was the answer I got when I tried troubleshooting with him. Pretty poor excuse. They have released debug builds for people to test and find bugs on in the past, I do not understand why they didn't for this one.
-Josh (June 02, 2009, 05:32 AM)
--- End quote ---

AOL accounts are now free, and you don't even need one to run the software now (only need it to access certain features, like email). And if you have an AIM screen name it can be used in AOL's software, too, accessing aim.com email through it, so now there are 2 options for the same thing. So there should be no trouble getting access to the ads on the email window, which was my original complaint.

I seriously doubt that he can't verify. It might have been a problem way back when I first reported it, but that isn't the case today. Plus, I gave you access to that screen name on my AOL account to help him and I would have let him use it too, if it would have helped, so his excuses are pretty lame and carry no weight. (I'd still be willing to let him borrow one of my screen names if he's too lazy to get one of his own, if I thought it would help.)

But if they add the gzip support that should take care of the problem, any way.

And I sure hope they do, because the freeware TPA Ad Buster plugin is not an option for most AOL users today. It doesn't work with latest version of AOL, it's not Vista compatible, plus it's unsupported, buggy, and frequently crashes. Not to mention that it's pretty hard to find on the TPA site, ever since AOL threatened to stop working with them and allowing them access to information to develop other shareware plugins that are the TPA company's bread & butter. They were supposed to remove it from their site completely, but instead just removed all links to it from other pages. (Sneaky, but it made AOL shut up.) But TPA did keep the part of the deal with AOL that they wouldn't develop it any further, which is why the plugin is in the horrible state that it's in.

AdMuncher is not perfect and I read above someone is leaving it behind for something else, but what? I've yet to find anything that does what AdMuncher will do for every program you have installed. Most adblockers restrict themselves to working with web browsers. If there are any true alternatives to AdMuncher I'd love to hear them.
-Innuendo (June 02, 2009, 10:41 AM)
--- End quote ---

That's why I am still using it. I don't want to have to install & run a gazillion ad blockers that are application specific (and for some applications they don't even exist)

Innuendo:
I agree the developers are writing checks with their mouths that their butts can't cash. Personally, I'd prefer more frequent releases with fewer features added between non-beta releases, i.e. the developer said the only reason the current beta hasn't been released as final is because they don't have all the features coded that they want to be in the v4.73 release.

I say fine...release what you've got as v4.72.1 then. Add/fix some more stuff and release that as v.4.72.2, etc. When things are how you like it release that as v4.73. Then you can start the whole cycle over with v4.73.1.

At the current pace I don't think we have to worry about Linux and the v5.0 release. That's something our grandkids will have to deal with.  :P

Josh:
As I said innuendo, I am in agreement with you. Make point releases, release new versions when you push out changes to the list structure. Don't force users to use beta code, regardless of how many times you claim it as reliable. Ad Muncher has caused me headaches in the past that are only resolved after exiting ad muncher. This is when a NO or MINIMAL filtering on URL filter does not work. It is at that time that murray gets involved because Jeff claims the problem is with something else but then Murray confirms its a bug in the way AM handles the data it receives.

CodeTRUCKER:
Not to condone laziness or lack of good planning, but is it possible that the reason incremental releases are not provided is because it might jeopardize the future, i.e., coding feature "A" now would prevent the implementation of features "B," "C," etc. requiring a total rewrite of the master architecture?

I have to face this when I develop an app or even a macro.  I have had to start over more than once because I painted myself into a corner.  
I hope I am saying this right? :huh:

Innuendo:
CodeTRUCKER, that's a very good point. I suppose that's possible, but no one would be able to say for sure if this is the case without being able to look over Murray's shoulder at his code.

I've never had a major problem with AdMuncher, but I have never had a qualm about running beta software, either.

I'm running a beta version of AnyDVD, a beta version of The Bat!, a beta version of Total Commander, a beta version of ACDSee Pro v3, and more on a beta version of Windows 7. I love running beta software because I always seize an opportunity to use new features.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page