Need Good Ad Blocker

I see "enhanced support for Vista" listed. Is this the same as the advertised "Enhanced Windows Vista Support" in 4.6 which has been present the last year and a half or so?

 

Nope, this is new technology, but thanks for asking!

 

Thank you!

 

Seriously, SuperAdBlocker worked very well for me, as time went on, SuperAdBlocker became less and less compatible because of the rapid maturity of newer technology.

I look forward to the new release of SuperAdBlocker v5.0 and know it will perform as well if not better than its predecessor.

Quite an few requests were to have an standalone version of SuperAdBlocker without its counterpart SuperAntiSpyware, will an standalone version be available?


HKEY1952

 

That's good because the previous enhanced Vista support was pretty ridiculous. Especially since this current upgrade was promised like two years ago.

Also, will SAB have the $9.99 false "one day only" ad like SAS has?

 

This version IS THE STANDALONE version

 

MODERATORS : Can you pull his posts as all he does is hurl insults and bash our products and company and the the threads turn off topic. THANK YOU!

 

Does SUPERAntiSpyware always name its updater with a pile of random numbers?

 

The updater is called SSUPDATE.EXE.

 

Those random numbers are called 'version numbers' and represent the current 'software version'.

The 'software version' represents the current 'compiled' version of the 'source code' to 'executable code'.

The 'source code' is an human-readable collection of statements or declarations that specify the actions to be performed by an computer and
are written in what is called 'programming language'. Examples of 'programming language' are: Visual Basic, Visual C++, Java, and Pearl.

The 'executable code' is what causes an computer to perform indicated tasks according to encoded instructions.

When the 'source code' is converted into 'executable code' the software program is 'compiled'
The 'source code' is converted into 'executable code' by the use of another software program called an 'compiler'

The 'compiler' transforms 'source code' (the source language that is human-readable) into another computer language (the target language) the 'executable code'.
the 'executable code' is in binary form (ones and zeros, "basically") known as 'object code' or 'machine code'.


Now for the Version Numbers.

Note that the following is only an example an may not hold true for every developer.

SUPERAntiSpyware.exe v4.29.1004 is an compiled software program (the 'source code' was converted to 'executable code' with the 'compiler')

Software versioning is very wide and sometimes complex because not every developer follows the same 'versioning scheme'
Regardless of the 'versioning scheme' chosen or used by the developer, it all boils down to "basically" three levels of 'versioning' to represent the 'version number'

01) - the "major level" = v4
02) - the "minor level" = .29.
03) - the "patch level" = .1004

Now, by standard, any changes made to the 'source code' will increment the 'version number' upwards by one in the "respective level".

For example: The developer may change something in the 'source code' that is very minor or outside of the main executable in an .dat file perhaps, or in the Help File maybe.
This minor change to the 'source code' would in turn increment the "patch level" upwards by one: from .1004 to .1005 If three changes were made then from: .1004 to .1007
Think of the "patch level" as making very minor changes throughout the 'source code' that does not involve the main executable or have any impact on the performance or architecture of the software.

Now some developers may not reflect these minor changes and "patch level" changes to the public because they have no direct impact on the performance of the software and simply wait
until the software program is 'recompiled' and assign an completely different 'version number' to the "patch level" during recompilation such as .1100 even though only one change
may have been made to the 'source code'. Again, the developer is free to break the rules in 'version numbering'

As another example, perhaps the developer received notifications of an 'bug' or some other minor problem with the software that was not directly involved with the main executable but did
however have some what of an influence on the architecture of the 'source code'. Perhaps involving the cosmetics in the main interface of the software program or an reconstruct of an .dll
or .dat file. This change to the 'source code' is still considered minor because the changes do not involve the main executable of the software.

In this case the "minor level" of the 'version number' would be incremented upwards by one for every change made to the 'source code': from .29. to .30. for example involving only one change.
Think of the "minor level" as making minor changes throughout the 'source code' that does not involve the main executable but does have an impact on the performance and architecture of the software.

Any changes made to the 'source code' that involve the main executable, or have an large impact on the overall architecture or performance of the software are reflected in the
"major level" of the 'version number'. Regardless of the amount of the changes made to the 'source code' the 'version number' of the "major level" will be incremented upwards by one.
For example: from v4 to v5 and in our example: from v4.30.1100 to v5.00.0000. or whatever 'versioning scheme' the developer chooses.
Think of the "major level" as making changes to the main executable, or making global changes to the 'source code' that have an direct impact on the architecture and performance of the software.

All of the changes that are made to the 'source code' of an developing 'project' are maintained and controlled by special software called 'versioning software' that may or may not be
part of the developing package.


Perhaps this brief article will help shed more light on the subject

Software Version Numbers Explained:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Software_Version_Numbers_Explained


HKEY1952

 

Thank you very much,HKEY1952 and SUPERAntiSpy .You are so kind.

I just see the updater named after random numbers in my firewall.It force me to set a allowing rule for the updater.It is cockamamie to me.

 

Our updater is always named the same - version information changes inside the file, and does NOT alter the name of the file.

 

Nick,

What priority do you plan on giving to enhancing SuperAdBlocker with further updates/fixes, after its final release ? In the past, SAS has been the priority (and this is understandable to me, since it is the most important of the 2 products), but I had reported a few bugs that I had encountered with SuperAdBlocker, about a year ago and it has taken a long time for this new release which I assume includes fixes to the bugs that I had reported on the last offical release.

BTW, SAB is a great product !!! The bugs encountered were very minor. Look forward to trying the version when it is offically released.

 

We will be enhancing the product many times over the next year. If you have issue that are still not resolved and are actual bugs, please let us know and we can address them!

 

To work with Opera?

 

We do not yet support Opera, Chrome or Safari - those don't provide and easy way to "hook in" to filter the content - but we are looking into it!

 

I have heard that for over a year.
AM works great with Opera.

 

Thank you Nick always on top of things!!

 

Opera does not provide an easy way to hook into it and the user base is very small compared to IE and Firefox.

If you need support for Opera immediately, then use a product which supports it like AM.

 

What's that got to do with the promise you made over a year ago?

 

I don't believe we "promised" to support Opera at any point - we have always looked at the smaller market share browsers and watched their growth and user numbers.

All you are looking to here is a combative situation - which I won't engage in - from a market share standpoint I would invest resources into Chrome before Opera as Google is behind Chrome and it likley will grow faster than Opera - in our web stats of tens of millions of users (from our multiple sites), we see less than 1% of users surfing with Opera (that's only our stats of course). In a perfect world we could support everything, but we have to be realistic with our resources.

 

Especially considering that Firefox is number one followed by IE and then Google Chrome last time I checked

 

The file's name wasn't changed.The change was the name of the updating process instead of the updater.It is my mistake.

Here is my firewall's prompt:

 

You jumped into this thread pimping your product and future releases. I called you on it and you responded by asking my posts be removed. Maybe before making such requests you should be reminded of your own posts on this forum? And I never "bashed" your products. In fact, I have purchased licenses in the past. I have two licenses for SAS, one lifetime, and had a license for SAB which I purchased partly because of your representation that Vista support would be coming soon. SAS works very well, SAB does not (my opinion, of course).

My post would only be off topic had you not made your posts about more promises about SAB.

My comments on this subject are finished. Now go ahead and ask that my posts be removed as I suspect you will do.