The unofficial Shadow Defender Support Thread.

Thank you all for such quick replies! I will most certainly go down the list and check out each and everyone's suggestions and advice.

Again, Thanks everyone!

 

Guys, have a look here. Opinions welcome!

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=332124

 

I nominate Defensewall to compliment SD. Actually it should read the other way round.

DefenseWall in a way is like SD in that it starts out as a protector of all as default. And with DW lots of situations DW doesn't hassle you it just does its thing in the background, Whereas Sandboxie, anything has to be added to gain protection. And changes require you to stop your life, and attend to SBoXiE. With AppGuard, I found it beyond my patience to setup or enjoy. I think if you ran psychology evaluations here, the 'control boys' would be AppGuard lovers.

 

Heaping glowing praise on a DefenseWall / Shadow Defender combo has got me to revisit SD.

I'm trying to get Shadow defender up & running alongside DW on XP. But the experience is painful. Either entering or exiting shadow mode on reboot - the startup is slow. The desktop task bar & processes takes so long to all open & be ready for work I can go and boil the kettle, run to the corner shop & buy a cake come home & eat it with a cup of tea & by then the startup process is just about complete. Its truly that slow.

I set shadow Defender to trusted before install & also after install I set the SD program files to trusted as well. The other security installed is good ol' LnS & Emsisoft AM 6. Emsisoft has SD excluded from surviellence.

Any comments?

 

That's strange as DefeseWall + ShadowDefender (minus LnS & Emsisoft AM 6) combo here is quite quick in boot up and to load everything in XP Home.
Have you tried excluding DefenseWall from Emsisoft AM?
If that has no effect on your slow start up maybe try uninstalling Emsisoft to see if the conflict lies there.
Another option would be to contact "Ilya" to find out if it's a DW thing at either here (Wilders) or Gladiator Security Forum or contact softsphere support

 

So far, the slowness seems to be attributal to DW hips (SD installed). Deactivating Hips allows fast reboot.

Emailed Ilya. He's sending me a folder of drivers to test. Sure is nice to be able to talk with the developer and they pitch in and help straight away. Once we cure this glitch, there'll will be left only one thing wrong with DefenseWall in my opinion. That being I should have listened to you (LW) & Kees & started using DW long ago.

 

Hi,

I'm using SD version 325. Should I install the latest version 331 now that Tony is back?

Best Regards,
Amit

 

If all the features in version 325 are working then you don't have the problem that version 331 purports to fix and you don't need to install it. It's too early to say yet whether the real Tony is back or whether somebody else is pretending to be him.

 

I've now installed 331 anyway. So far so good.

 

Should be okay because I've never seen any bad reports about v331.

 

What made you install version 1.1.0.331 even though it is not considered as safe by many users of SD?Did you had any problem with the previous version 1.1.0.325? I appreciate your courage in using 1.1.0.331 version of SD.

How many Wilders Security Forum users use SD version 1.1.0.331?

 

I just installed 331 too today. Works fine. With 325 last time i had it, i was getting random BSOD even if i wasn't using SD. Not sure if 331 is BSOD-free yet, but so far so good.

 

I did see any thing wrong with 331 as far as I see its clean as older versions and its just a matter of would you pay for it not known who is in the driver seat,so to speak.However,If memory serves I think a few in here had said they purchased it with a valid working license and no incidents.

 

I tried v331 as well in the past with no ill effects, however I wouldn't trust any software released without a changelog at the time of release. A changelog for v331 has hastily added after months of complaints from SD users, and its validity is extremely questionable.

The accuracy of any changelog is hard to verify at the best of times; in the case of SD the total lack of proper developmental transparency makes the 331 changelog's validity even more questionable. Anyone can write anything as a changelog, and there is no way for the end users to verify if its true or not without frequent and open communication with the developer. Which is not the case with SD.

If Tony is really back, then he's certainly not helping the reputation of his software with his continued silence, a silence that goes beyond reason or common sense. If it is really him then what does he have to hide?

 

Very true indeed.I will stick to 3.25 until it no longer protects or breaks.

 

The 64-bit versions of builds 325 and 331 lockup my Win7 x64 laptop as soon as I launch IE9. When that happens not even Ctrl-Alt-Del responds and I'm forced to do a power-down!

 

When I first installed 3.25 on windows 7 32 bit my system locked up trying to go in shadow mode on demand and had to force power down.I reinstalled it a second time and its been fine ever since.I know others have mentioned lock ups but not sure if it was specific to 64 bit but in any case if its going to screw with your system its probably not worth it.

 

Patrick, have you had any recent communication with anyone at SD?

Has anyone else had any e-mails answered recently?

 

Oh no reason. I just thought I would try out the latest version. It did well. No prob whatsoever.

 

I am using SD .325 on my laptop using win 7 32bit. My question is, using shadow mode is it ok to hibernate the laptop?

 

Hi CyberMan969,
I've not had any reply to my last six emails to Tony from two email addresses (I sent from two to make sure it wasn't a problem with my emailer) and I'm wondering if any Shadow Defender has had any support contact in the last couple of weeks?

Patrick

 

Thank you for the update Patrick. I wonder what the hell is going on over there. We have had a few replies after all this time, then silence again!

I bet that if someone was to e-mail them offering a good deal to take the code off their inept hands, then they would most probably answer in a heartbeat...

I think it's high time that this software changed hands, and for this purpose I started a little experiment here:

http://forums.comodo.com/wishlist-c...rtualization-functions-into-cis-t86643.0.html

Dedicated Wilders thread here to exchange opinions:

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=332124

It can happen if enough of us want it to.

 

Patrick, about 10 days ago I sent an email to support@________ about my problem (as reported in post 1391) wherein I also detailed my laptop configuration. The next day I received a reply from 'Tony' suggesting that the problem could be my laptop's mSSD cache-drive. He also said he is working on an SSD-compatible version.

Cruise

 

What I find strange Cruise is the reason why 'Tony' has ignored Patrick's latest e-mails. Patrick did a great job in the past as SD forum mod, and he deserves better treatment from 'Tony'. I mean, how long does it take to answer an e-mail from someone who has supported your program for free?

If it is indeed Tony over there, and if we do get an SSD compatible version in the future, this still doesn't negate the fact that Tony should offer better treatment towards the people who have done good service to his software in the past without even being paid for it.

 

CM, I was just responding to Patrick wanting to know if anyone has heard from Tony over the past 2-weeks. On the other hand, I don't think we should be condemning him either, because we don't know what personal or political issues may be preventing him from replying to Patrick or anyone else over the past 2-weeks.