Discussion in 'sandboxing & virtualization' started by Cutting_Edgetech, Feb 14, 2011.
Indeed great news! It is good to know that version .680 was working fine.
Exactly. A nice piece of new news we not seen in awhile. My own current version having proved itself solid and reliable against formidable efforts that would toasted most machine's O/S systems and at the very least required a image restore is performing without fail.
Try to understand how these options work
Can someone please provide me the SHA256 checksum of the file: SD126.96.36.1996_Setup.exe
Thank you very much in advance
Same thing for mine.
Update today and no problem at all. This program is just amazing. After so many years it still works like a charm
Match! Thank you!
Congratulations to Tony on the new version.
There is a small typo on a page
The page shows
version 188.8.131.522 instead of 184.108.40.2066
'Shadow Defender V1.5 Change History
Version 220.127.116.112 - August 5, 2020
Fixed: Fix a bug related to Exclusion List on Windows 10.'
Notified Tony Wed 5 August 2020 Fixed
I doubt that it's the same 'Tony' we once knew. Nevertheless I'm happy to see SD revitalized after 15 months!
May I ask why.
I believe that's very likely because this new SD version is reporting a different "Verifed Publisher".
Up through v18.104.22.1680 the publisher was reported as "Yang Ping" (aka 'Tony'). This new release (v22.214.171.1246) reports the publisher as "Beijing YiChengWeiLai Culture-Tech Co., Ltd."
Without changing the version number, the distribution has been resized a second time, and now it is digitally signed on August 6th. I don't like such silent changes.
Hello, Tony or not-Tony, what's going on?
There has been some conjecture that this is not the same Tony, but this method (sort of running beta) convinces me that it is, because, he has always worked like this. Tony will, if a valid user, bug feedback notification arrives quickly after a release just fix and release again, often hours after receipt, using the same version number.
I suppose (I'm guessing) on the feeling that at that point not many people will have downloaded it and not to alarm the users by sudden version number changes after a new full release or maybe just for a speedy implementation of the changes.
Will you be running the 'new' installer over the top of the one released on the 2nd August?
I will not personally be doing that because I use an older version 126.96.36.1999 (which I am content with on my main working system) but if I was going to upgrade from the withdrawn release version, I think I would uninstall and do a fresh install of the later version, just to be on the safe side. I have no reason though, to believe, that an 'over the top' upgrade would do any harm. It is normal and usual to use that method.
I will, of course, use the new version, on my other systems.
I did upgrade over the top and so far did not encounter any problems...
From the August 2nd to the August 6th version ?
No, from a older version.
Why wouldn’t a (possible) new Shadow Defender-owner/programmer introduce him- or herself?
Hi Stapp, I just installed an 'over the top' of the latest version 6th Aug over a version 188.8.131.529 on a laptop and I didn't like what happened. Shadow Defender 184.108.40.2066 later release acted unusually, didn't install properly and asked for a password (not serial number). The system (Windows 7) went into repair mode and when rebooted the new Shadow Defender hadn't installed. Maybe not true for everybody but set off alarm bells for me.
I later reverted to my older version after a complete uninstall of Shadow Defender and a fresh installation of 220.127.116.119 which went without any noticable problem.
Well that doesn't sound too good. I am on August 2nd version (only installed, not run - yet).
Think I'll wait how this pans out ... @stapp?
I have previous SD18.104.22.1680 setup as well ...
I installed the August 2nd one by running the installer and it overwrote the old one. I had SD22.214.171.1240 previously.
I have never had the 126.96.36.1999 version that sdmod mentioned plus I am on Win 10.
I am trying to decide whether or not to run the August 6th one over the top of the August 2nd one (both 188.8.131.526 but different sizes)
The 184.108.40.2069 version is nothing special, it's just the one that I prefer and have used.
I also have it installed on Windows 10 on other PCs
I don't know if there is anything wrong with August 6 'install over' but as I said it acted strange to me and I've lost confidence in it and when Windows 7 was doing the 'repair' I don't know what it was repairing or why.
ps Maybe I'll try it again later to see if I get a different result
Same (though I must have had 220.127.116.119 at some point).
Will wait this one out, and let the enthusiasts experiment ...
Separate names with a comma.