MalcolmSm1th

Member
  • Content Count

    38
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MalcolmSm1th

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    www.ukhorseracing.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    On the banks of the Tay somewhere in Perthshire
  • Interests
    Horse racing
  1. Thanks for this. At least I can now go back and now stop this auto renewal. A few things spring to mind: This opt-out auto-renewal is wrong. It should be made a lot clearer that it's happening when one places the order and it should be opt-in The opt-out should be easier to find and it should be on the Emsisoft licence panel The date of expiry/renewal should never be hidden from the customer. The emails recieved should identify which computer's licence is expiring and the date of expiration should be accurate. The last point is a concern to me because I have only two computers. One's licence expires in about 280 days and so the email must refer to the other machine but getting two emails in one day: one saying it expires in seven days and the other saying fifteen isn't helpful. The licence on my second machine runs out in about 390 days. So what are these two emails about and will I be getting billed for extra licences that have been autorenewed and know nothing of? This auto-renew issue need to be looked at because there's no clarity, just confusion. Once upon a time there was a Licence Manager that I could look at but I can't see anything like this now. Best wishes Malc
  2. Thanks Jeremy This is a bit, shall we say, "cheeky". I had the number of days shown on my machine a week or so ago and now not now. So even if I have been subscribed to 'auto renew' then I should still get some sort of indication of when this is going to run out. Furthermore, the two emails from Emisoft saying, initially, that I had 15 days left then a few hours later saying that I had seven days left and no indication of what I really have because I am positive that the licence that I purchased on the 24th of September of this year should not be only seven or fifteen days remaining. I don't like the way that the licence remaining indication has been removed and that a one year licence purchased a few months ago is about to expire and that it's got two different expiry dates. Something here stinks. I don't remember opting into anything which is a continuous renewal and I don't like that way that information is being hidden from me. Thanks for your efforts they are much appreciated. Malc
  3. This is what I get when I go further: I am running on the Stable version. I don't have the time to do Beta for people any more -- or the patience which is more of a shame, really and certainly a failing of mine to be sure. Malc
  4. Well, neither have I until today. I assumed that it was this Start of the Month It's a New Version thingy. This is what mine now looks like. Any ideas? Malc
  5. This morning I received an email saying that I had 15 days left on my licence. Then, a few hours later, another email saying that my licence was going to expire in seven days. So I then looked into the Anti-Malware to see what it thought was going on and I can't find how many days are left remaining: it just tells me that there's an Active Subscription. The question I have is: how can I see how many days are left on my account because at this rate I will have no days left by lunchtime. Malc
  6. A very good point. Okay, I take it back. I would then seriously consider removing something from my HOSTS file if it broke something. But as I am not a TV Licence payer I don't use iPlayer so I hadn't come across this particular instance. But for the most part I don't wander around the internet that much anyway. At least not these days. In the early nineties, I think '94, I was connected to the web for the first time. I was living in Belgium and, for some reason, the bundled IE with my set-up came as the home page the Vatican. I didn't find the address bar for weeks and so for the first few weeks of exploring the web I started off with the Vatican and then followed the links at random and then see where I ended up. Perhaps in those days I had found most of the internet, as there wasn't much of it, but it was interesting trawling around and made a change from BBs and CompuServe. But, now, I tend not to wander around too much and if a site that I want stops me reading it because of the adverts or whatever then I take the hint and then move off elsewhere.
  7. Jeremy, then in my case the site goes. There was/is one financial site which is great for stock market news and is full of adverts, something like XKFM or something. If you remove the adverts then the site becomes usable. And this is after one pays for the site's subscription which isn't cheap. A further wallet-dipping mugging exercise will remove the adverts -- for a couple hundred extra quid. Anyway, if the site is one that employs such a method then I won't bother looking at it. There are some sites which refuse to load with Adblockers/HOST files because the site thinks it still needs to load. Perthshire Foods, just north of you, is one example. So, if I can't get to view that site then I will go elsewhere. Facebook is another site that is nobbled in the HOSTS file. I am not interested in dropping a single byte over to them. Google Analytics is another; if anyone relies on Analytics to see my visits then they're wrong. I used to worry about such things for my site, but no longer as soon as I got my 'target' about fifteen years ago: a regular visitor to my racing site from the Vatican State City. As soon as I got that, I have no interest in such things. The only people who want my Analytics are those advertisers who wish to 'improve' my site with a wall of undocumented JavaScript, cookies, pop-up adverts and the like and so it's no loss that the latte-sipping leeches don't get any trade from my site. Malc
  8. Jeremy It's the domains that I take out of the HOSTS file rather than IP addresses. And I keep adding to them because once a scummy site always a scummy site. Malc
  9. I also have CryptoPrevent installed and set to 'Paranoid' level (and always forgetting to reduce that when I try to install anything). I also have a very hefty HOSTS file to stop issues with known bad/advert/spying sites. Next up: a proper router that I can configure the firewall.
  10. Hello, Thanks for the initiative (above). However, does it have to be one Windows machine and one associated Android device? Most people that I know tend to have one phone and a tablet so this wouldn't quite fit. Is there any way of adding extra devices to this scheme? Malc
  11. This is what I had considered: that it wasn't a simple GUI clagged onto the Windows Firewall and that it was a fully fledged firewall in its own right. I didn't bring up the subject of the GUI only stated that if it were a simple GUI then there is no way that EAM should have borked with Comodo installed. Which brings us back to why Emsisoft have said that they wouldn't test EAM with anything other than the Windows Firewall and leaving all forced to use a firewall that some wouldn't rather use.
  12. Thanks for the reply. So, Comodo is one of two things. It's either just a GUI clagged onto Windows Firewall or it's not. If it's just a clagged on GUI then how come EAM caused problems with it on the same machine? If it isn't a clagged-on GUI then surely it's big enough or important enough to be tested against? So, which is it? Is Comodo just a GUI or an actual firewall? Best Malc
  13. Thanks for the reply but this isn't exactly what GT500 has said " We don't intend EAM to be used alongside other security software, so we don't test it alongside other security software " So if Windows Firewall isn't an example of security software then what the hell is it doing on our computers and if it is an example of security software then GT500 has categorically said in his recent message that it's not recommended and not tested against EAM. If Windows Firewall is the sole exception to the rule and that EAM should be used with Windows Firewall and only Windows Firewall then this gives me great cause for concern because that's forcing us into a corner. And, more to the point, if Windows Firewall were any good then it would, for example, stop the data slurping (aka telemetry) of our machines to MS HQ. In short, I don't trust Microsoft to protect us at the firewall level. And if the only firewall that will work with EAM is Microsoft's then I wonder what deal that they may have made with Microsoft and my level of trust in an application which is supposed to protect me is going to diminish significantly. I find it very worrying that EAM will work with one, and only one, firewall and I am wondering what is going on in the darker recesses of my machine. It is not as if we're asking EAM to run along nicely with an obscure piece of security code that's been cobbled together by one bloke in his spare time in his shed and isn't supported and hardly used: but we're looking to use EAM with a decent firewall application that's well known and respected.
  14. Whoa! You don't test alongside other security software? You've removed the firewall from EAM and then leave us with the option to either have no firewall on the machines or a third party firewall, be it the likes of Microsoft's or Comodo. And now you tell us that you don't test EAM against them and, further, you don't recommend us to use such a security product. Surely this can't be so. Please could you clarify this because I would like to have some sort of firewall on my machines and, in particular, I don't wish to have Microsoft's because I simply don't trust them at all but, right now, I am wondering if I have misplaced my trust altogether. Regards Malc
  15. If this matter isn't resolved soon and/or the compatibility issue with known good software, e.g. The BetEngine, isn't resolved soon then I won't be recommending Emsisoft to my customers any more. I can't begin to start to guess how many people I have recommended this anti-malware suite to and most of these are/were using Comodo firewall. And people are asking me why if there's an issue with third party firewalls then why did Emsisoft stop developing their own? I suggest either get this working or dig out the source code for your old firewall and re-integrate that. A lot of us don't trust Microsoft's offerings, especially when we hear of tales of Windows 10 borking when one uses a popular browser. So, I would rather use an anti-malware suite that didn't force me to use MS' products. Best wishes Malc