Best cookie/popup/ad blocker...

Hi, I did not buy a new version of Norton Internet Security for a couple of
years now ever since I switched to ZoneAlarm for firewall protection since
it is much easier to use then Norton, works just as well, and FREE!

I am looking for a piece of software that does the following features below
like Norton Internet Security, but I DO NOT need a firewall or antivirus
software as I have 2 preffered choices already (Zonealarm free for firewall,
AVG for antivirus).

QUESTION:
If anyone has recommendations on a software program(s) that can fufill the
needs below the way I specified please let me know. I don't mind buying the
software program as long as it fufills my needs:

1) PopUp Blocker (Except from trusted sites)
2) Cookie blocker and cookie permissions for trusted sites.
3) Adware blocker

Norton Internet security did the above features.

In particular, I loved 2 features of Norton Internet Security.
a) The way NIS prompted you if you want to always accept a cookie
from a certain site or block it.
That way I could choose which sites are the "trusted" sites and
which sites all cookies should be blocked from.
b) As well, Norton Internet Securirity allowed you to export or
import settings in case you do a reinstall or put in a new version, etc.,
that way you don't have to redo any of your cookie overides. Being able to
do this import or export of settings is a bonus since If I had to reinstall
Windows it would be a bit of a chore to add the "trusted sites" again and
makes managing multiple computers a lot easier.

I'd prefer a free program BUT my most important requirement is that the
program needs to work WELL (like the current software I use that is listed
below) so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I thought about
Norton Internet Security, but I prefer ZoneAlarm free firewall to their own
firewall software and I don't like the fact that it is so hard to prevent
Norton Internet Security from installing the antivirus as well.

I use Spybot (search and destroy) and Ad-Aware to remove spyware (after the
fact).

Thanks

JC

Johnny Canuck

"Johnny Canuck" <>
wrote in news:hop6d.40$Yu3.18@clgrps12:
> Hi, I did not buy a new version of Norton Internet Security for a
> couple of years now ever since I switched to ZoneAlarm for firewall
> protection since it is much easier to use then Norton, works just as
> well, and FREE!
> I am looking for a piece of software that does the following features
> below like Norton Internet Security, but I DO NOT need a firewall or
> antivirus software as I have 2 preffered choices already (Zonealarm
> free for firewall, AVG for antivirus).
>
> QUESTION:
> If anyone has recommendations on a software program(s) that can
> fufill the needs below the way I specified please let me know. I
> don't mind buying the software program as long as it fufills my needs:
>
> 1) PopUp Blocker (Except from trusted sites)
> 2) Cookie blocker and cookie permissions for trusted sites.
> 3) Adware blocker
>
> Norton Internet security did the above features.
>
> In particular, I loved 2 features of Norton Internet Security.
> a) The way NIS prompted you if you want to always accept a
> cookie from a certain site or block it.
> That way I could choose which sites are the "trusted" sites and
> which sites all cookies should be blocked from.
> b) As well, Norton Internet Securirity allowed you to export or
> import settings in case you do a reinstall or put in a new version,
> etc., that way you don't have to redo any of your cookie overides.
> Being able to do this import or export of settings is a bonus since
> If I had to reinstall Windows it would be a bit of a chore to add the
> "trusted sites" again and makes managing multiple computers a lot
> easier.
> I'd prefer a free program BUT my most important requirement is that
> the program needs to work WELL (like the current software I use that
> is listed below) so any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I
> thought about Norton Internet Security, but I prefer ZoneAlarm free
> firewall to their own firewall software and I don't like the fact
> that it is so hard to prevent Norton Internet Security from
> installing the antivirus as well.
> I use Spybot (search and destroy) and Ad-Aware to remove spyware
> (after the fact).
>
> Thanks
>
> JC

Still hunting, I see, by reposting your near-same prior inquiry of a
week ago
(http://groups.google.com/groups?thre...965%40clgrps12,
except #3 for AX and #4 for anonymous surfing changed to just #3 for
malware but which is "ad blocker" in your Subject). Hopefully this
doesn't become a weekly repost.

The problems that I have with ad blockers is that they sometimes block
non-ads. They also rely on substrings that may be perfectly legit
(that's why you have a whole list of exceptions already pre-programmed
when you first install the ad blocker program and you'll later have to
add your own exceptions; I had to do that for Creative which had "ads"
somewhere in the URL to review your trouble reports with them). Some
sites will refuse to function (i.e., proffer any of their content) if
you block the downloading of ALL the content of their web page since
they use that revenue to offset the cost of the resources needed to
present you with that web page you get to access for free. You might
not realize this and wonder by you got a blank page with "Done" in the
status line. Or you hit a page that uses Macromedia's Flash to paint
the menues and other content of that page but which also includes the
ads, so you could block Flash content but then you get a blank page if
they don't offer an non-Flash version of the page.

I refuse to let them dictate how the resources on MY computer get used
(like popups, ActiveX or Java applet downloads, cookies, fonts, etc.)
but similarly they should be able to dictate what is THEIR content. If
you don't want that content, don't go there. You get their content for
free so where are they going to generate revenue to pay for that web
site? Yeah, I personally do not like seeing ads but I also see their
viewpoint in compensation for their costs to provide that site. If you
take the attitude that you shouldn't have to see part of their content
(i.e., the ads) to see the rest then understand they have an equal right
not to give you any of their content unless you see it all. If they
wish to offer partial content with me blocking ads then that was their
choice and you get to surf ad-free. If they wish to block all their
content unless you see their ads (which is part of their content) then
that's perfectly okay with me, too. Most users are ignorant of the
repercussions of ad blocking. Good sites with helpful tools or
information often disappear simply because they cannot afford to keep
the site running because their users are blocking the ads they need to
generate revenue to pay for the resources of that site. But then most
end users are running web sites or having to pay for them. Most users
have an exceedingly unrealistic view that everyone else should be
altruistic to their visitors. So, how many days each week do you work
for free for your employer? I'm still on the fence regarding ad
blocking.

In the prior thread of a week ago, Panicware was mentioned as including
ad blocking. NIS has its web filtering for ad blocking but I'm close to
disabling that feature since it interferes with the proper operation of
many web sites. AdSubtract has been around for awhile.

--
__________________________________________________ _______________
******** Post replies to newsgroup - Share with others ********
Email: lh_811newsATyahooDOTcom and append "=NEWS=" to Subject.
__________________________________________________ _______________

Vanguardx

>
> Still hunting, I see, by reposting your near-same prior inquiry of a week
> ago
> (http://groups.google.com/groups?thre...965%40clgrps12,
> except #3 for AX and #4 for anonymous surfing changed to just #3 for
> malware but which is "ad blocker" in your Subject). Hopefully this
> doesn't become a weekly repost.

Actually about 12 hours after I had posted that other message I had this
one posted BUT it was stuck in my outbox.
I had replies on the other thread so I didn't need this message but I didn't
notice that it didn't go through until I saw it in my "sent list" just
now...


> The problems that I have with ad blockers is that they sometimes block
> non-ads. They also rely on substrings that may be perfectly legit (that's
> why you have a whole list of exceptions already pre-programmed when you
> first install the ad blocker program and you'll later have to add your own
> exceptions; I had to do that for Creative which had "ads" somewhere in the
> URL to review your trouble reports with them). Some sites will refuse to
> function (i.e., proffer any of their content) if you block the downloading
> of ALL the content of their web page since they use that revenue to offset
> the cost of the resources needed to present you with that web page you get
> to access for free. You might not realize this and wonder by you got a
> blank page with "Done" in the status line. Or you hit a page that uses
> Macromedia's Flash to paint the menues and other content of that page but
> which also includes the ads, so you could block Flash content but then you
> get a blank page if they don't offer an non-Flash version of the page.
>
> I refuse to let them dictate how the resources on MY computer get used
> (like popups, ActiveX or Java applet downloads, cookies, fonts, etc.) but
> similarly they should be able to dictate what is THEIR content. If you
> don't want that content, don't go there. You get their content for free
> so where are they going to generate revenue to pay for that web site?
> Yeah, I personally do not like seeing ads but I also see their viewpoint
> in compensation for their costs to provide that site. If you take the
> attitude that you shouldn't have to see part of their content (i.e., the
> ads) to see the rest then understand they have an equal right not to give
> you any of their content unless you see it all. If they wish to offer
> partial content with me blocking ads then that was their choice and you
> get to surf ad-free. If they wish to block all their content unless you
> see their ads (which is part of their content) then that's perfectly okay
> with me, too. Most users are ignorant of the repercussions of ad
> blocking. Good sites with helpful tools or information often disappear
> simply because they cannot afford to keep the site running because their
> users are blocking the ads they need to generate revenue to pay for the
> resources of that site. But then most end users are running web sites or
> having to pay for them. Most users have an exceedingly unrealistic view
> that everyone else should be altruistic to their visitors. So, how many
> days each week do you work for free for your employer? I'm still on the
> fence regarding ad blocking.

actually you make an EXCELLENT point about adblocking, there are a lot of
great sites that need the ad revenue to survice. Pop up blocking is fine
but ad block shouldn't be. That is why popupcop is good since each page
gets it's own "virtual session". Solidly agree with you on this point.

> In the prior thread of a week ago, Panicware was mentioned as including ad
> blocking. NIS has its web filtering for ad blocking but I'm close to
> disabling that feature since it interferes with the proper operation of
> many web sites. AdSubtract has been around for awhile.
>
Ad blocking is not a feature I need.
I've downloaded popupcop, but haven't installed it since I need to reinstall
my WinOS this weekend because of a couple of fatally damaged files.
I'll give popupcop a run through after that. Thanks again for your help
vanguardx, not only have you given my a nice suggestion on software, you've
alerted me to other issues (such as some websits needing cookies to operate,
the role ads play for smaller sites, etc.) that have me thinking as well.

[offtopic: I just did a anti-virus post in the other group to see what
people think, but the link you gave me seems to point to Kapersky being the
best, with AVG being pretty decent for a free program. I didn't notice that
this thread was still in that outbox or I would have deleted. Are you my
shadow btw

JC

Johnny Canuck

In article <hop6d.40$Yu3.18@clgrps12>, on Wed, 29 Sep 2004 02:48:45 GMT, "Johnny Canuck"
<> wrote:

| Hi, I did not buy a new version of Norton Internet Security for a couple of
| years now ever since I switched to ZoneAlarm for firewall protection since
| it is much easier to use then Norton, works just as well, and FREE!
|
| I am looking for a piece of software that does the following features below
| like Norton Internet Security, but I DO NOT need a firewall or antivirus
| software as I have 2 preffered choices already (Zonealarm free for firewall,
| AVG for antivirus).
|
| QUESTION:
| If anyone has recommendations on a software program(s) that can fufill the
| needs below the way I specified please let me know. I don't mind buying the
| software program as long as it fufills my needs:
|
| 1) PopUp Blocker (Except from trusted sites)
| 2) Cookie blocker and cookie permissions for trusted sites.
| 3) Adware blocker

Proximitron <http://www.proxomitron.info/>

<davidp />

--
David Postill

David Postill

Have you tried Firefox? That gives you a reasonably fine control over what
you download when you browse to the point of even disallowing images from
certain sites. You can further sharpen it up with the add-ons (plugins)
that allow even more intelligence.

(sorry if I kicked in an open door, but it has worked for me quite well on
both Windows and Linux).

--

Regards, /// Peter ///


(remove animals from signature fist)

Peter Houppermans

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Peter Houppermans wrote:
| Have you tried Firefox? That gives you a reasonably fine control over
what
| you download when you browse to the point of even disallowing images from
| certain sites. You can further sharpen it up with the add-ons (plugins)
| that allow even more intelligence.
|
| (sorry if I kicked in an open door, but it has worked for me quite well on
| both Windows and Linux).
|
I'm a firm fan of Firefox (and TBird for mail and news) - I don't use
the popup features but it is a good browser; I especially like the
tabbed browsing.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFBWsjTqmlxlf41jHgRAv0MAKDmBUit8uP+kowF2FJeNs IiaIglpACgxLGi
1F/Iq5hJrrUcxB7IsYojcGM=
=Dd2i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

andy smart

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:01:22 +0100, Peter Houppermans
<> wrote:

>Have you tried Firefox?

Its good but not all websites work with it.


--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt

In article <>,
_way says...
> On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:01:22 +0100, Peter Houppermans
> <> wrote:
>
> >Have you tried Firefox?
>
> Its good but not all websites work with it.

Many banking sites and many applications that require custom controls
don't also.


--
--

(Remove 999 to reply to me)

Leythos

"Johnny Canuck" <> wrote in message
news:hop6d.40$Yu3.18@clgrps12...
> Hi, I did not buy a new version of Norton Internet Security for a couple
of
> years now ever since I switched to ZoneAlarm for firewall protection since
> it is much easier to use then Norton, works just as well, and FREE!
> Thanks
>
> JC
>
>

Basically you get what you paid for....

vb

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 19:42:19 GMT, Leythos <> wrote:

>In article <>,
>_way says...
>> On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:01:22 +0100, Peter Houppermans
>> <> wrote:
>>
>> >Have you tried Firefox?
>>
>> Its good but not all websites work with it.
>
>Many banking sites and many applications that require custom controls
>don't also.

Indeed, www.natwest.com was what I had in mind.

I also find subtle differences in table spacing

OTOH to access a forum I use, Firefox does it flawlessly
and IE does not work.

--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

Jim Watt