Proxomitron or WebWasher?

[TAB]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .


OR

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts file
would? How about WebWasher? I'm looking to have it prevented in the
first place as I am on a slow dialup connection.

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

 

[Fizz Earthwood]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

WebWasher: fast, effective, simple.
Prox: same only high learning curve, odd quirks, ability to block just
about anything you want. Great for tinkerers.

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

Really boring, retro way to block adverts. I'd rather sew socks than
maintain a hosts file.

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts file
would? How about WebWasher? I'm looking to have it prevented in the
first place as I am on a slow dialup connection.

Both do.

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

Go with WebWasher. If you <gasp!> have money to spend, buy Admuncher.
Then you can surf anonymously and block the baddies all at the same time.

Fizz

 

[Fizz Earthwood]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

WebWasher: fast, effective, simple.
Prox: same only high learning curve, odd quirks, ability to block just
about anything you want. Great for tinkerers.

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

Really boring, retro way to block adverts. I'd rather sew socks than
maintain a hosts file.

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts file
would? How about WebWasher? I'm looking to have it prevented in the
first place as I am on a slow dialup connection.

Both do.

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

Go with WebWasher. If you <gasp!> have money to spend, buy Admuncher.
Then you can surf anonymously and block the baddies all at the same time.

Fizz

 

[Kruppt]

(e-mail address removed) (TAB) wrote in

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

<snip>

For info on how to set up WebWasher.
Check out this link below.
Look at these two link on his page first.

Manual Browser Configuration
setting-up WebWasher - manual configuration

http://www.pacificnet.net/~bbruce/workshop.htm

Kruppt

 

[YK]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

It is.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

OR

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

A good HOSTS file that is maintained (updatede today) can be obtained here:
http://asp.flaaten.dk/proxo/forum.asp?FORUM_ID=20

It is also a good Proximitron forum.

eDexter is a good companion to the HOSTS file:
http://www.accs-net.com/hosts/eDexter.html

If you are running Win2K/XP then stop the DNS Service to stop the slowdowns
caused by a large HOSTS file.

 

[Neudaze]

(e-mail address removed) (TAB) wrote in

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a
long FAQ on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .


OR

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http
daemon to give quick 404 errors?

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts
file would? How about WebWasher? I'm looking to have it
prevented in the first place as I am on a slow dialup
connection.

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

Both! Then launch the one that works best!

Proxomitron is a little more difficult to exit and launch on the
fly, but you can create shortcuts to the config dialogs.

Half a good day!

 

[Trevor Noble]

WebWasher: fast, effective, simple.
Prox: same only high learning curve, odd quirks, ability to block just
about anything you want. Great for tinkerers.
snip

Oh yea! Here is an extract on how to set up WebWasher:

How Do I Define a New Media Type?
4. Enter the magic byte sequences byte for byte, where each byte must be
encoded in 2 hex
digits without any additional formatting (such as 0x). For an ARJ file, this
would be EA60
5. Select Magic bytes are necessary, since all ARJ files have to start with
this sequence, and it is
unlikely that files other than ARJ start with EA60.

Obviouly everybody knows the byte sequences of all the files you wish to
block!!

Regards
Trevor

 

[Alan]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

I'm a convert from WW to Prox. I (and others I know) found the latest
version of WW to make a real mess out of certain sites... but maybe not
for everybody. Despite Prox being a powerful and complex program, it
works perfectly "straight out of the box".

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

The hosts solution is messy and decidedly inefficient IMO. Hosts was
never designed to operate as a filter supporting huge block lists.

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts file
would? How about WebWasher? I'm looking to have it prevented in the
first place as I am on a slow dialup connection.

Both will block in the same way as hosts does. If a URL is identified as
being on the block list, no content will be downloaded and the HTML can
be modified *locally* to replace an advert with the word [AD] or similar
on the page you view. So yes, unwanted data is prevented from being
downloaded - it's not a "cleanup after the event" .

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

I'd try Prox, install as is. There's only one setting change to make in
the browser, then off you go. Although there's lots in it, you can learn
it "on the fly" and as required. I reckon Prox is a lot of fun, but also
suited to someone without the time to fiddle about.

 

[Iain Cheyne]

I'd try Prox, install as is. There's only one setting change to make in
the browser, then off you go. Although there's lots in it, you can learn
it "on the fly" and as required. I reckon Prox is a lot of fun, but also
suited to someone without the time to fiddle about.

I've tried both, but only an old version of Webwasher, and I found the
Proxomitron superior. It doesn't *need* any fiddling at all. The default
settings work fine.

Webwasher let a lot of popups through and it was difficult to block sites,
although it may have changed in recent versions.

Plus Webwasher is only free for personal use. I need to block nasties at
work too.

 

[Robin T Cox]

The hosts solution is messy and decidedly inefficient IMO. Hosts was
never designed to operate as a filter supporting huge block lists.

I respectfully disagree.

The fact is, a hosts file remains a quick and easy - and easily
understandable (!) - way to implement a blocklist. And if you use an aid
such as Hostess to help you keep your hosts file up to date, it is as good
as any other - without any tedious effort.

Update hosts files are regularly published on the Web. See:

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.zip
http://asp.flaaten.dk/proxo/hosts.zip
http://www.accs-net.com/hosts/
http://pgl.yoyo.org/adservers/
http://technoerotica.net/mylog/hostfile.html
http://remember.mine.nu/

Hostess is available from:
http://accs-net.com/hostess/

 

[Alan]

I respectfully disagree.

OK, I don't think I'll mention this again on ACF <grin> because my own
aversion to hosts stemmed from some quite intensive testing on a
particular junk blocker and an "equivalent" hosts used for the basis of
comparison. The mechanism by which hosts is "invoked" was shown to be
about as inefficient as it could be. Anyway, it's a technical issue and
most people don't feel a performance hit from this inefficiency, as you
have obviously found yourself...

The fact is, a hosts file remains a quick and easy - and easily
understandable (!) - way to implement a blocklist. And if you use an
aid such as Hostess to help you keep your hosts file up to date, it
is as good as any other - without any tedious effort.

I think I'll keep the technicalities to myself on this one from now on.

 

[Alan]

I've tried both, but only an old version of Webwasher, and I found the
Proxomitron superior. It doesn't *need* any fiddling at all. The
default settings work fine.

I should have emphasised this more, and should have said "*but if you
want to fiddle* you can learn it on the fly". But this is also one of
the things I like most about Prox. If you're the curious type, it lets
you have a dig and work out how its defaults did certain things to
particular web pages, and you can gradually pick up on things like its
regular expression language and filters, and start learning to write
your own.

 

[John Corliss]

Looking for opinions on these two programs. I read through a long FAQ
on Proximitron, and it 'seems' quite complicated.

Proxomitron works well right out of the box. The F.A.Q. lists far more
than you need to understand how to make it work.

WebWasher did not have alot of info on it . . .

The help file is quite inclusive.

OR

Would it be better to just maintain a hosts file and an http daemon to
give quick 404 errors?

Then you have to maintain the hosts file. However, some people like
this idea and use it successfully.

Does Proximitron prevent the actual download of data, as a hosts file
would?

I think it just filters the stuff out. However, I'm not sure and can't
find verification of whether or not this is so.

How about WebWasher?

From the F.A.Q. which is built into WebWasher's help file:
____________________________________
Q: Does WebWasher fetch advertising images and just make them
invisible on the Web page?
A: No. WebWasher eliminates the HTTP connection to advertising. This
means that your browser does not download the advertising images. Web
surfing speed will increase significantly and network bandwidth is saved.
____________________________________

I'm looking to have it prevented in the
first place as I am on a slow dialup connection.

Just looking for opinions, I don't have a ton of time to invest.

Both work well, but both have their downsides. WebWasher uses FAR more
in the way of system resources, and THBOMK Proxomitron puts markers on
the page where the ads that it's removed used to be. There may be a
way around this failing of Proxomitron, and if so I hope somebody
posts it.

--
Regards from John Corliss
alt.comp.freeware F.A.Q.:
http://www.ccountry.net/~jcorliss/F.A.Q./FrameSet1.html
Note that I can't see any of Andy Mabbett's troll posts
because I have him killfiled.

 

[Riggs]

Both work well, but both have their downsides. WebWasher uses FAR more
in the way of system resources, and THBOMK Proxomitron puts markers on
the page where the ads that it's removed used to be. There may be a
way around this failing of Proxomitron, and if so I hope somebody
posts it.

You might want to have a look at JD's Config list for Proxomitron. It
strips those 'ad containers' off of the pages and a lot more.

From the author...



Features,

Made with Proxomitron newbies in mind.
Almost every "web page" filter in the list has been modified in some way.
Includes a few original site specific filter set's. (deviantart, google &
yahoo groups)
Includes my Proxomitron "error page" replacements. (Matrix style)
Has multiple options for Ad killing & JS handling.
Includes updated Ad Lists.
All lists & HTML "bits" are kept in seperate folders.
"Web page" filters are broken down into groups.
Many original filters.
Can be used without overwriting your default config or blocklists.
Kill's can be hidden by disabling a filter. ("Insert Style Sheet - Show
Kills")
Highlight's "email", "javascript", "redirect", ftp & image links.
Includes two SLIGHTLY modified Super-Opener filters.
Includes a ranking system for filters. To help those new to Proxomitron.
Includes bookmarklets to toggle Proxomitron kills in IE/Mozilla (Opera
users read FAQ/Tips)
Includes an updated killed.html.
Predefined filters can be bypassed by a keypress & reload.

Includes three configs.
JD_Extra = What I recommend for those trying my config. A nice mix of
filters.
JD_Basic = Only basic Ad & Pop-up blocking. Plus filters to disable
annoying javascript.
JD_Advanced = My daily config. Industrial strength filtering. ^_^

Download at:

http://www.jd5000.net/

 

[John Corliss]

(clipped)
You might want to have a look at JD's Config list for Proxomitron. It
strips those 'ad containers' off of the pages and a lot more.

From the author...

Features,

Made with Proxomitron newbies in mind.
Almost every "web page" filter in the list has been modified in some way.
Includes a few original site specific filter set's. (deviantart, google &
yahoo groups)
Includes my Proxomitron "error page" replacements. (Matrix style)
Has multiple options for Ad killing & JS handling.
Includes updated Ad Lists.
All lists & HTML "bits" are kept in seperate folders.
"Web page" filters are broken down into groups.
Many original filters.
Can be used without overwriting your default config or blocklists.
Kill's can be hidden by disabling a filter. ("Insert Style Sheet - Show
Kills")
Highlight's "email", "javascript", "redirect", ftp & image links.
Includes two SLIGHTLY modified Super-Opener filters.
Includes a ranking system for filters. To help those new to Proxomitron.
Includes bookmarklets to toggle Proxomitron kills in IE/Mozilla (Opera
users read FAQ/Tips)
Includes an updated killed.html.
Predefined filters can be bypassed by a keypress & reload.

Includes three configs.
JD_Extra = What I recommend for those trying my config. A nice mix of
filters.
JD_Basic = Only basic Ad & Pop-up blocking. Plus filters to disable
annoying javascript.
JD_Advanced = My daily config. Industrial strength filtering. ^_^

Download at: http://www.jd5000.net/

Thanks! I'll check it out. Would be nice to be able to replace WW with
a less resource demanding alternative.

--
Regards from John Corliss
alt.comp.freeware F.A.Q.:
http://www.ccountry.net/~jcorliss/F.A.Q./FrameSet1.html
Note that I can't see any of Andy Mabbett's troll posts
because I have him killfiled.

 

[bluemoon]

That was my experience about a year back back before switching to
Proxomitron

You might want to have a look at JD's Config list for Proxomitron. It
strips those 'ad containers' off of the pages and a lot more.

You took the words right out of my mouth. JD has worked tirelessly on
his custom configs & is undoubtedly one of the best out there if not
the best at creating them.

Proxomitron has almost unlimited potential for those willing to spend
the time working with it, but is also a terrific asset for the novice
user.

I'm not knocking WebWasher. It's o.k. for what it does, but there is
really no comparison between the two.

You will find a wealth of info at

Prox 2002 Forum
http://asp.flaaten.dk/proxo/

and

Prox-List forum
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/prox-list/messages

Includes three configs.
JD_Extra = What I recommend for those trying my config. A nice mix of
filters.
JD_Basic = Only basic Ad & Pop-up blocking. Plus filters to disable
annoying javascript.
JD_Advanced = My daily config. Industrial strength filtering. ^_^

A config is basically a set of filters & settings. The 3 JD configs
are all the same. The only difference is that the JD_Basic config has
less of the filters actived than the JD_Extra, & so on for the
JD_Advanced. JD_Basic or JD_Extra should be competent for your needs.

Hint #1: The basic Proxomitron setup comes with a default.cfg (along
with a set of several other more advanced configs), which is a basic
set of filters that will be used by default when launching
Proxomitron. At that point you may right click it's tray icon &
locate the option to load any other config residing in your
"C:\Program Files\Proxomitron" folder.

If you want have any of one these other configs launch with
Proxomitron by default, create a shortcut to Proxomitron.exe, right
click on it & select "Properties." In the "Target" field you should
see "C:\Program Files\Proxomitron\Proxomitron.exe". Add a space after
the last quotation mark and enter the name of the config you wish to
use, i.e.,

"C:\Program Files\Proxomitron\Proxomitron.exe" JD_Extra.cfg

Hint #2: You can get a neat enhanced tray menu patch at

ProxoPatcher
http://www.xs4all.nl/~vsetten/prox/

hth

blue

 

[Alan]

Hint #2: You can get a neat enhanced tray menu patch at

ProxoPatcher
http://www.xs4all.nl/~vsetten/prox/

I'm a little confused here regarding versions. My Prox claims 4.5
(2003-5-22). I'm not sure if this is classed as an "older" version WRT
the patch application, or not. I *thought* this *was* the (latest) final
release.

 

[Kruppt]

I'm a little confused here regarding versions. My Prox claims 4.5
(2003-5-22). I'm not sure if this is classed as an "older" version WRT
the patch application, or not. I *thought* this *was* the (latest) final
release.

The version you have is not the latest.
When you right click on the Prox Icon in the system tray,
and click on -ABOUT- you should see the below

Version: Naoko 4.5 (2003-6-1)
Proxomitron 4.5-j

Kruppt

 

[Alan]

The version you have is not the latest.
When you right click on the Prox Icon in the system tray,
and click on -ABOUT- you should see the below

Version: Naoko 4.5 (2003-6-1)
Proxomitron 4.5-j

Cheers! Will d/l 4.5-j right now!

 

[Bill Day]

Proxomitron puts markers on
the page where the ads that it's removed used to be. There may be a
way around this failing of Proxomitron, and if so I hope somebody
posts it.

I actually chose the setting that leaves a tiny reminder that an ad has
been blocked...it reminds me that it is working....under "banner
blaster" and similar boxes in the "web page" options, you can check or
uncheck whether you see the evidence.........