With respect to comment #4 by Jeet i.e can't access the site etc..... The exact same post was posted in the Gamegiveaway section apart from it was releated to the game giveaway developers site regarding Star Ashes as opposed to Astro Gemini. I've throughly checked the site and searched the web for any information regarding this issue with no results found so i'm rather suspicious of the information being posted. I've unapproved that particular post via moderation because personally I think it's scaremongering. In my experience, when someone has posted such information the downloads for that particular game have reduced drastically.

Seeing that the same person has posted the same warning here on the applications side of the project rally makes me suspicious.

The giveaway team have always throughly tested the software and vetted their contributors so as not to allow software that's dubious through to the community. Doing so would hurt their standing with the big search engines.

I've been visiting the giveaway site since November 2006 and have never seen a giveaway that's had a confirmed virus or other malware.

With respect to the Star Ashes site over on the game giveaway side of the project you just have to see that it's a very plain site, devoted virtually 100% to their games with very little advertising. I very much doubt their is a problem with either of these sites.

Personally I think this user is posting malicious posts or they have a serious problem with their computer. No one else has reported this problem.

Whiterabbit-uk  –  12 years ago  –  Você achou esse comentário útil? sim | não (+59)

Traduzir

#6 - ootje: You are mistaken. Software should install their executables in Program Files or Program Files(86) and NOT in System32 nor SysWOW64

#8 - Whiterabbit-uk: Thanks for the info but, as a moderator, why didn't you delete the post entirely; or, at the very least, append your post to #4. By the time we get to yours, the apparently malicious, misinformation damage had been done. Perhaps allowing commenters to post in-line would be useful here.

#4 - Jeet: Do you REALLY think GOTD would allow malware to be distributed from their site? Do you REALLY think they don't know about VirusTotal, VirSCAN, etc? Do you REALLY think their coders who wrap our daily treats aren't smart enough to examine those files in-house?

Or, which is much more likely, Are you the kind of person who yells "Fire" in order to look like a hero? In any event, before harming someone's reputation --AstroGemini's, GOTD's or anyone else's-- while hiding (slinking?)behind the veil of the Internet,YOU should check out YOURSELF and double-check your facts. Even giving your honesty and integrity the benefit of the doubt, at the very least, you are reckless and, therefore, more dangerous than helpful.

I'm glad Whiterabbit-uk called you out.

JMJsquared  –  12 years ago  –  Você achou esse comentário útil? sim | não (+15)

Traduzir

#15 @papin - I am a retired electronics consultant and while your figures raise a point for some people, the figures don't add up quite like that.

Even a desktop computer is unlikely to be using 200W while truly idling and a laptop is even less likely to be.

Lots of people do not like turning off/hibernating their computers at all, as some believe the repetative starting up/stopping of the computer leads to premature failure of components, especially the electro-mechanical ones like the HDDs. There is a great deal of debate over whether this is indeed true or not, but if it does work out that way for you - Then any savings from electricity will be wiped out by replacing even one HDD.

Remember also that some stream movies, etc. from their computer to their TV, so the computer needs to be on even though you might think it is not being used as watching TV.

The same thing happens with those who use their computer for phone calls, although most now do not require the computer to be on.

The computer might not apparently be doing "anything", but a lot of people have software running antivirus or defragmenting while it is "idle". Not to forget back-ups, MS system restore, MS system indexing and possibly others all working in the background.

Finally, some people just prefer seeing something nice or fun on the screen8, rather than a blank screen - Look at how popular digital photo frames have been for example. They tend to be left running all the time and "waste" a lot more electricity over time than you might think. But sometimes you just have to accept that "pleasure" or nice things cost a little.

TK_M  –  12 years ago  –  Você achou esse comentário útil? sim | não (+12)

Traduzir

@15, PAPIN

Your line of reasoning is sound. And I've seen it repeated many times here every time a "screensaver" is offered. However, while you've got this large visiting audience, why not expand your argument to include even bigger and more "wasteful energy" categories of things? For instance...

Ever go to a flea market, or a garage sale, or a "Dollar" store (here in the USA), and ponder how many people and factories are busily employed cranking out the humongous quantity of fabric/textile and little/low-end plastic and ceramic and glass and metal and wax, wooden, and paper trinkets, useless-sized pots, vases, ugly plates, stinky candles, "objets d'art", toys, kitchen gizmos no one uses, flimsy tools, party favors, throwaway electronics, clothing, etc? Basically all that detritus of our modern human culture no one eventually wants or can really use for any length of time before being offered to someone else or a landfill.

Just think about all the energy needed to run those furnaces, ovens, vats, kilns, machinery, chemical and petroleum refineries, pumps; the drillers and miners and ax men/lumberjacks and mill workers; the human and natural resources used to harvest and transport the raw materials, refine/process/shape and mold them, hand paint them, etc.

I'd love to see an energy calculation estimate for everything used to create all this "disposable" stuff. Really, I'm serious! It could become a PhD dissertation, a landmark publication (or has someone already done it?)! It's something I've often wondered (and whether we could ever build a more attractive and utopian world were all that effort and resources to be redirected towards that purpose).

I'll bet you own a few of those things you'll someday put out for a garage sale or simply toss away, still in their gift boxes, still unused/unworn, little used, played with or appreciated. I know I do. Think of the energy and materials used to create just your own pile of eventual cast-offs. I'll bet they "cost" much more in terms of material, energy and resources used to create them than an enjoyable screensaver would use.

Still, I see your point, and every little bit helps. If we or our kids are not really going to occasionally glance at, smile or laugh at this screensaver, it would be better for all of us of like mind to not waste time and precious electrical energy to run our computers while leaving messages on this page saying they are useless and wasteful; and rather for us to set our computers to "sleep" or "hibernate" (if that works without problems) while we do more eco-friendly activities.

Of course, like you, I had to waste some resources to leave my sage advice in return...

...and I've turned on this cute little cartoony screensaver around Easter every year for my family to enjoy since I first picked it up (March 2008) -- thanks, Astro Gemini, for this seasonal adornment -- but, yes, it SHOULD'VE come out a week earlier this year...

Just saying... ;-)

harpo2448  –  12 years ago  –  Você achou esse comentário útil? sim | não (+8)

Traduzir