Prev: Network Activity Indicator for Windows 7
Next: Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Release Candidate
From: David H. Lipman on 22 Apr 2010 21:33
From: "Bear Bottoms" <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com>

| "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in
| news:hqqrj201vuj(a)news3.newsguy.com:

>> From: "kraut" <kraut3852(a)yahoo.com>



>>| It seems that every time (Sometimes twice a day) that I go to update
>>| malwarebytes' anti-malware I get a 4 to 5 MB download. Does it
>>| really change that much and are these DLs really necessary??

>> Yes. There are no incremental updates they are complete signature
>> packets and everytime there is a new update there are additional
>> signatures.


| Well, it isn't really necessary. An incremental update could be managed. It
| is necessary in the sense that it is how MB does it.

That I can agree on.

BTW:
http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Press/Releases/?id=346
and
http://vipre.malwarebytes.org/


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp


From: Dustin Cook on 28 Apr 2010 13:15
Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote in
news:Xns9D62CDB38466bearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.250:

> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in
> news:hqqrj201vuj(a)news3.newsguy.com:
>
>> From: "kraut" <kraut3852(a)yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>
>>| It seems that every time (Sometimes twice a day) that I go to update
>>| malwarebytes' anti-malware I get a 4 to 5 MB download. Does it
>>| really change that much and are these DLs really necessary??
>>
>> Yes. There are no incremental updates they are complete signature
>> packets and everytime there is a new update there are additional
>> signatures.
>>
>
> Well, it isn't really necessary. An incremental update could be
> managed. It is necessary in the sense that it is how MB does it.

The updater and the server would both require reconfiguration and a bit of
new code to support that. It's easier to simply pull the update and
overwrite the older copy. It's not simply appending additional data, tho.




--
"Hrrngh! Someday I'm going to hurl this...er...roll this...hrrngh.. nudge
this boulder right down a cliff." - Goblin Warrior

From: David H. Lipman on 28 Apr 2010 19:12
From: "Bear Bottoms" <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com>

| Dustin Cook <bughunter.dustin(a)gmail.com> wrote in
| news:Xns9D688828451ABHHI2948AJD832(a)69.16.185.247:

>> Bear Bottoms <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com> wrote in
>> news:Xns9D62CDB38466bearbottoms1gmaicom(a)69.16.185.250:

>>> "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in
>>> news:hqqrj201vuj(a)news3.newsguy.com:

>>>> From: "kraut" <kraut3852(a)yahoo.com>



>>>>| It seems that every time (Sometimes twice a day) that I go to
>>>>| update malwarebytes' anti-malware I get a 4 to 5 MB download. Does
>>>>| it really change that much and are these DLs really necessary??

>>>> Yes. There are no incremental updates they are complete signature
>>>> packets and everytime there is a new update there are additional
>>>> signatures.


>>> Well, it isn't really necessary. An incremental update could be
>>> managed. It is necessary in the sense that it is how MB does it.

>> The updater and the server would both require reconfiguration and a
>> bit of new code to support that. It's easier to simply pull the update
>> and overwrite the older copy. It's not simply appending additional
>> data, tho.

| As I said, it isn't really necessary. It is a choice. Not necessarily a
| bad one. Just a choice. But it isn't necessary. Or the choice of not
| providing incremental backups isn't necessary. The choice of providing
| incremental backups could easily be accomplished by altering the updater,
| reconfiguring the server, adding a bit of new code for appending the
| additional data and other changes that might be desired. :)

What does "incremental backups" have to do with "incremental updates" ?

Inceremental updates is NOT an easy implementation.

Take Day 1. You get an update.

Now Day 2 and Day 3 have passed.

Do you do a Delta between Day 4 and the data in day 1 ? How ?

Even if you do incremental updates after period X has elapsed from Day 1 you will still
need to replace the whole signature set and not do inccrementals.

Then there is the fact that it is not an update per day issue. Updates are a function of
new signatures and the number and need for them. Sometimes a couple a day and sometimes
several a day.

I know the database and the MBAM signature process. Whole updates replacing last updates
is an easier proposition without completely rewriting both the database and the engine.


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp


From: David H. Lipman on 28 Apr 2010 20:37
From: "Bear Bottoms" <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com>

| "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote in
| news:hrafdg02scu(a)news1.newsguy.com:

>> I know the database and the MBAM signature process. Whole updates
>> replacing last updates is an easier proposition without completely
>> rewriting both the database and the engine.


| I meant incremental updates.

| Like I said, it isn't a bad thing to do what is done. Incremental updates
| is more practical for the end-user to download smaller files, but no real
| big deal at this time.

| My point was it wasn't necessary to do it the way it is done. It could have
| been written in the beginning to make incremental updates...or could even
| be changed at this point with no great effort - but effort nonetheless.
| Maybe if the file becomes so large that this becomes a real issue, such
| would be undertaken.

| Maybe it wasn't a forethought to do incremental updates. Maybe it was
| thought of and decided against. It just isn't necessary to do it the way it
| is done.

It may be "neccessary" but may NOT be optimum.


--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp


From: David H. Lipman on 28 Apr 2010 21:30
From: "Bear Bottoms" <bearbottoms1(a)gmai.com>



| Jeesus. It isn't necessary. It could be set up even now for incremental
| updates. It's just not. Like I said, at this point it isn't really a big
| deal. It just isn't necessary.

You did not write the software so you can not state if it was neccessary or not.
You can ONLY state it is not optimum.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Network Activity Indicator for Windows 7
Next: Ubuntu 10.04 LTS Release Candidate