Comments on: Google Chrome with no Ads – BFilter – Move over Privoxy and Admuncher!

By: Bilal Jaffery

Bilal Jaffery — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 06:30:38 +0000

I personally use OpenDNS.org for my dns, so I am already protected – with or without any proxies.

By: Kaleo

Kaleo — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:59:23 +0000

Privoxy also deals with the DNS leaks when using Tor. Does BFilter address that, as well?

By: Timothy Rushton

Timothy Rushton — Fri, 15 May 2009 09:53:54 +0000

I have tried various ad blocking software and for one reason or another, have had to uninstall them. They either start well and then for some reason stop blocking the ads, then they do, then they don’t scenerio or they’re just crap. I think bfilter is the best I have tried (it even blocks the ebay ads in Baygenie) but it has one big problem. It also blocks out entire web pages, especially links from other web sites, legit ones not dodgy ones. I know it’s bfilter because as soon as I tick Bypass, everything works fine. I have tried this on Vista 32, Vista 64 and Windows 7 64, it does the same on all of them. And to try and configure it to stop doing this, I am pretty good with computers, but I ain’t fiddling with bfilter’s configuration, it’s just not user firendly at all.

By: Recondo

Recondo — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:16:19 +0000

Forget Ad-Muncher – It’s not free. This should have been worded differently.

At the risk of sounding like a salesman, I’ll say this….. For 30 dollars, you get free LIFETIME upgrades. They don’t make you pay for every new version. A small price to pay for a fantastic product that works independant of any web browser.

By: privoxy

privoxy — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 00:48:27 +0000

Don’t let Privoxy scare you away! It’s actually extremely quick to install, and it works wonderfully right out of the box — there’s no need to mess with all the (admittedly complicated) settings. And it only takes up three megs of ram. Now BFilter might be great too. But Privoxy works fine.

By: Bilal Jaffery

Bilal Jaffery — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 10:02:37 +0000

hmm, that seems strange. I haven’t had this issue on any of the computers I work on.

Have you tried it on another setup?

By: Nivasa

Nivasa — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 10:46:30 +0000

I’ve set it up and it seems to work like a charm filtering ads.. but does anyone else receive this error in the Operations Log when BFilter starts up? :

Applying config …
[config:85] Illegal value for “proxy_port”

All the other configs load successfully (i.e. Loading forwarding configuration.. standard url patterns.. local url patterns.. content filters.. cache)

I have a home network (two Vista PCs (DHCP) behind a wireless router). I’ve configured Chrome’s proxy settings as specified in the instructions (http/127.0.0.1:8080).

Does something need to be opened on my router and/or Vista’s firewall?

Appreciate the help!

By: Eugene

Eugene — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 06:39:17 +0000

Simply the best!! Works a dream with Chrome, less than 5 mins to download install and get on line. Thanks for the heads up .

By: Bilal Jaffery

Bilal Jaffery — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:03:00 +0000

Only problem is that you are comparing paid ‘filter’ updates to free services. In my experience, I have never had any problems with AdBlock plus nor Bfilter yet.

100% of my pages have been accurately filtered for Ads. However, even if it works 80% of the times, I am fine with it as I have not spent a dollar for paid filtering software like Ad Muncher.

Could you also elaborate on the depth of Ad muncher’s filtering capability?

By: Tech-fly

Tech-fly — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 10:40:07 +0000

This is really bad advice.

Nothing even comes close to Ad Muncher’s depth and range of ad blocking abilities.

Not only can it do more than any other ad blocker, it does it transparently without any proxy settings and it does it OUT OF THE BOX.

Along with DAILY filter list updates I will never switch to another ad blocker.

bfilter and adblock plus are both TOYS.
/rant>

By: David

David — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:06:29 +0000

Very nice, was able to set it up within 5 mins.Thanks Bilal.