Guest Dajan Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Hi I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default programs enough Thanks Quote
Guest Mick Murphy Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Vista own Firewall is very good, and quite sufficient for what you need. Below are some compatible security Programs you might want to use with Vista. http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html Avast Anti-Virus is Vista compatible (32bit and 64bit Versions), FREE, auto-updating, and a low resources user of your computer. And, only have 1(one) Anti-Virus installed / running on your computer at any one time.. Conflicts may occur if you have more than 1(one). http://www.spybot.info/en/index.html Spybot Search & Destroy 1.6 is a very good, FREE Anti-Spyware Program. Download, install, update, and immunize your System with it. Then SCAN with it. Update it, and scan your System once a fortnight. http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html SpywareBlaster 4.1 is a non-intrusive, FREE Anti-Spyware Program that runs in the background (no scanning by you!). SpywareBlaster prevents the installation of many so-called spyware, adware and malware programs by disabling the CLSIDs of popular spyware ActiveX controls, and also prevents the installation of any of them via a webpage Update it once a fortnight, and let it do its work in the background! http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam.php Malwarebytes is as the name says, a Malware Remover! Download, then update, the FREE version from one of the sites listed below: Download from Download.com Download from MajorGeeks.com Download from GT500.org -- Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia "Dajan" wrote: <span style="color:blue"> > Hi > > I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default programs > enough > > Thanks > </span> Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 "Mick Murphy" <MickMurphy@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht news:A35534B3-7451-4219-942C-8613819B83C3@microsoft.com...<span style="color:blue"> > Vista own Firewall is very good, and quite sufficient for what you need. > > Below are some compatible security Programs you might want to use with > Vista. > > http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html > > Avast Anti-Virus is Vista compatible (32bit and 64bit Versions), FREE, > auto-updating, and a low resources user of your computer. > And, only have 1(one) Anti-Virus installed / running on your computer at > any > one time.. > Conflicts may occur if you have more than 1(one). > > http://www.spybot.info/en/index.html > > Spybot Search & Destroy 1.6 is a very good, FREE Anti-Spyware Program. > Download, install, update, and immunize your System with it. > Then SCAN with it. > Update it, and scan your System once a fortnight. > > http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html > > SpywareBlaster 4.1 is a non-intrusive, FREE Anti-Spyware Program that runs > in the background (no scanning by you!). > SpywareBlaster prevents the installation of many so-called spyware, adware > and malware programs by disabling the CLSIDs of popular spyware ActiveX > controls, and also prevents the installation of any of them via a webpage > Update it once a fortnight, and let it do its work in the background! > > http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam.php > > Malwarebytes is as the name says, a Malware Remover! > Download, then update, the FREE version from one of the sites listed > below: > > Download from Download.com > Download from MajorGeeks.com > Download from GT500.org > > -- > Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia > > > "Dajan" wrote: ><span style="color:green"> >> Hi >> >> I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default programs >> enough >> >> Thanks >></span></span> I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. Try Avira. Quote
Guest Paul Montgomery Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: <span style="color:blue"> >I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe.</span> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement lest everyone think you're an idiot. I already do, so it won't change my mind. Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com...<span style="color:blue"> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" > <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: ><span style="color:green"> >>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe.</span> > > Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement > lest everyone think you're an idiot. > > I already do, so it won't change my mind.</span> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead! Quote
Guest FromTheRafters Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm Looks pretty safe to me. Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" even though that is actually what you wrote. I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista. "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message news:eWvu3peBJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > > > "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht > news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com...<span style="color:green"> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" >> <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe.</span> >> >> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement >> lest everyone think you're an idiot. >> >> I already do, so it won't change my mind.</span> > > http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm > Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know > everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything > against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead! </span> Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> schreef in bericht news:#UEoqGfBJHA.3496@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm > > Looks pretty safe to me. > > Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. > > Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is > unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" > even though that is actually what you wrote.</span> I never said that the others were UNsafe, they are just less accurate in practice. <span style="color:blue"> > > I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for > many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista. > > "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message > news:eWvu3peBJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...<span style="color:green"> >> >> >> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht >> news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" >>> <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: >>> >>>>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. >>> >>> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement >>> lest everyone think you're an idiot. >>> >>> I already do, so it won't change my mind.</span> >> >> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead!</span> > ></span> Quote
Guest FromTheRafters Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 inline response "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message news:edvybcfBJHA.3396@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > > > "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> schreef in bericht > news:#UEoqGfBJHA.3496@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...<span style="color:green"> >> http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >> >> Looks pretty safe to me. >> >> Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >> >> Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >> unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >> even though that is actually what you wrote.</span> > > I never said that the others were UNsafe, they are just less accurate in > practice.</span> Isn't that what I just said? It is easy to infer from your phrasing (since you put "would't advise Avast" so close to "not so safe") that you meant more than "less accurate in practice". I didn't say that you implied it, or said it, only that you left it easy to infer. <span style="color:blue"><span style="color:green"> >> >> I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >> many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista. >> >> "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message >> news:eWvu3peBJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> >>> >>> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht >>> news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com... >>>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" >>>> <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: >>>> >>>>>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. >>>> >>>> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement >>>> lest everyone think you're an idiot. >>>> >>>> I already do, so it won't change my mind. >>> >>> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >>> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >>> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >>> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead!</span> >> >></span> > > </span> Quote
Guest Beoweolf Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Anything in the top 10 is a good product, at that level the only differences are - as listed in your proof - differences in ergonomics, look-n-feel. Anything in the Top 5, I would use or recommend to anyone, especially if the top priority is Free/shareware. Different uses/users have unique priorities. One size does not fit all. Over the years, I have found there is no such thing as "best". "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message news:eWvu3peBJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > > > "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht > news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com...<span style="color:green"> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" >> <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe.</span> >> >> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement >> lest everyone think you're an idiot. >> >> I already do, so it won't change my mind.</span> > > http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm > Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know > everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything > against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead! </span> Quote
Guest Paul Montgomery Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: <span style="color:blue"> >http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm > >Looks pretty safe to me. > >Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. > >Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >even though that is actually what you wrote. > >I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista.</span> I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it. <span style="color:blue"> > >"Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message >news:eWvu3peBJHA.528@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...<span style="color:green"> >> >> >> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht >> news:ekh2b4lus9at1636md3nqosi6ku5tbrpli@4ax.com...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:14:22 +0200, "Flight" >>> <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote: >>> >>>>I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. >>> >>> Come up with something credible to back up that ridiculous statement >>> lest everyone think you're an idiot. >>> >>> I already do, so it won't change my mind.</span> >> >> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead! </span> ></span> Quote
Guest Bruce Chambers Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Dajan wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > Hi > > I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default > programs enough > > Thanks</span> Vista's built-in firewall is perfectly adequate for most people. While it's not quite up to the ease-of-use standards of Kerio or ZoneAlarm, it has been noticeably improved over WinXP's version. There are two interfaces for Vistas built-in firewall: 1) A simplified one accessed through the Control Panel that is the only one most people see. To further supplement this view, Sphinx's Vista Firewall Control http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/) is a piece of freeware that makes the Vista Firewall much more easily manageable to the average user. 2) And the more advanced "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security (WF.msc), accessed via the Start Menu's Administrative Tools folder, for the experienced user who wants more granular control. -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot Quote
Guest Bruce Chambers Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 Flight wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > > > > http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm > Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know > everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything > against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead!</span> Who is "Gizmo," and why should anyone take anything posted on the site as credible? I, for one, certainly wouldn't trust anything found there. They actually recommend snake-oil products such as memory optimizers and registry cleaners. Whoever runs that sirte is a very dangerous and irresponsible person. -- Bruce Chambers Help us help you: http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375 They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot Quote
Guest Paul Montgomery Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:24:18 -0600, Bruce Chambers <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote: <span style="color:blue"> >Flight wrote:<span style="color:green"> >> >> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead!</span> > > Who is "Gizmo," and why should anyone take anything posted on the site >as credible? > > I, for one, certainly wouldn't trust anything found there. They >actually recommend snake-oil products such as memory optimizers and >registry cleaners. Whoever runs that sirte is a very dangerous and >irresponsible person.</span> "Flight" also looks to MythBusters for technology info. "Gizmo"/MythBusters... hey. It don't git no bettah... Quote
Guest Mick Murphy Posted August 24, 2008 Posted August 24, 2008 "I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. Try Avira" I think that is a very dangerous statement by you. I hope that you are prepared to back it up. Companies don't appreciate statements like the above. "Avira": install to get NAG screens! -- Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia "Flight" wrote: <span style="color:blue"> > > > "Mick Murphy" <MickMurphy@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht > news:A35534B3-7451-4219-942C-8613819B83C3@microsoft.com...<span style="color:green"> > > Vista own Firewall is very good, and quite sufficient for what you need. > > > > Below are some compatible security Programs you might want to use with > > Vista. > > > > http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html > > > > Avast Anti-Virus is Vista compatible (32bit and 64bit Versions), FREE, > > auto-updating, and a low resources user of your computer. > > And, only have 1(one) Anti-Virus installed / running on your computer at > > any > > one time.. > > Conflicts may occur if you have more than 1(one). > > > > http://www.spybot.info/en/index.html > > > > Spybot Search & Destroy 1.6 is a very good, FREE Anti-Spyware Program. > > Download, install, update, and immunize your System with it. > > Then SCAN with it. > > Update it, and scan your System once a fortnight. > > > > http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html > > > > SpywareBlaster 4.1 is a non-intrusive, FREE Anti-Spyware Program that runs > > in the background (no scanning by you!). > > SpywareBlaster prevents the installation of many so-called spyware, adware > > and malware programs by disabling the CLSIDs of popular spyware ActiveX > > controls, and also prevents the installation of any of them via a webpage > > Update it once a fortnight, and let it do its work in the background! > > > > http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam.php > > > > Malwarebytes is as the name says, a Malware Remover! > > Download, then update, the FREE version from one of the sites listed > > below: > > > > Download from Download.com > > Download from MajorGeeks.com > > Download from GT500.org > > > > -- > > Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia > > > > > > "Dajan" wrote: > ><span style="color:darkred"> > >> Hi > >> > >> I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default programs > >> enough > >> > >> Thanks > >></span></span> > I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. Try Avira. > > </span> Quote
Guest Dajan Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 Thanks for all the posts, I am using and always have, AVG Free, I just was not sure about the need for zonealarm Dave "Dajan" <dajan@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:530A427A-39B1-4A8A-B742-BF649F3B9016@microsoft.com...<span style="color:blue"> > Hi > > I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default programs > enough > > Thanks </span> Quote
Guest Kayman Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 11:17:46 +0100, Dajan wrote: <span style="color:blue"> > Hi > I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista...</span> No, you don't! Use this: http://zonealarm.donhoover.net/uninstall.html <span style="color:blue"> > ...or is the default programs enough</span> You are not going to find anything better than the Vista FW and Vista in itself due to the advanced features the FW and Vista are using. Managing the Windows Vista Firewall http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc510323.aspx Tap into the Vista firewall's advanced configuration features http://articles.techrepublic.com.com/5100-10877-6098592.html Configure Vista Firewall to support outbound packet filtering http://searchwindowssecurity.techtarget.co...1247138,00.html Vista Firewall Control. http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/ The free version may be all you need, check the comparisons under the "Download and Buy" link. Quote
Guest FromTheRafters Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message news:m693b45tfhgcvvcc0qv91jc3eindb8o7l9@4ax.com...<span style="color:blue"> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" > <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: ><span style="color:green"> >>http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >> >>Looks pretty safe to me. >> >>Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >> >>Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >>unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >>even though that is actually what you wrote. >> >>I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >>many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista.</span> > > I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast > customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've > been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). > > I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, > because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and > because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut > off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). > > I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages > about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG > because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. > > I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to > get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. > > So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all > of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it.</span> You sorta hit the nail on the head there - they all suck one way or another and you have to find which one sucks the least at what you want it to do. I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. Quote
Guest Paul Montgomery Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:54:51 -0400, "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: <span style="color:blue"> > >"Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message >news:m693b45tfhgcvvcc0qv91jc3eindb8o7l9@4ax.com...<span style="color:green"> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" >> <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >>> >>>Looks pretty safe to me. >>> >>>Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >>> >>>Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >>>unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >>>even though that is actually what you wrote. >>> >>>I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >>>many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista.</span> >> >> I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast >> customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've >> been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). >> >> I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, >> because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and >> because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut >> off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). >> >> I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages >> about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG >> because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. >> >> I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to >> get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. >> >> So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all >> of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it.</span> > >You sorta hit the nail on the head there - they all suck one way >or another and you have to find which one sucks the least at >what you want it to do. > >I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but >I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both >the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. </span> Just Googled "disable AntiVir's nag screen". First hit: http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable_antivir_nag.htm Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> schreef in bericht news:eno3RWlBJHA.3776@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > > "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message > news:m693b45tfhgcvvcc0qv91jc3eindb8o7l9@4ax.com...<span style="color:green"> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" >> <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: >><span style="color:darkred"> >>>http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >>> >>>Looks pretty safe to me. >>> >>>Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >>> >>>Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >>>unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >>>even though that is actually what you wrote. >>> >>>I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >>>many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista.</span> >> >> I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast >> customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've >> been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). >> >> I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, >> because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and >> because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut >> off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). >> >> I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages >> about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG >> because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. >> >> I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to >> get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. >> >> So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all >> of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it.</span> > > You sorta hit the nail on the head there - they all suck one way > or another and you have to find which one sucks the least at > what you want it to do. > > I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but > I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both > the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. ></span> "We" want everything for nothing and complain if someone tries to get something back for all the work. Ever looked what it really costs? If someone rejects a very good working program only because that "nag screen" then go on, I won't help you any more. Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht news:5ee3b45e5ht6mhjhtgqek7j7bk55vbsi6m@4ax.com...<span style="color:blue"> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:24:18 -0600, Bruce Chambers > <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote: ><span style="color:green"> >>Flight wrote:<span style="color:darkred"> >>> >>> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >>> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >>> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >>> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead!</span> >> >> Who is "Gizmo," and why should anyone take anything posted on the site >>as credible? >> >> I, for one, certainly wouldn't trust anything found there. They >>actually recommend snake-oil products such as memory optimizers and >>registry cleaners. Whoever runs that sirte is a very dangerous and >>irresponsible person.</span> > > "Flight" also looks to MythBusters for technology info. > > "Gizmo"/MythBusters... hey. It don't git no bettah...</span> They just showed for everyone watching it, that fingerprints can be so easily cheated. Nothing else, blundering idiot! Quote
Guest Flight Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 "Mick Murphy" <MickMurphy@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht news:7165530D-02CC-49C6-8556-11F62455C8D2@microsoft.com...<span style="color:blue"> > "I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. Try Avira" > > I think that is a very dangerous statement by you. > I hope that you are prepared to back it up. > Companies don't appreciate statements like the above. > > "Avira": install to get NAG screens! > -- > Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia > > > "Flight" wrote: ><span style="color:green"> >> >> >> "Mick Murphy" <MickMurphy@discussions.microsoft.com> schreef in bericht >> news:A35534B3-7451-4219-942C-8613819B83C3@microsoft.com...<span style="color:darkred"> >> > Vista own Firewall is very good, and quite sufficient for what you >> > need. >> > >> > Below are some compatible security Programs you might want to use with >> > Vista. >> > >> > http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html >> > >> > Avast Anti-Virus is Vista compatible (32bit and 64bit Versions), FREE, >> > auto-updating, and a low resources user of your computer. >> > And, only have 1(one) Anti-Virus installed / running on your computer >> > at >> > any >> > one time.. >> > Conflicts may occur if you have more than 1(one). >> > >> > http://www.spybot.info/en/index.html >> > >> > Spybot Search & Destroy 1.6 is a very good, FREE Anti-Spyware Program. >> > Download, install, update, and immunize your System with it. >> > Then SCAN with it. >> > Update it, and scan your System once a fortnight. >> > >> > http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html >> > >> > SpywareBlaster 4.1 is a non-intrusive, FREE Anti-Spyware Program that >> > runs >> > in the background (no scanning by you!). >> > SpywareBlaster prevents the installation of many so-called spyware, >> > adware >> > and malware programs by disabling the CLSIDs of popular spyware ActiveX >> > controls, and also prevents the installation of any of them via a >> > webpage >> > Update it once a fortnight, and let it do its work in the background! >> > >> > http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam.php >> > >> > Malwarebytes is as the name says, a Malware Remover! >> > Download, then update, the FREE version from one of the sites listed >> > below: >> > >> > Download from Download.com >> > Download from MajorGeeks.com >> > Download from GT500.org >> > >> > -- >> > Mick Murphy - Qld - Australia >> > >> > >> > "Dajan" wrote: >> > >> >> Hi >> >> >> >> I used zonealarm in XP do I need it with vista or is the default >> >> programs >> >> enough >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >></span> >> I wouldn't advise Avast. It is not so safe. Try Avira. >> >></span></span> Look at the test results from many antivirustesters. What's wrong with that? But do whatever you want, I stop with comments on this subject. Quote
Guest The Bee Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 Paul Montgomery wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:54:51 -0400, "FromTheRafters" > <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: > <span style="color:green"> >> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message >> news:m693b45tfhgcvvcc0qv91jc3eindb8o7l9@4ax.com...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" >>> <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: >>> >>>> http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >>>> >>>> Looks pretty safe to me. >>>> >>>> Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >>>> >>>> Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >>>> unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >>>> even though that is actually what you wrote. >>>> >>>> I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >>>> many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista. >>> I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast >>> customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've >>> been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). >>> >>> I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, >>> because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and >>> because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut >>> off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). >>> >>> I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages >>> about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG >>> because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. >>> >>> I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to >>> get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. >>> >>> So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all >>> of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it.</span> >> You sorta hit the nail on the head there - they all suck one way >> or another and you have to find which one sucks the least at >> what you want it to do. >> >> I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but >> I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both >> the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. </span> > > Just Googled "disable AntiVir's nag screen". > > First hit: > > http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable_antivir_nag.htm > > > </span> Quote
Guest The Bee Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 Flight wrote:<span style="color:blue"> > > > "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> schreef in bericht > news:5ee3b45e5ht6mhjhtgqek7j7bk55vbsi6m@4ax.com...<span style="color:green"> >> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 13:24:18 -0600, Bruce Chambers >> <bchambers@cable0ne.n3t> wrote: >><span style="color:darkred"> >>> Flight wrote: >>>> >>>> http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-...us-software.htm >>>> Read this, you blundering idiot! You seem to think that you know >>>> everything better and no one must have the arrogance to say anything >>>> against you. But now it shows that you know nothing at all, potatohead! >>> >>> Who is "Gizmo," and why should anyone take anything posted on the site >>> as credible? >>> >>> I, for one, certainly wouldn't trust anything found there. They >>> actually recommend snake-oil products such as memory optimizers and >>> registry cleaners. Whoever runs that sirte is a very dangerous and >>> irresponsible person.</span> >> >> "Flight" also looks to MythBusters for technology info. >> >> "Gizmo"/MythBusters... hey. It don't git no bettah...</span> > > They just showed for everyone watching it, that fingerprints can be so > easily cheated. Nothing else, blundering idiot!</span> I am telling you now don't get the old man's nose open, because he is sick in the head, and he doesn't have anything going on in his, otherwise, old, lonely and loony tune life but Usenet. He is some kind of kin to Ringmaster Albright. He is just out here attacking people for no apparent reason, with a lot of lip dribble service. At least with Ringmaster, he has a mission statement of get Frank, get Microsoft and get anyone that talks pro on Microsoft, while old man Montgomery is just loosy as a goosy and out here. Quote
Guest FromTheRafters Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 "Flight" <jPUNTvoorbeeld@gmailPUNTcom> wrote in message news:%23RJ5B8oBJHA.5012@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<span style="color:blue"> > > > "FromTheRafters" <erratic@ne.rr.com> schreef in bericht > news:eno3RWlBJHA.3776@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...<span style="color:green"> >> >> "Paul Montgomery" <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote in message >> news:m693b45tfhgcvvcc0qv91jc3eindb8o7l9@4ax.com...<span style="color:darkred"> >>> On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 09:59:44 -0400, "FromTheRafters" >>> <erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote: >>> >>>>http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ihs/alex/R...D2008m3b_US.htm >>>> >>>>Looks pretty safe to me. >>>> >>>>Nice to see the ones I had chosen at the top of the list. >>>> >>>>Just because it appears as second best, doesn't mean it is >>>>unsafe - and it is easy to infer 'unsafe' from "not so safe" >>>>even though that is actually what you wrote. >>>> >>>>I advise either one about equally - both are adequate for >>>>many users' needs and have proven to work with Vista. >>> >>> I just spent the past week looking at McAfee (it's free for Comcast >>> customers), AVG 8 (I've used AVG in the past), Avira and Avast (I've >>> been using Avast since AVG 7.5 passed on). >>> >>> I rejected McAfee because it produced false positives a couple times, >>> because it is something of a resource hog compared to the others, and >>> because it placed a warning icon in my tray to remind me that I'd shut >>> off email scanning (it uses a proxy for email). >>> >>> I rejected AVG because it constantly popped up false-positive messages >>> about a couple files on my system. Plus I've lost confidence in AVG >>> because of recent reports of problems with several Windows updates. >>> >>> I rejected Avira because of the very irritating nag screen trying to >>> get me to go with the pro version. Otherwise, it seemed OK. >>> >>> So I'm sticking with Avast. - even though it's impossible to stop all >>> of its operations (if needed) without uninstalling it.</span> >> >> You sorta hit the nail on the head there - they all suck one way >> or another and you have to find which one sucks the least at >> what you want it to do. >> >> I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but >> I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both >> the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. >></span> > "We" want everything for nothing and complain if someone tries to get > something back for all the work. Ever looked what it really costs? If > someone rejects a very good working program only because that "nag screen" > then go on, I won't help you any more.</span> I am neither complaining nor requiring help. I migrated to free AV after having used paid-for products in the past. None of the ones I have used has ever caught malware except Norton 5.0 - which caught kakworm coming from a microsoft helpdesk after I had already applied the scriptlet typelib / eyedog patch. I don't think it is a bad thing to pay for software, and I believe the free ones are adequate for my low risk data. People with high value (and hence high risk) data should get payware and make use of the support it helps pay for. Quote
Guest Paul Montgomery Posted August 25, 2008 Posted August 25, 2008 On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:37:44 -0500, Paul Montgomery <i.m.nonnymous@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote: <span style="color:blue"> >On Sun, 24 Aug 2008 21:54:51 -0400, "FromTheRafters" ><erratic@ne.rr.com> wrote:<span style="color:green"> >> >>I understand there is a way to disable AntiVir's nag screen, but >>I haven't tried it because I haven't installed AntiVir yet. Both >>the program and the anti-nag wait in the wings. </span> > >Just Googled "disable AntiVir's nag screen". > >First hit: > >http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable_antivir_nag.htm</span> The methods to disable the nag screen and the splash screen work. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.