anti spyware; beta or not?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Steve & Chris Clark, Nov 27, 2005.

  1. Hello everyone

    I wanted to download the beta Microsoft anti spyware program upon the
    recommendations here but I'm running on an older computer still (Pentium 2)
    with Windows 98SE still and it still functions beautiful and does the job
    for us.
    The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I stay
    away from it?

    I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to have a
    couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different things.

    What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older Microsoft
    anti spy ware? zone alarm in addition to Adaware?

    My antivirus is AVG which I've been really happy with too.

    thanks in advance
    Steve & Chris Clark, Nov 27, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Steve & Chris Clark

    Toolman Tim Guest

    In news:k4mif.918$,
    Steve & Chris Clark spewed forth:
    > Hello everyone
    >
    > I wanted to download the beta Microsoft anti spyware program upon the
    > recommendations here but I'm running on an older computer still
    > (Pentium 2) with Windows 98SE still and it still functions beautiful
    > and does the job for us.
    > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I
    > stay away from it?


    Don't bother. It won't run on W9x systems.

    > I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to
    > have a couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different
    > things.
    >
    > What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older
    > Microsoft anti spy ware? zone alarm in addition to Adaware?


    Nope. No older MS version. They didn't even write this one.

    --
    Some people are like Slinkies. Not really good for anything, but you
    still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mitch Guest

    In article <k4mif.918$>, Steve & Chris
    Clark <> wrote:

    > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I stay
    > away from it?

    Wel, of course. If it doesn't meet the requirements, don't use it. That
    kind of thing isn't supposed to be flexible!

    > I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to have a
    > couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different things.

    Sure; people in this group also like Spybot S&D.

    > What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older Microsoft
    > anti spy ware?

    No, there is no older product, especially if the MS product is still in
    beta.

    > zone alarm in addition to Adaware?

    Zone Alarm is a firewall -- don't you have a firewall installed?
    You need one -- do it now. People here seem to like Outpost best.
    Mitch, Nov 27, 2005
    #3
  4. Steve & Chris Clark

    lee jolly Guest

    Your best bet is use (spybot search and destroy) microsoft antispyware will
    not work properly with windows 98 as it's for xp originally

    AVG is a good choice of antivirus, so Keep that, and install spybot it's the
    best one in my opinion.

    Lee

    www.thepcwizard.org






    "Steve & Chris Clark" <> wrote in message
    news:k4mif.918$...
    > Hello everyone
    >
    > I wanted to download the beta Microsoft anti spyware program upon the
    > recommendations here but I'm running on an older computer still (Pentium
    > 2)
    > with Windows 98SE still and it still functions beautiful and does the job
    > for us.
    > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I stay
    > away from it?
    >
    > I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to have a
    > couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different things.
    >
    > What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older
    > Microsoft
    > anti spy ware? zone alarm in addition to Adaware?
    >
    > My antivirus is AVG which I've been really happy with too.
    >
    > thanks in advance
    >
    >
    lee jolly, Nov 27, 2005
    #4
  5. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mitch Guest

    In article <o9mif.3781$>, Toolman Tim
    <> wrote:

    > Nope. No older MS version. They didn't even write this one.


    Wait -- they didn't write it, but they released it in beta?
    Sounds like they are trying to get everyone else to do their testing.

    Do we know who wrote it? Anyone with a reputation?
    Was it a product before MS bought it?
    Mitch, Nov 27, 2005
    #5
  6. Steve & Chris Clark

    Toolman Tim Guest

    In news:271120050748061836%,
    Mitch spewed forth:
    > In article <o9mif.3781$>, Toolman Tim
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Nope. No older MS version. They didn't even write this one.

    >
    > Wait -- they didn't write it, but they released it in beta?
    > Sounds like they are trying to get everyone else to do their testing.
    >
    > Do we know who wrote it? Anyone with a reputation?
    > Was it a product before MS bought it?


    Very reputable - Giant AntiSpyware.

    --
    Some people are like Slinkies. Not really good for anything, but you
    still can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.
    Toolman Tim, Nov 27, 2005
    #6
  7. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:48:06 GMT, Mitch <> wrote:

    >In article <o9mif.3781$>, Toolman Tim
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >> Nope. No older MS version. They didn't even write this one.

    >
    >Wait -- they didn't write it, but they released it in beta?
    >Sounds like they are trying to get everyone else to do their testing.
    >
    >Do we know who wrote it? Anyone with a reputation?
    >Was it a product before MS bought it?


    http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/44857/44857.html

    Just FYI, on Sunbelt:

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?H1D93293C
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?N2E94293C

    (Ignore the DipSpew.)

    --
    "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
    Mara, Nov 27, 2005
    #7
  8. Steve & Chris Clark

    Guest Guest

    "Mitch" <> wrote in message
    news:271120050748061836%...
    > In article <o9mif.3781$>, Toolman Tim
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> Nope. No older MS version. They didn't even write this one.

    >
    > Wait -- they didn't write it, but they released it in beta?
    > Sounds like they are trying to get everyone else to do their testing.
    >
    > Do we know who wrote it? Anyone with a reputation?
    > Was it a product before MS bought it?



    You know that they bought it but you claim not to have a clue from whom they
    bought it? So how do you really know they bought it? Guess you can't
    Google or read Microsoft's own articles about them buying it from Giant.
    Guess you think that the Giant product was such a superb product that it
    didn't need any changes. Go visit the MSAS newsgroup and you'll see there
    were TONS of problems with *Giant's* code that Microsoft has to fix. Could
    Microsoft have taken the product off the shelf and waited until they came
    out eventually with a released version? Yep, which means all those users
    looking for freebie solutions would have to do without MSAS as a solution.
    You could *buy* the retail version of Giant's code from the version that
    Sunbelt bought and get their CounterSpy product but the malware signatures
    still come from Microsoft (who has a contractual obligation to provide the
    signatures to Sunbelt for awhile yet). Sunbelt can modify their own code
    branch to provide better detection but they aren't making the same changes
    that Microsoft is doing to qualify the product as Microsoft certified, plus
    Microsoft is developing an enterprise version.

    Since it is free, there is nothing stopping you from trialing the product.
    On some hosts, I've found it works great. On other hosts, I've found it
    impacted responsiveness of the system. But then I've also noticed similar
    effects from Prevx Home and various anti-virus programs. It depends on the
    environment in which the software is used, the expertise of the user, and
    how much time the user has to resolve problems. It's free. You lose only
    your own time to go cheap with a freebie product. If it doesn't work,
    uninstall it (or restore from a disk image to exactly get back to where you
    were before).
    Guest, Nov 27, 2005
    #8
  9. Outpost is better than ZoneAlarm and no I don't have a firewall.
    Outpost over ZoneAlarm?
    I'll try it.
    Thanks


    "Mitch" <> wrote in message
    news:271120050741036489%...
    > In article <k4mif.918$>, Steve & Chris
    > Clark <> wrote:
    >
    > > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I

    stay
    > > away from it?

    > Wel, of course. If it doesn't meet the requirements, don't use it. That
    > kind of thing isn't supposed to be flexible!
    >
    > > I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to have a
    > > couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different things.

    > Sure; people in this group also like Spybot S&D.
    >
    > > What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older

    Microsoft
    > > anti spy ware?

    > No, there is no older product, especially if the MS product is still in
    > beta.
    >
    > > zone alarm in addition to Adaware?

    > Zone Alarm is a firewall -- don't you have a firewall installed?
    > You need one -- do it now. People here seem to like Outpost best.
    Steve & Chris Clark, Nov 27, 2005
    #9
  10. Thanks very much for this.

    Thank you everyone for all the posts.
    This newsgroup is and always has been the best!
    You're all great!

    Chris


    "lee jolly" <> wrote in message
    news:nimif.7784$...
    > Your best bet is use (spybot search and destroy) microsoft antispyware

    will
    > not work properly with windows 98 as it's for xp originally
    >
    > AVG is a good choice of antivirus, so Keep that, and install spybot it's

    the
    > best one in my opinion.
    >
    > Lee
    >
    > www.thepcwizard.org
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Steve & Chris Clark" <> wrote in message
    > news:k4mif.918$...
    > > Hello everyone
    > >
    > > I wanted to download the beta Microsoft anti spyware program upon the
    > > recommendations here but I'm running on an older computer still (Pentium
    > > 2)
    > > with Windows 98SE still and it still functions beautiful and does the

    job
    > > for us.
    > > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should I

    stay
    > > away from it?
    > >
    > > I do have Adaware and it's not bad but everyone says it's best to have a
    > > couple of anti spyware programs since they catch different things.
    > >
    > > What are your thoughts or suggestions. Perhaps there's an older
    > > Microsoft
    > > anti spy ware? zone alarm in addition to Adaware?
    > >
    > > My antivirus is AVG which I've been really happy with too.
    > >
    > > thanks in advance
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
    Steve & Chris Clark, Nov 27, 2005
    #10
  11. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mitch Guest

    In article <>, Mara
    <> wrote:

    > http://www.windowsitpro.com/Article/ArticleID/44857/44857.html



    It's interesting how Microsoft tries to spin this:

    Sunbelt's claims were about future SDKs, and yet Microsoft talks only
    of satisfying them by providing signature updates -- hardly the same
    thing. I would figure signature updates were already promised from
    Giant; not allowing them to develop any future products is a whole
    other issue.

    > Microsoft... hopes that giving Sunbelt
    > access to several years of spyware signature updates will assuage
    > Sunbelt's legal concerns.

    Who are they kidding? It's 31 months -- hardly "several years".
    Don't the marketers at Microsoft think we'd know that?

    Good news, at least, that users are getting a solid product.
    Mitch, Nov 27, 2005
    #11
  12. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mitch Guest

    In article <>, <Vanguard> wrote:

    > You know that they bought it but you claim not to have a clue from whom they
    > bought it? So how do you really know they bought it?

    Well, I don't -- they could have just stolen it.
    I wasn't claiming either one -- I was just continuing the discussion,
    to hear more from people.

    > Guess you can't
    > Google or read Microsoft's own articles about them buying it from Giant.

    Sure, I could. So could we all, and just quit using newsgroups entirely.
    It's just a discussion topic. People do that.

    > Guess you think that the Giant product was such a superb product that it
    > didn't need any changes. Go visit the MSAS newsgroup and you'll see there
    > were TONS of problems with *Giant's* code that Microsoft has to fix. Could

    Aha. See? That's information contributing to the discussion.
    Comments about the Giant product so far sounded quite positive, but if
    Microsoft is really working to make it better (not just change how it
    looks) then that's reason not to release it yet.

    <snip>
    > It depends on the
    > environment in which the software is used, the expertise of the user,

    I disagree in principle -- there is no reason any of this should depend
    on the expertise of the user. In practice, that's not true yet, but it
    should be -- the industry is certainly that well developed.
    == Computers should NOT have to be a hobby. ==

    > how much time the user has to resolve problems. It's free. You lose only
    > your own time to go cheap with a freebie product. If it doesn't work,
    > uninstall it (or restore from a disk image to exactly get back to where you
    > were before).

    This is a practical attitude, and one people have to deal with in the
    uncertain area of security and protection.
    It would be better if the industry could categorize the dangers better
    and classify or rate the tools, but I guess we just haven't got quite
    enough knowledge and perspective yet.
    Mitch, Nov 27, 2005
    #12
  13. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mara Guest

    On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 18:16:42 GMT, Mitch <> wrote:

    <snip>
    >Good news, at least, that users are getting a solid product.


    I wouldn't count on that.

    http://makeashorterlink.com/?S27A6593C

    Considering that M$ themselves are spammers, and thus untrustworthy, and that
    they are buying/have bought companies well known for similar untrustworthiness,
    their product is not something I would run. I have already heard rumors of
    spyware/adware companies being exempted in their product. It would not surprise
    me in the slightest to find out it was true, and it's not something I'm willing
    to take a chance on.

    --
    "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
    Mara, Nov 27, 2005
    #13
  14. It's a bit cynical but I tend to agree with you.


    "Mara" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 18:16:42 GMT, Mitch <> wrote:
    >
    > <snip>
    > >Good news, at least, that users are getting a solid product.

    >
    > I wouldn't count on that.
    >
    > http://makeashorterlink.com/?S27A6593C
    >
    > Considering that M$ themselves are spammers, and thus untrustworthy, and

    that
    > they are buying/have bought companies well known for similar

    untrustworthiness,
    > their product is not something I would run. I have already heard rumors of
    > spyware/adware companies being exempted in their product. It would not

    surprise
    > me in the slightest to find out it was true, and it's not something I'm

    willing
    > to take a chance on.
    >
    > --
    > "No lusers were harmed in the creation of this usenet article.
    > AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY NOT!"
    > --glmar04 at twirl.mcc.ac.uk in a.s.r
    Steve & Chris Clark, Nov 27, 2005
    #14
  15. Steve & Chris Clark

    Trax Guest

    Trax, Nov 27, 2005
    #15
  16. Steve & Chris Clark

    Dave Lear Guest

    "Steve & Chris Clark" wrote in message
    news:k4mif.918$

    > I'm running on an older computer still (Pentium 2) with Windows 98SE


    > The beta states for systems with Windows 2000 and XP etc. Should
    > I stay away from it?


    Hmm... the software says it only runs on Win2000 or WinXP and you have
    WinME, i.e. you're not running an O/S that the software requires to work...
    let's think about that one.
    Dave Lear, Nov 28, 2005
    #16
  17. Re: white bumps on scrotum

    Dave Lear <> wrote:

    > I like to check myself out naked in the mirror. Do you?
    Beggiatoaceae Aichiensis Hookeri Frogvirus, Nov 28, 2005
    #17
  18. Re: getting no attention from my parents

    Dave Lear <> wrote:

    > And just what is so odd about my taking offence by the trifling defects
    > or errors of others?
    3-1-Oxy-2-Aminobenzoyl-Butylamino-Difluorophenyl-4, Nov 28, 2005
    #18
  19. Re: Fateful brain disease from years of abuse

    Dave Lear <> wrote:

    > I'm just a harmless little fuzzball.
    Dan Harwin-Corrington, Nov 28, 2005
    #19
  20. Steve & Chris Clark

    Mitch Guest

    In article <>, Trax
    <> wrote:

    > |>Good news, at least, that users are getting a solid product.
    >
    > http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1834607,00.asp
    > Microsoft antispyware isn't to be trusted.


    Ah, right -- I'd forgotten about that incident.
    Sure doesn't make a good impression of the anti-spyware tool.

    On the other hand, Microsoft has always been very direct telling
    everyone that all of their products and behaviors implicitly trust all
    of their 'partners' and any activities they would want to do-- and they
    are in bed with a lot of partners.
    So it begs the question; why does anyone consider their products safe?
    And why do so many people insist Microsoft is a good company?
    Mitch, Nov 28, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Neil

    OT: MS Anti-spyware beta

    Neil, Feb 21, 2005, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    569
    Kendal Emery
    Feb 24, 2005
  2. Lookout

    new MS Anti spyware (Beta)

    Lookout, Jan 15, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    720
  3. Alain Star

    Exclusive: Microsoft Anti-Spyware Beta

    Alain Star, Jan 6, 2005, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    17
    Views:
    823
    winged
    Jan 12, 2005
  4. Alessandro Crugnola

    Re: Exclusive: Microsoft Anti-Spyware Beta

    Alessandro Crugnola, Jan 7, 2005, in forum: Computer Security
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    421
    southpawArcher
    Jan 8, 2005
  5. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    739
Loading...

Share This Page