Date
1 - 15 of 15
antivirus / i use a v g
|
Richard Kuzma
I use avg and it works pretty good for me |
|
|
|
Angela Delicata
AVG is the worst I have ever used.
Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: I use avg and it works pretty good for me --- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
|
|
|
Arlene
Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
inaccisable. -----Original Message-----
From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angela Delicata Sent: July-01-16 10:18 AM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g AVG is the worst I have ever used. Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: I use avg and it works pretty good for me --- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
|
|
|
Brian's Mail list account
Yes seems to slow things down and keeps wanting to add stuff you don't need. its bcome bloatware.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Angela Delicata" <angeladelicata@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2016 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g AVG is the worst I have ever used. Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: I use avg and it works pretty good for me --- Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
|
|
|
Pauline Smith <paulinesmithh@...>
I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote:
Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very |
|
|
|
Arlene
Hi, You can use it or defender. You have to run one or the other. Cause they
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
both are the same. So, if you do end up with tem. Just use defender. -----Original Message-----
From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Pauline Smith Sent: July-02-16 3:51 PM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got veryantivirus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
|
|
|
Gene
How do all the people who say it works fine for me
know. You don't know if you only scan with the program you are
using. Saying it works fine for me means nothing. I could install
the worst antimalware program in existence and, if it is accessible, I could
scan my system regularly. No matter how poor a job it did, if it indicates
that my machine is free of malware, I could then write that it does a good
job. This is classic circular reasoning. The only way to know if a
program is protecting you reasonably well, aside from reading reliable
reviews, is to have something you know is good scan your computer such as
an on line scanner or more than one. Such comments as MSEe works fine for
me are meaningless unless we know what they are based on. MSEE is
considered by many knowledgeable computer advisors to be a substandard
program. Is it good enough to protect people from the threats they are
likely to run into? I don't know but if you are considering using it, you
should know that it scores very low in detection tests, or it did last I saw
anything about this six months or a year ago. those interested can check
to see what the current situation is. I doubt it's changed much.
.
You cannot make an informed decision based on
comments such as it works well for me. What does that mean and how are
people determining that it works well for them.
The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably
accessible when I tried it awhile ago. I don't know what the current state
of the program is. People are discussing various programs and no one, to
my recollection is giving any meaningful evaluations of how the programs work
such as from properly done reviews or based on what their program finds compared
to on line scanners and malware bytes.
Without such discussions, you may be able to get a
good idea of the quality of various programs users consider accessible enough to
use by doing searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For
example, if AVG is said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google
search for AVG review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you
don't know what sites are reputable, asking here may get you information.
the information from these sorts of list discussions may help you know which
programs are accessible. But such list discussions, in my
experience, seldom give any or hardly any information about the quality of
such programs that can be evaluated in a meaningful way.
Gene ----- Original Message -----
From: Pauline Smith
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM
Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: > Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very > inaccisable. > > -----Original Message----- > From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angela > Delicata > Sent: July-01-16 10:18 AM > To: nvda@nvda.groups.io > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > AVG is the worst I have ever used. > > > Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: > >> I use avg and it works pretty good for me >> >> > > --- > Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast antivirus. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > |
|
|
|
Sophos Home can be a good option. My latest runs proved it to be accessible with NVDA. It's web-based control panel, might not be the best in the world in terms of accessibility, but at least I can turn stuff on and off.
|
|
|
|
Brian's Mail list account
Windows 10 seems to have msse embedded with windows Defender,thoughI'm stilltrying to figure out how to get a tray icon to let meknow ifall iswell.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Pauline Smith" <paulinesmithh@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 11:51 PM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. |
|
|
|
Brian's Mail list account
OK well I think that if you did get something nasty it would show itself in other ways. However I'd also like to find something I can put on a stick and shove in, having updated it on another machine and run a manual scan for confidence sake. Does anyone know of such a program?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 12:45 AM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g How do all the people who say it works fine for me know. You don't know if you only scan with the program you are using. Saying it works fine for me means nothing. I could install the worst antimalware program in existence and, if it is accessible, I could scan my system regularly. No matter how poor a job it did, if it indicates that my machine is free of malware, I could then write that it does a good job. This is classic circular reasoning. The only way to know if a program is protecting you reasonably well, aside from reading reliable reviews, is to have something you know is good scan your computer such as an on line scanner or more than one. Such comments as MSEe works fine for me are meaningless unless we know what they are based on. MSEE is considered by many knowledgeable computer advisors to be a substandard program. Is it good enough to protect people from the threats they are likely to run into? I don't know but if you are considering using it, you should know that it scores very low in detection tests, or it did last I saw anything about this six months or a year ago. those interested can check to see what the current situation is. I doubt it's changed much. . You cannot make an informed decision based on comments such as it works well for me. What does that mean and how are people determining that it works well for them. The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably accessible when I tried it awhile ago. I don't know what the current state of the program is. People are discussing various programs and no one, to my recollection is giving any meaningful evaluations of how the programs work such as from properly done reviews or based on what their program finds compared to on line scanners and malware bytes. Without such discussions, you may be able to get a good idea of the quality of various programs users consider accessible enough to use by doing searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For example, if AVG is said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google search for AVG review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you don't know what sites are reputable, asking here may get you information. the information from these sorts of list discussions may help you know which programs are accessible. But such list discussions, in my experience, seldom give any or hardly any information about the quality of such programs that can be evaluated in a meaningful way. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Pauline Smith Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very |
|
|
|
Gene
The whole point of well designed malware is that it
runs without causing any unusual behaviors to alert the user that there may be a
problem. You can't assume that no odd behaviors means no infections.
often, you do not have any such behaviors.
Gene ----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 7:56 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g other ways. However I'd also like to find something I can put on a stick and shove in, having updated it on another machine and run a manual scan for confidence sake. Does anyone know of such a program? Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 12:45 AM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g How do all the people who say it works fine for me know. You don't know if you only scan with the program you are using. Saying it works fine for me means nothing. I could install the worst antimalware program in existence and, if it is accessible, I could scan my system regularly. No matter how poor a job it did, if it indicates that my machine is free of malware, I could then write that it does a good job. This is classic circular reasoning. The only way to know if a program is protecting you reasonably well, aside from reading reliable reviews, is to have something you know is good scan your computer such as an on line scanner or more than one. Such comments as MSEe works fine for me are meaningless unless we know what they are based on. MSEE is considered by many knowledgeable computer advisors to be a substandard program. Is it good enough to protect people from the threats they are likely to run into? I don't know but if you are considering using it, you should know that it scores very low in detection tests, or it did last I saw anything about this six months or a year ago. those interested can check to see what the current situation is. I doubt it's changed much. . You cannot make an informed decision based on comments such as it works well for me. What does that mean and how are people determining that it works well for them. The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably accessible when I tried it awhile ago. I don't know what the current state of the program is. People are discussing various programs and no one, to my recollection is giving any meaningful evaluations of how the programs work such as from properly done reviews or based on what their program finds compared to on line scanners and malware bytes. Without such discussions, you may be able to get a good idea of the quality of various programs users consider accessible enough to use by doing searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For example, if AVG is said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google search for AVG review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you don't know what sites are reputable, asking here may get you information. the information from these sorts of list discussions may help you know which programs are accessible. But such list discussions, in my experience, seldom give any or hardly any information about the quality of such programs that can be evaluated in a meaningful way. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Pauline Smith Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: > Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very > inaccisable. > > -----Original Message----- > From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angela > Delicata > Sent: July-01-16 10:18 AM > To: nvda@nvda.groups.io > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > AVG is the worst I have ever used. > > > Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: > >> I use avg and it works pretty good for me >> >> > > --- > Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast > antivirus. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > |
|
|
|
Brian's Mail list account
The point is though that many anti viruses do not see some infections, its always been the case and presumably as the arms race continues, always will be. I'm just more pragmatic and realistic about such things these days. Half the problem is where you go on the web and how good a firewall is.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message -----
From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 2:13 PM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g The whole point of well designed malware is that it runs without causing any unusual behaviors to alert the user that there may be a problem. You can't assume that no odd behaviors means no infections. often, you do not have any such behaviors. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian's Mail list account Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 7:56 AM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g OK well I think that if you did get something nasty it would show itself in other ways. However I'd also like to find something I can put on a stick and shove in, having updated it on another machine and run a manual scan for confidence sake. Does anyone know of such a program? Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 12:45 AM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g How do all the people who say it works fine for me know. You don't know if you only scan with the program you are using. Saying it works fine for me means nothing. I could install the worst antimalware program in existence and, if it is accessible, I could scan my system regularly. No matter how poor a job it did, if it indicates that my machine is free of malware, I could then write that it does a good job. This is classic circular reasoning. The only way to know if a program is protecting you reasonably well, aside from reading reliable reviews, is to have something you know is good scan your computer such as an on line scanner or more than one. Such comments as MSEe works fine for me are meaningless unless we know what they are based on. MSEE is considered by many knowledgeable computer advisors to be a substandard program. Is it good enough to protect people from the threats they are likely to run into? I don't know but if you are considering using it, you should know that it scores very low in detection tests, or it did last I saw anything about this six months or a year ago. those interested can check to see what the current situation is. I doubt it's changed much. . You cannot make an informed decision based on comments such as it works well for me. What does that mean and how are people determining that it works well for them. The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably accessible when I tried it awhile ago. I don't know what the current state of the program is. People are discussing various programs and no one, to my recollection is giving any meaningful evaluations of how the programs work such as from properly done reviews or based on what their program finds compared to on line scanners and malware bytes. Without such discussions, you may be able to get a good idea of the quality of various programs users consider accessible enough to use by doing searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For example, if AVG is said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google search for AVG review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you don't know what sites are reputable, asking here may get you information. the information from these sorts of list discussions may help you know which programs are accessible. But such list discussions, in my experience, seldom give any or hardly any information about the quality of such programs that can be evaluated in a meaningful way. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Pauline Smith Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very |
|
|
|
Gene
But if you use a better antimalware program or
programs, you will be less likely to be infected when you come across a
malicious web site or do something else that may put you in danger. Of
course, you can reduce your chances of being infected by following good
protective behaviors. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't run good
protective programs.
I'm not sure what you are saying. The fact
that no programs know about all malware doesn't mean that you simply adopt an I
don't care much which program I run attitude. It's easy for a lot of
criminals to break into houses. Does that mean you buy the cheapest locks
you can find because many criminals can easily bypass locks? You never
know when a site you use regularly may be hacked and become dangerous, even if
only for a number of hours or a day. As careful as I am, and I almost
never make such mistakes, I followed a link in an e-mail once because I wasn't
paying close attention to what I was doing for a moment. My antivirus
program stopped the site from downloading malware to my computer.
Gene ----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2016 4:11 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g always been the case and presumably as the arms race continues, always will be. I'm just more pragmatic and realistic about such things these days. Half the problem is where you go on the web and how good a firewall is. Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 2:13 PM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g The whole point of well designed malware is that it runs without causing any unusual behaviors to alert the user that there may be a problem. You can't assume that no odd behaviors means no infections. often, you do not have any such behaviors. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian's Mail list account Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 7:56 AM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g OK well I think that if you did get something nasty it would show itself in other ways. However I'd also like to find something I can put on a stick and shove in, having updated it on another machine and run a manual scan for confidence sake. Does anyone know of such a program? Brian bglists@... Sent via blueyonder. Please address personal email to:- briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' in the display name field. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 12:45 AM Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g How do all the people who say it works fine for me know. You don't know if you only scan with the program you are using. Saying it works fine for me means nothing. I could install the worst antimalware program in existence and, if it is accessible, I could scan my system regularly. No matter how poor a job it did, if it indicates that my machine is free of malware, I could then write that it does a good job. This is classic circular reasoning. The only way to know if a program is protecting you reasonably well, aside from reading reliable reviews, is to have something you know is good scan your computer such as an on line scanner or more than one. Such comments as MSEe works fine for me are meaningless unless we know what they are based on. MSEE is considered by many knowledgeable computer advisors to be a substandard program. Is it good enough to protect people from the threats they are likely to run into? I don't know but if you are considering using it, you should know that it scores very low in detection tests, or it did last I saw anything about this six months or a year ago. those interested can check to see what the current situation is. I doubt it's changed much. . You cannot make an informed decision based on comments such as it works well for me. What does that mean and how are people determining that it works well for them. The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably accessible when I tried it awhile ago. I don't know what the current state of the program is. People are discussing various programs and no one, to my recollection is giving any meaningful evaluations of how the programs work such as from properly done reviews or based on what their program finds compared to on line scanners and malware bytes. Without such discussions, you may be able to get a good idea of the quality of various programs users consider accessible enough to use by doing searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For example, if AVG is said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google search for AVG review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you don't know what sites are reputable, asking here may get you information. the information from these sorts of list discussions may help you know which programs are accessible. But such list discussions, in my experience, seldom give any or hardly any information about the quality of such programs that can be evaluated in a meaningful way. Gene ----- Original Message ----- From: Pauline Smith Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM To: nvda@nvda.groups.io Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. Pauline On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: > Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very > inaccisable. > > -----Original Message----- > From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of Angela > Delicata > Sent: July-01-16 10:18 AM > To: nvda@nvda.groups.io > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > AVG is the worst I have ever used. > > > Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: > >> I use avg and it works pretty good for me >> >> > > --- > Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast > antivirus. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > > > > > > > |
|
|
|
I agree, not everything is perfect and the biggest can get targeted, norton was broken into recently.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Ok, so my main concern and reason I don't exactly run anything that strong are the horror stories I have heard. For myself, I got a good security toolbar that blocked just about everything. It worked till I wanted to open a new window for java programming and it wouldn't work. It wouldn't cleanly uninstall either on all the systems I used it on. Another time I got an antispam malware program but its installer/uninstall was broken and wouldn't run. I have had also security programs that went nuts and dissallowed critical windows files. The only way to fix this was a full reformat of all systems and the reformat made everything better again. I have had friends with avera and other programs that have had screen readers and other files flagged as false positives. When I worked with double extention files for linux programming at university, I had great trouble accessing them. Finally with all the remote family systems I have I really need something low maintainance something I can mostly trust. I don't want to have to allow every address through it, I don't want issues all day long. In the old days when I owned full blown security suites, norton etc, the first thing I did was shut down most of them because they hogged memmory. And even when I had the systems to handle them right, II spent half the time more than 4 hours a day trying to get them to work with different programs. About 2 hours after that using the system, and at least another hour solving crashes with them. Then there were user issues. If anything changed I would have to change them some what. Every couple weeks to a month they potentially screwed up, and would require a reformat to make things work as they should. As long as a user didn't ever need to enter them they were fine, the problem was they never stayed fine for long. While things have improved, I don't trust security or to more of a point complex software to any true extent. After 6 years of reformats to make sure windows loaded and with my remotes coming, msse came along and to be honest its really cut down on my time. So its shit, compaired to the hell I had to go through I really couldn't care less. True I have to handle the occasional careless user or program breakage but in my case its better than trying to handle things. Just last year I had to handle a system full of junk, errors, and what the user said was malware and system dammage. THe junk was squashed, the malware was debugged. The dammage was fixed. That took a couple hours to handle. THere were updates to do and that took another hour. It took me 5 days to remove all the security software and put something I could control back in. And that was with me trying to make it work. If I had more time I would just reformat which always fixes everything and load a standard configuration. Every system I maintain has this treatment done to it. So in most case the config is the same and this config has continued to work. Now I do use where I can passive protections to but somewhere down the road my trust of advanced stuff really slipped from me. So what would I have to have to change? 1. a bit of malware so serious I would have no choice to reformat every week and babysit with the suites but it would have to be worse than norton, mcafee, jaws, symantech, a computer with a overheated cpu, jammed fan, failing hard drive and bad ram chips before that would ever happen. Importantly, I need something that is effective enough that it will kill the bad guys but will not cause me false alarm troubles to often. I need something that in most cases I can think of in my sleep and process in a half sleep state should I need to. I need something that is accessible and most importantly something I can say to people its free or low cost and it will stay for a long period and won't ever need to be removed at least for a while. Msse prevides most of what I want. I almost never need to configure it let alone babysit. False alarms are minimal. It is accessible and I can handle it in my sleep. Also its interface hardly changes and thats another thing I have issue with from time to time. Fact is I am not convinced that if I change to something else it won't bite me in the backside down the road and just be stupid about itself. I have changed to many times about 5 times in about 6 years. On 4/07/2016 9:11 p.m., Brian's Mail list account wrote:
The point is though that many anti viruses do not see some infections, |
|
|
|
Gene
I doubt very much that what you are describing is
typical other than some false positives. If antimalware programs were
generally as destructive and terrible as you describe, they would have a
terrible reputation and no one would use them.
If a screen-reader has some files seen as false
positives, then set the antimalware program to exclude the screen-reader from
being scanned by the program.
I don't think your experiences are at all
representative other than, as I said, some false positives.
Gene ----- Original Message -----
norton was broken into recently. Ok, so my main concern and reason I don't exactly run anything that strong are the horror stories I have heard. For myself, I got a good security toolbar that blocked just about everything. It worked till I wanted to open a new window for java programming and it wouldn't work. It wouldn't cleanly uninstall either on all the systems I used it on. Another time I got an antispam malware program but its installer/uninstall was broken and wouldn't run. I have had also security programs that went nuts and dissallowed critical windows files. The only way to fix this was a full reformat of all systems and the reformat made everything better again. I have had friends with avera and other programs that have had screen readers and other files flagged as false positives. When I worked with double extention files for linux programming at university, I had great trouble accessing them. Finally with all the remote family systems I have I really need something low maintainance something I can mostly trust. I don't want to have to allow every address through it, I don't want issues all day long. In the old days when I owned full blown security suites, norton etc, the first thing I did was shut down most of them because they hogged memmory. And even when I had the systems to handle them right, II spent half the time more than 4 hours a day trying to get them to work with different programs. About 2 hours after that using the system, and at least another hour solving crashes with them. Then there were user issues. If anything changed I would have to change them some what. Every couple weeks to a month they potentially screwed up, and would require a reformat to make things work as they should. As long as a user didn't ever need to enter them they were fine, the problem was they never stayed fine for long. While things have improved, I don't trust security or to more of a point complex software to any true extent. After 6 years of reformats to make sure windows loaded and with my remotes coming, msse came along and to be honest its really cut down on my time. So its shit, compaired to the hell I had to go through I really couldn't care less. True I have to handle the occasional careless user or program breakage but in my case its better than trying to handle things. Just last year I had to handle a system full of junk, errors, and what the user said was malware and system dammage. THe junk was squashed, the malware was debugged. The dammage was fixed. That took a couple hours to handle. THere were updates to do and that took another hour. It took me 5 days to remove all the security software and put something I could control back in. And that was with me trying to make it work. If I had more time I would just reformat which always fixes everything and load a standard configuration. Every system I maintain has this treatment done to it. So in most case the config is the same and this config has continued to work. Now I do use where I can passive protections to but somewhere down the road my trust of advanced stuff really slipped from me. So what would I have to have to change? 1. a bit of malware so serious I would have no choice to reformat every week and babysit with the suites but it would have to be worse than norton, mcafee, jaws, symantech, a computer with a overheated cpu, jammed fan, failing hard drive and bad ram chips before that would ever happen. Importantly, I need something that is effective enough that it will kill the bad guys but will not cause me false alarm troubles to often. I need something that in most cases I can think of in my sleep and process in a half sleep state should I need to. I need something that is accessible and most importantly something I can say to people its free or low cost and it will stay for a long period and won't ever need to be removed at least for a while. Msse prevides most of what I want. I almost never need to configure it let alone babysit. False alarms are minimal. It is accessible and I can handle it in my sleep. Also its interface hardly changes and thats another thing I have issue with from time to time. Fact is I am not convinced that if I change to something else it won't bite me in the backside down the road and just be stupid about itself. I have changed to many times about 5 times in about 6 years. On 4/07/2016 9:11 p.m., Brian's Mail list account wrote: > The point is though that many anti viruses do not see some infections, > its always been the case and presumably as the arms race continues, > always will be. I'm just more pragmatic and realistic about such things > these days. Half the problem is where you go on the web and how good a > firewall is. > Brian > > bglists@... > Sent via blueyonder. > Please address personal email to:- > briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' > in the display name field. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> > To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> > Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 2:13 PM > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > > The whole point of well designed malware is that it runs without causing > any unusual behaviors to alert the user that there may be a problem. > You can't assume that no odd behaviors means no infections. often, you > do not have any such behaviors. > > Gene > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Brian's Mail list account > Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 7:56 AM > To: nvda@nvda.groups.io > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > > OK well I think that if you did get something nasty it would show itself in > other ways. However I'd also like to find something I can put on a stick > and > shove in, having updated it on another machine and run a manual scan for > confidence sake. Does anyone know of such a program? > Brian > > bglists@... > Sent via blueyonder. > Please address personal email to:- > briang1@..., putting 'Brian Gaff' > in the display name field. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gene" <gsasner@...> > To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io> > Sent: Sunday, July 03, 2016 12:45 AM > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > > How do all the people who say it works fine for me know. You don't know if > you only scan with the program you are using. Saying it works fine for me > means nothing. I could install the worst antimalware program in existence > and, if it is accessible, I could scan my system regularly. No matter how > poor a job it did, if it indicates that my machine is free of malware, I > could then write that it does a good job. This is classic circular > reasoning. The only way to know if a program is protecting you reasonably > well, aside from reading reliable reviews, is to have something you know is > good scan your computer such as an on line scanner or more than one. Such > comments as MSEe works fine for me are meaningless unless we know what they > are based on. MSEE is considered by many knowledgeable computer > advisors to > be a substandard program. Is it good enough to protect people from the > threats they are likely to run into? I don't know but if you are > considering using it, you should know that it scores very low in detection > tests, or it did last I saw anything about this six months or a year ago. > those interested can check to see what the current situation is. I doubt > it's changed much. . > > You cannot make an informed decision based on comments such as it works > well > for me. What does that mean and how are people determining that it works > well for them. > > The Essett online scanner was quite reasonably accessible when I tried it > awhile ago. I don't know what the current state of the program is. People > are discussing various programs and no one, to my recollection is giving > any > meaningful evaluations of how the programs work such as from properly done > reviews or based on what their program finds compared to on line scanners > and malware bytes. > > Without such discussions, you may be able to get a good idea of the quality > of various programs users consider accessible enough to use by doing > searches for reviews of specific names of programs. For example, if AVG is > said to work well and be accessible by a user, do a Google search for AVG > review. Look at what reputable sites say. If you don't know what sites > are > reputable, asking here may get you information. the information from these > sorts of list discussions may help you know which programs are accessible. > But such list discussions, in my experience, seldom give any or hardly any > information about the quality of such programs that can be evaluated in a > meaningful way. > > Gene > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Pauline Smith > Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2016 5:51 PM > To: nvda@nvda.groups.io > Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g > > > I also use MSE. It works fine for me. I'm not sure if I will have to > use a different program once Windows 10 is installed. > > > Pauline > > > > On 7/1/2016 1:41 PM, Arlene wrote: >> Hi, I use mse it works fine for me. I did use avg and it got very >> inaccisable. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: nvda@nvda.groups.io [mailto:nvda@nvda.groups.io] On Behalf Of >> Angela >> Delicata >> Sent: July-01-16 10:18 AM >> To: nvda@nvda.groups.io >> Subject: Re: [nvda] antivirus / i use a v g >> >> AVG is the worst I have ever used. >> >> >> Il 01/07/2016 19:11, Richard Kuzma via Groups.io ha scritto: >> >>> I use avg and it works pretty good for me >>> >>> >> >> --- >> Questa e-mail è stata controllata per individuare virus con Avast >> antivirus. >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > > > > > > > . > |
|
|