View Poll Results: Should we follow ASCs definitions of Spyware/PUPS and add NIS to the detections?

Voters
330. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, detect NIS completely!

    222 67.27%
  • Yes, but detect only some harmless files to wake up people.

    26 7.88%
  • No, please waste our donations to go through legal channels, instead of using them to fight malware.

    8 2.42%
  • None of the above.

    74 22.42%
Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 233

Thread: Either Safer Networking Ltd. or Symantec leaving the Anti Spyware Coalition...

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Check this out, if you take the "Is Windows a virus?" argument and replace the word "Windows" with "Nortons", it still fits perfectly.

    Is Nortons a virus?

    No, Nortons is not a virus. Here's what viruses do:

    They replicate quickly - okay, Nortons does that.

    Viruses use up valuable system resources, slowing down the system as they do so - okay, Nortons does that.

    Viruses will, from time to time, trash your hard disk - okay, Nortons does that too.

    Viruses are usually carried, unknown to the user, along with valuable programs and systems. Sigh... Nortons does that, too.

    Viruses will occasionally make the user suspect their system is too slow (see 2) and the user will buy new hardware. Yup, that's with Nortons, too.

    Until now it seems Nortons is a virus but there are fundamental differences:Viruses are well supported by their authors, are running on most systems, their program code is fast, compact and efficient and they tend to become more sophisticated as they mature.

    So Nortons is not a virus.

    It's a bug.

    [/end funny quote]

    I'd say that Nortons deserves to have its arse kicked. They're arrogant enough not to realise that their competitors are, performance-wise, beating them. They'd be scanners such as McAfee and PcCillin (Trend Micro) just to name two, there are more (although McAfee probably has some resource drawbacks as well). Not only that, but they seem to have little respect for the others on their side. Not on. I say either detect them completely or show how weak their virus scanner really is by creating a virus that trashes their servers, hehehe. (that suggestion is a joke, btw. That'd probably be quite unwise on your behalf)

    Yes, it's true. I AM using Nortons at the moment. But as soon as I get my arse up and buy a better, more resource efficient scanner, it's going.
    Last edited by Fire_Phoenix; 2006-10-01 at 15:24. Reason: <--- perfectionist. Minor spelling mistakes.

  2. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Ouch!


    I must renew my subscriptions in 30 days and I saw what they charge me for it.
    These virus definitions should arrive wrapped in gold, as far as the price is concerned.
    Chikago
    AMD Athlon 64 4000+/2 GB DDR SDRAM/nVidia Geforce 7800GTX/Asus 8N32-Sli deLuxe
    Ad-Aware/Spybot S&D/SpywareBlaster/Windows Defender/CCleaner/WinPatrol/NIS/NSW/Diskeeper

  3. #23
    Senior Member Tom.K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The Universe / Milky Way / Solar System / Earth / Europe / Croatia
    Posts
    735

    Default

    I`ve voted 1:Detect NIS Completely!
    Norton:Must pay
    Spybot-S&D:Free
    Norton:Big size:798 MB
    Spybot-S&D:Small size:20 MB
    Norton:Non-protected quarantines
    Spybot-S&D-Protected quarantines
    Norton:Small log info
    Spybot-S&D-Big log info
    N/A.

  4. #24
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    5

    Default NIS vs Spybot

    Spybot is a fantastic tool, make no mistake. Symantec's NIS is unable to give the end-user the level of control and options Spybot offers in dealing with and, in some cases, preventing malware.

    However, there are certain users out there that think Spybot is a replacement for real-time and on-demand detection suites such as NIS. It isn't. Mostly, it's a removal tool for after-the-fact infection cleaning.

    It would definately be inaccurate to classify NIS as malware. It's simply poorly made software, which informed users who may need the resources it notoriously gobbles-up simply will not tolerate. I won't advocate any other suites here. It's up to the user to care enough to make their own decision based on research, and unfortunately, some expensive trial and error, too. But there are far faster, as-complete or better security suites out there, and they don't take over your PC, or cost an arm and a leg. And these competitors play nice with such useful and benevolent tools as Spybot.

    Keep up the good work, and if the average internet sheep take heed to NIS's misdiagnosis, then so much the better: Their ignorance is best removed from our digital midst by the PC troubles that will come from NIS itself - as well as infections Spybot could have properly removed for them - crippling their machines and getting them off the net.
    Last edited by spirit_in_exile; 2006-10-01 at 20:35.

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Brisbane, AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    6

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Niall View Post
    In the last week I have had to do two rebuilds on computers, thanks to Symantec. My clients had downloaded and installed their new 2007 edition. Only to see their computer continuously rebooting. This problem is not new with Norton. The programme is so invasive that it loves itself and wants to take over the computer.

    The solution is after the rebuild; install Spybot S&D and AVG7 to protect yourself! This is what I recommend to my clients. I have not got a complaint yet from them.

    Sorry Symantec, I was an avid supporter and user of your products. But not any more, I feel you have crossed the line over an individualís privacy. In so far as what a person can and cannot install on their computer.
    I fully support what Niall said: The original products written for the IBM PC by Peter Norton were first class and ground breaking technology in their time. I have several of Peter's books and found him an excellent teacher - somebody who OBVIOUSLY really knew what he was doing. Unfortunately, once Symantec got hold of the Norton name, the rot well and truly set in. The Symantec suite of products are now garbage - overly invasive bloatware.

    I feel VERY sorry for Peter - having his good name and reputation totally TRASHED by the rubbish being sold by Symantec under his name

    I also recommend a combination of Sybot S&D and AVG as current "Best Practise" installation for dealing with Malware !

    Calvin.

  6. #26
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1

    Thumbs up

    ]I just joined the forum and agree with comments about NIS and Microsoft. I used NIS for several years and got disgusted with it. It was pretty difficult to root out but found that Tenebril Uninstaller did a nice job of that.
    I now use BitDefender 9.0, Webroot Spysweeper and Zone Alarm for my anti--virus and anti-malware protection and am planning to install SpyBot S&D. I have already installed it in computers of people who I help.

    As for Microsoft, I use XP Professional and will avoid the Vista bloatware as long as possible. It's then on to Mac or UBUNTU.

  7. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    13

    Default

    I've been using SB SnD since time began and would not think of powering up without it. I am on my third upgrade of NIS and am getting pretty disgusted with it. I'll ca+d NIS in a heartbeat before even considering forsaking my faithful Spybot. I think I see Bitdefender over the horizon.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5

    Default What would you advise

    Then I have a simple question: what would you people advise instead of NIS? You cannot say Spybot S&D because that works AFTER the fact, and I use it a lot and yes, I love it too. I have to have a reliable firewall and antivirus to keep nasty stuff from entering. I don't mind paying for it.
    And what shall I install instead of Norton System Works? I rely on this program to keep my computer running smoothly. I have had no need to reinstall Windows for a year now, thanks to NSW?
    Chikago
    AMD Athlon 64 4000+/2 GB DDR SDRAM/nVidia Geforce 7800GTX/Asus 8N32-Sli deLuxe
    Ad-Aware/Spybot S&D/SpywareBlaster/Windows Defender/CCleaner/WinPatrol/NIS/NSW/Diskeeper

  9. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    5

    Default Offensive

    Keep up the good work, and if the average internet sheep take heed to NIS's misdiagnosis, then so much the better: Their ignorance is best removed from our digital midst by the PC troubles that will come from NIS itself - as well as infections Spybot could have properly removed for them - crippling their machines and getting them off the net.
    I find this an offensive remark. I thought forums like these were meant to help and advise each other. If you pose like an elite group far above the "average internet sheep" then I am in the wrong place here and I will pose my question elsewhere.
    Thank you.
    Chikago
    AMD Athlon 64 4000+/2 GB DDR SDRAM/nVidia Geforce 7800GTX/Asus 8N32-Sli deLuxe
    Ad-Aware/Spybot S&D/SpywareBlaster/Windows Defender/CCleaner/WinPatrol/NIS/NSW/Diskeeper

  10. #30
    Member of Team Spybot PepiMK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Planet Earth
    Posts
    3,571

    Default

    I agree with Chikago - while it is true that using computers especially connected to the Internet requires some kind of responsibility, the goal has to be to educate those users who're not aware of the risks, not to expel them from online life.

    I do also about Norton products past. Norton Commander is something I still use - in the clone version of Midnight Commander - in everydays work, and couldn't do without it.

    After just having read the PC World article, I want to repeat one important thing that's often pushed back in discussions: warning about existing incompatibilities is a very important thing, since it helps users to understand the situation better when problems arise. We are just complaining about incompatibility warnings when they cannot be proven, and there don't even exist the smallest protocol of them on Symantecs side.

    Regarding the definition - Spyware or Potentially Unwanted Technology - that's how the ASC defines software that reduces system security.

    By the way, now that the harm is done and any printed box of NIS will show this warning for the next 12 months, Symantec of course said "lets continue discussions again".
    Just remember, love is life, and hate is living death.
    Treat your life for what it's worth, and live for every breath
    (Black Sabbath: A National Acrobat)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •