Microsoft AntiSpyware Beta
-
Dude... They created that market! If Windows wasn't installed by default allowing every bit of crud on the 'Net to stomp all over your average gullible consumer's system, malware wouldn't be an issue to most people. Now let them clean up the mess they've made...
You left me high and dry and changed me You lied to me and now i’m angry**...** -
Paul, I have nothing against competition, although M$... sorry Microsoft ;) has the unfair advantage to offer a free version with it's OS. Most users will go with the free version, thus they won't bother to search for alternatives that might be better. Look at Winzip. The market is now shut since it's been implemented in Windows XP! How fair is that? We'll see how it goes but I hope they won't offer a free version and they'll be decent enough to compete on the same level as others. Eventually, Microsoft will be in every software market possible and with their millions to back them up for marketing, it just won't be profitable enough to create new software for the mass market. I might be wrong but that's my point of view.
Right, I have never understood this "unfair" arguement. I agree they have used unfair practices such as threatening OEM manufacturers. That is not this arguement though. Creating an app and shipping it with your OS is not unfair. It adds value to the OS and so to the user. The very user who pays money, and everyone complains about MS pricing anyway, for the OS. Microsoft worked hard, whatever people think, to create Windows and make it a viable choice. MacOS has bundled apps since it's first release. Nobody beating down Apple's door calling them naughty people for that. Linux? It comes with apps up to your armpits (sure, most types have two or more choices but the choice is normally dead easy and biased.) And where is the line drawn between OS and app? Windows Explorer? Lots of alternatives out there which are selling copies. XPSP2 firewall? Lots of firewalls out there. CD/DVD burners? Few people use the one built-in to Windows. And suddenly I realise I can't actually think of any other apps Microsoft bundle with Windows that is any serious threat to 3rd parties. Notepad, Paint, Calc and err hmm no, none. People are very biased against Microsoft. Think iPod and iTunes. Talk about unfair, Apple force you to use iTunes if you have an iPod*, that is hardware and software lock-in. Plus they lock you into some proprietary music format! Yet it took till yesterday for someone to complain about that. MS would have been sued before they had even released it had they tried that trick. I need someone to explain to me what is unfair about Microsoft working hard to add value to their OS. If an alternative is good enough then it will be used. Internet Explorer? FireFox. Windows Media Player? Winamp (up until recently and plenty of people use Music Match or iTunes on Windows). I know Microsoft is no saint, past, present or future, but this "you can't bundle that with Windows" unfair rhetoric is nonsense. Microsoft can't stop OEMs** putting what they want on machines anymore (AFAIK) and they have gone to lengths to make Windows accept alternatives easily. No, it is not nice for 3rd parties, they have a tough nut to crack but 3rd parties have done it by making great software. Calling it unfair though is... well... a bit whiny. * I know you can/could use Music Match and there are very-lesser known alternatives but most people think iTunes+iPod and nothing else. ** Heck from what I have read it is the OEMs who are the jerks now. Charging huge amounts to have an icon on the desktop with
-
Please read my reply to you... :)
You left me high and dry and changed me You lied to me and now i’m angry**...** -
Right, I have never understood this "unfair" arguement. I agree they have used unfair practices such as threatening OEM manufacturers. That is not this arguement though. Creating an app and shipping it with your OS is not unfair. It adds value to the OS and so to the user. The very user who pays money, and everyone complains about MS pricing anyway, for the OS. Microsoft worked hard, whatever people think, to create Windows and make it a viable choice. MacOS has bundled apps since it's first release. Nobody beating down Apple's door calling them naughty people for that. Linux? It comes with apps up to your armpits (sure, most types have two or more choices but the choice is normally dead easy and biased.) And where is the line drawn between OS and app? Windows Explorer? Lots of alternatives out there which are selling copies. XPSP2 firewall? Lots of firewalls out there. CD/DVD burners? Few people use the one built-in to Windows. And suddenly I realise I can't actually think of any other apps Microsoft bundle with Windows that is any serious threat to 3rd parties. Notepad, Paint, Calc and err hmm no, none. People are very biased against Microsoft. Think iPod and iTunes. Talk about unfair, Apple force you to use iTunes if you have an iPod*, that is hardware and software lock-in. Plus they lock you into some proprietary music format! Yet it took till yesterday for someone to complain about that. MS would have been sued before they had even released it had they tried that trick. I need someone to explain to me what is unfair about Microsoft working hard to add value to their OS. If an alternative is good enough then it will be used. Internet Explorer? FireFox. Windows Media Player? Winamp (up until recently and plenty of people use Music Match or iTunes on Windows). I know Microsoft is no saint, past, present or future, but this "you can't bundle that with Windows" unfair rhetoric is nonsense. Microsoft can't stop OEMs** putting what they want on machines anymore (AFAIK) and they have gone to lengths to make Windows accept alternatives easily. No, it is not nice for 3rd parties, they have a tough nut to crack but 3rd parties have done it by making great software. Calling it unfair though is... well... a bit whiny. * I know you can/could use Music Match and there are very-lesser known alternatives but most people think iTunes+iPod and nothing else. ** Heck from what I have read it is the OEMs who are the jerks now. Charging huge amounts to have an icon on the desktop with
You have good points. Although I have nothing against Microsoft directly and I would hold the same attitude towards any company that acts the same as them. I'm not complaining about Linux or Apple because I don't use them very much and don't know their attitude as far as unfair competiting goes. I guess I'm mad because I do work in the same area as GIANT was and that there's no way to compete against Microsoft since we don't have their financial resources.
-
Microsoft have released a re-branded Giant AntiSpyware app in beta form. Seems pretty good, detected a couple of spyware apps on my machine that a recent Spybot Search and Destroy scan did not pick-up on. I used the deep-scan and it did not max out my machine, letting me carry on working in VS.NET and SQL. The download is a bit of a PITA if you choose to do the Genuine Windows authentication, which I did. Make sure you have your Windows Product-Key with you when you do (normally on the bottom of your laptop or back of your desktop or on the cover of the CD you bought.) It is also part of the Spy-Net AntiSpyware network which provides automatic signature updates, like anti-virus apps. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project South-East Asia Disaster: How you can help Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
Paul Watson wrote: The download is a bit of a PITA if you choose to do the Genuine Windows authentication, which I did. Make sure you have your Windows Product-Key with you when you do (normally on the bottom of your laptop or back of your desktop or on the cover of the CD you bought.) All I had to do was allow IE to install the activex. No product key needed. Matt Newman
Even the very best tools in the hands of an idiot will produce something of little or no value. - Chris Meech on Idiots
-
Paul Watson wrote: The download is a bit of a PITA if you choose to do the Genuine Windows authentication, which I did. Make sure you have your Windows Product-Key with you when you do (normally on the bottom of your laptop or back of your desktop or on the cover of the CD you bought.) All I had to do was allow IE to install the activex. No product key needed. Matt Newman
Even the very best tools in the hands of an idiot will produce something of little or no value. - Chris Meech on Idiots
I was using FireFox which does not support ActiveX. I don't use IE except on Windows Update and VPN intranets. regards, Paul Watson South Africa The Code Project South-East Asia Disaster: How you can help Pope Pius II said "The only prescription is more cowbell. "
-
Right, I have never understood this "unfair" arguement. I agree they have used unfair practices such as threatening OEM manufacturers. That is not this arguement though. Creating an app and shipping it with your OS is not unfair. It adds value to the OS and so to the user. The very user who pays money, and everyone complains about MS pricing anyway, for the OS. Microsoft worked hard, whatever people think, to create Windows and make it a viable choice. MacOS has bundled apps since it's first release. Nobody beating down Apple's door calling them naughty people for that. Linux? It comes with apps up to your armpits (sure, most types have two or more choices but the choice is normally dead easy and biased.) And where is the line drawn between OS and app? Windows Explorer? Lots of alternatives out there which are selling copies. XPSP2 firewall? Lots of firewalls out there. CD/DVD burners? Few people use the one built-in to Windows. And suddenly I realise I can't actually think of any other apps Microsoft bundle with Windows that is any serious threat to 3rd parties. Notepad, Paint, Calc and err hmm no, none. People are very biased against Microsoft. Think iPod and iTunes. Talk about unfair, Apple force you to use iTunes if you have an iPod*, that is hardware and software lock-in. Plus they lock you into some proprietary music format! Yet it took till yesterday for someone to complain about that. MS would have been sued before they had even released it had they tried that trick. I need someone to explain to me what is unfair about Microsoft working hard to add value to their OS. If an alternative is good enough then it will be used. Internet Explorer? FireFox. Windows Media Player? Winamp (up until recently and plenty of people use Music Match or iTunes on Windows). I know Microsoft is no saint, past, present or future, but this "you can't bundle that with Windows" unfair rhetoric is nonsense. Microsoft can't stop OEMs** putting what they want on machines anymore (AFAIK) and they have gone to lengths to make Windows accept alternatives easily. No, it is not nice for 3rd parties, they have a tough nut to crack but 3rd parties have done it by making great software. Calling it unfair though is... well... a bit whiny. * I know you can/could use Music Match and there are very-lesser known alternatives but most people think iTunes+iPod and nothing else. ** Heck from what I have read it is the OEMs who are the jerks now. Charging huge amounts to have an icon on the desktop with
-
Paul Watson wrote: two or more anti-spyware systems on your machine and to run them in series. I totally agree. And using Firefox may help, too :-D Paul Watson wrote: Did Windows crash on you today I have to say that since I run on W2K (that is for years), these days are gone :cool: Paul Watson wrote: You seem very anti-them today You can't blame me because I encourage competition, can you? :-> I have no problem with MS, except perhaps I fear its tendency towards hegemony and then its intrusion in new domains.
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck Doch seh ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
<I have no problem with MS, except perhaps I fear its tendency towards hegemony and then its intrusion in new domains. > Truly an American company. It's good to live, Josef Wainz Software Developer
-
<I have no problem with MS, except perhaps I fear its tendency towards hegemony and then its intrusion in new domains. > Truly an American company. It's good to live, Josef Wainz Software Developer
Turtle Hand wrote: Truly an American company "Truly a company" should be enough :)
Fold With Us! Sie wollen mein Herz am rechten Fleck Doch seh ich dann nach unten weg Da schlägt es links
-
Paul, I have nothing against competition, although M$... sorry Microsoft ;) has the unfair advantage to offer a free version with it's OS. Most users will go with the free version, thus they won't bother to search for alternatives that might be better. Look at Winzip. The market is now shut since it's been implemented in Windows XP! How fair is that? We'll see how it goes but I hope they won't offer a free version and they'll be decent enough to compete on the same level as others. Eventually, Microsoft will be in every software market possible and with their millions to back them up for marketing, it just won't be profitable enough to create new software for the mass market. I might be wrong but that's my point of view.
LukeV wrote: Look at Winzip. The market is now shut since it's been implemented in Windows XP! How fair is that? You are joking, right? Window XP's support for zip files is crap. I don't know anybody who uses it. Honestly. And there are free apps our there that are a lot better than Winzip anyway (e.g. IZArc). And agree 100% with Paul. MS get bashed for no reason whatsoever. As far as I am concerned, Windows Media Player is the best media player I have come across. I have used WinAMP, Real Player, MM, and a number of others. The reason I go back to Media Player.... because it is better. Plain and simple. I use FF instead of IE because I think it is better. Having a free IE didn't make me not check out the alternatives. Actually, I think it is sad that MS does not include DVD support in their OS. They should, as it's a basic thing these days. But I'm sure if they did, the would be sued to high heavens. These are all things that are basic to any other operating system and nobody goes near them. It's a joke. Regards, Brian Dela :-) Now Bloging![^]