microsoft.public.security.virus Google Group

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

boaterd...@hot.mail.co.uk (~BD~) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 01:37:45 UT

I wish you'd just accept my questions for what they are. I'm *not*
trolling! I accept that my memory isn't quite what it was!
OK - if you told me before that you use Avira - fine. But isn't that
just anti-virus? I haven't looked for a while. What about all the other
malware that is *not* a virus?

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

dlipman~nosp...@verizon.net (David H. Lipman) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:08:57 UT

They didn't. they bought the GeCAD RAV engine and have incorporated in all their AV
software (MSE, MRT and OneCare) and I was recently told that it is "evolved" over the past
7 years.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

erra...@nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:02:46 UT

Historically, they have both been good. I suppose their popularity is
much of the reason that they are attacked.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

erra...@nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 00:00:08 UT

Microsoft is perfectly capable of purchasing the necessary technology to
have themselves a bite of the antimalware pie.
You don't really think that they build this stuff from the ground up all
by themselves do you?
Yes, I know, given enough time they will probably screw things up. I
think they have a chance to compete because more and more it is coming

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

dlipman~nosp...@verizon.net (David H. Lipman) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:33:42 UT

You'd be surprised at all the malware I see specifically targeting Kaspersky and Avira.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

spam999f...@rrohio.com (Leythos) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:22:19 UT

In article <uG97hHIyKHA.5...@TK2MSFTNGP05 .phx.gbl>, erratic
@nomail.afraid.org says...
The important question is: Why would you trust Microsoft to protect the
computer from malware when they can't even secure ANY OS platform USED
BY NORMAL PEOPLE?

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

erra...@nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 23:05:46 UT

I don't know. I haven't tried MSE. MSE certainly seems to have potential
(considering the Microsoft userbase communication aspect), but you can
bet it will soon become the most targeted by anti-antimalware malware.
Just as IE suffered through the security experts mantra of "alternative
browser" largely because of it being targeted, MSE may be similarly

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

spam999f...@rrohio.com (Leythos) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:25:03 UT

In article <4OqdnTkd0uHPvTjWnZ2dnUVZ8kmdn ...@bt.com>,
BoaterD...@hot.mail.co.uk says...
All of my computers as well as family and friends, and even clients,
have started moving to Avira from Symantec End Point Protection
products.
You already know this BD, stop trolling.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

boaterd...@hot.mail.co.uk (~BD~) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:17:50 UT

~BD~ wrote:
If you were going to chose .....
Hey! Here's the missing 'o' for choose!
*o*

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

boaterd...@hot.mail.co.uk (~BD~) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 22:12:00 UT

You are correct, of course. I've tried both ways. ;)
My current integrated audio system is superb (albeit I expect my hearing
is no longer as good as once it was!)
If you were going to chose separate protection elements for use against
today's threats, FTR - which would *you* recommend as likely to provide

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

erra...@nomail.afraid.org (FromTheRafters) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 20:47:15 UT

I often use an audiophile's analogy - I prefer a component system to an
integrated system because that way I can get the amplifier I want with
the preamp/graphic equalizer I want, and with the tuner, speakers,
etc...
If I buy an integrated system I am stuck with whatever components come
with it even if some of them are lacking quality in some respect.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

boaterd...@hot.mail.co.uk (~BD~) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:21:53 UT

Should we assume that you have read at all the links posted by 'Johnw'?
..... one of which says:-
Quote:
"Anti-malware testing group AV-Comparatives.org not only gave Microsoft
Security Essentials a top rating for malware removal, but now they've
given it their best ranking in their performance test as well.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

spam999f...@rrohio.com (Leythos) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 11:09:10 UT

In article <ux#d058xKHA.3...@TK2MSFTNGP06 .phx.gbl>, Joseph@ no spam
says...
I have seen nothing to give me reason to believe that MS can protect
their OS any better than they cold before - MSE does not appear to be
the best solution.

Re: Microsoft Security Essentials.

jos...@nospam (Joseph) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 01:40:58 UT

And that's why I was considering MSE, to replace 3 programs with 1. After
reading the replies and checking the links provided I'll go ahead and
install MSE to simplify my PC.
Thanks for your comments folks.

Re: NIS 2010 Full system scan taking 6 hours

.boaterd...@hotmail.co.uk (~BD~) — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 14:43:02 UT

Which information on the site do you dispute?
[link]
No one likes a sluggish computer. So we designed the Norton products to
be fast and light so they will not slow you down or get on your way.
60% Better Overall Performance
How do you measure performance? Passmark Software found 16 different