Microsoft Security Essentials
in [Spyware]
|
From: PajaP on 30 Dec 2009 09:04 On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:52:59 -0500, Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote: >In article <a5blj59hfqb7p29pr8491hsiv10udq93ae(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- >only.co.uk.invalid says... >> MSE obviously works on a much higher percentage of systems without >> issues. The same would apply to Avira, Avast and MalwareBytes. >> Everyone's system is different. >> Does now make someone an MS shill just because they prefer an MS product >> and are not afraid to recommend it here. >> > >Microsoft didn't write MSE, it's a company they bought, so it's no more >likely to work "better" or "higher" on any computer than any other >product. I never said it would more than any other product. Those are your words. I was comparing the amount of systems it works on to those it does not. I really do not care how they acquired this or any other product and it has no relevance to this discussion. >For proof, just look at Service Packs and Updates, something >that MS does write, and how many machines are negatively impacted by >those. Irrelevant. Though I dare say the percentage of machines that are impacted negatively is far lower those that are not. >Why would you trust MS to protect your computer, with another product, >when they didn't protect it in the first place? Why would I not? Unlike yourself who chooses to slate everything MS, I choose my own experiences to make my own decisions. You are a known MS basher and as such I ignore most of what you write, which is probably a shame (but I prefer to ignore those with obvious bias).
From: PajaP on 30 Dec 2009 09:06 On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:50:38 -0500, Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> wrote: >In article <qp1lj592qhsqhc44e1edqmnuj5rutvvcoh(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- >only.co.uk.invalid says... >> >Yea, neither have I and Avira is very light on system resources so I say >> >> I took it off my system and others as it used too many system resources >> in combination with MalwareBytes. Though Avast was far worse than Avira. >> > >I've used everything on the market, Avira is light on system resources >if you get the Antivirus/Malware version, not using the one with the >firewall and such. I am sure this is correct on your system. Not on mine. MSE uses the least on mine. It is also the least intrusive.
From: Leythos on 30 Dec 2009 09:29 In article <73nmj51f89vjffjhieqm0sj5fegf4s9e33(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- only.co.uk.invalid says... > > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:52:59 -0500, Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> > wrote: > > >In article <a5blj59hfqb7p29pr8491hsiv10udq93ae(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- > >only.co.uk.invalid says... > >> MSE obviously works on a much higher percentage of systems without > >> issues. The same would apply to Avira, Avast and MalwareBytes. > >> Everyone's system is different. > >> Does now make someone an MS shill just because they prefer an MS product > >> and are not afraid to recommend it here. > >> > > > >Microsoft didn't write MSE, it's a company they bought, so it's no more > >likely to work "better" or "higher" on any computer than any other > >product. > > I never said it would more than any other product. Those are your words. > I was comparing the amount of systems it works on to those it does not. > I really do not care how they acquired this or any other product and it > has no relevance to this discussion. Yes, it does, it's very relevant - you implied that because it was from Microsoft that it would likely run on a "higher" percentage of machines with less trouble - that's not true based on many decades of experience with Microsoft and the vendors they purchase. > > >For proof, just look at Service Packs and Updates, something > >that MS does write, and how many machines are negatively impacted by > >those. > > Irrelevant. Though I dare say the percentage of machines that are > impacted negatively is far lower those that are not. Again, it is VERY relevant - it shows that MS is not building apps that are more stable or less troublesome than the non-MS vendors, and MS has the inside scoop on their OS. > >Why would you trust MS to protect your computer, with another product, > >when they didn't protect it in the first place? > > Why would I not? Unlike yourself who chooses to slate everything MS, I > choose my own experiences to make my own decisions. You are a known MS > basher and as such I ignore most of what you write, which is probably a > shame (but I prefer to ignore those with obvious bias). You're wrong about my view on MS - I make a TON of money by building enterprise MS solutions all over the country and I have 20+ MS OS machines in my home, and several Linux ones. I am not a "known MS basher" at all - I'm very honest and very realistic. I love XP and server 2003/2008 and love Win 7 (don't care for Vista). There is no BIAS on my part, but yours is clearly showing. MS has proven time and time again that they can't secure the OS platform, even with their own antimalware tools, there has never been a case to trust them to build another app to protect the OS. Comprehend what I've written exactly as I write it, don't guess that I mean something other than what I've written. -- You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that. Trust yourself. spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
From: Leythos on 30 Dec 2009 09:30 In article <sgnmj5par0m0bjq6t8deptv5l73bocqq1h(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- only.co.uk.invalid says... > > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:50:38 -0500, Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> > wrote: > > >In article <qp1lj592qhsqhc44e1edqmnuj5rutvvcoh(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- > >only.co.uk.invalid says... > >> >Yea, neither have I and Avira is very light on system resources so I say > >> > >> I took it off my system and others as it used too many system resources > >> in combination with MalwareBytes. Though Avast was far worse than Avira. > >> > > > >I've used everything on the market, Avira is light on system resources > >if you get the Antivirus/Malware version, not using the one with the > >firewall and such. > > I am sure this is correct on your system. Not on mine. MSE uses the > least on mine. It is also the least intrusive. Please describe YOUR system, CPU, Memory, Drive types/speed, available FREE resources.... Open Task Manager and tell us how much memory and CPU MSE is using on startup and then after it's settled down.... -- You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that. Trust yourself. spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address)
From: Leythos on 30 Dec 2009 09:35
In article <sgnmj5par0m0bjq6t8deptv5l73bocqq1h(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- only.co.uk.invalid says... > > On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 08:50:38 -0500, Leythos <spam999free(a)rrohio.com> > wrote: > > >In article <qp1lj592qhsqhc44e1edqmnuj5rutvvcoh(a)4ax.com>, pajap(a)news- > >only.co.uk.invalid says... > >> >Yea, neither have I and Avira is very light on system resources so I say > >> > >> I took it off my system and others as it used too many system resources > >> in combination with MalwareBytes. Though Avast was far worse than Avira. > >> > > > >I've used everything on the market, Avira is light on system resources > >if you get the Antivirus/Malware version, not using the one with the > >firewall and such. > > I am sure this is correct on your system. Not on mine. MSE uses the > least on mine. It is also the least intrusive. Oh, and since I asked you about yours, here are my specs on a simple machine: P4/3.2ghz Hyper threaded, 2GB RAM, XP Pro + SP3 and all updates, 500GB SATA 7200 RPM: After boot, after the initial boot scan, system, with Gravity and Outlook open, with Avira, Skype, Yahoo IM, Logitec Cam, Ati, VNC running in the background, 513MB of 2096MB in use, 1% CPU load, Avguard.exe using 392k, Avgnt.exe using 1.372k. -- You can't trust your best friends, your five senses, only the little voice inside you that most civilians don't even hear -- Listen to that. Trust yourself. spam999free(a)rrohio.com (remove 999 for proper email address) |