AskWoody.com declares Avira "unscrupulous crapware"

Who cares if its unfair? If they didnt nag there wouldnt be a hack to get rid of it.

 

Come on, we all know who's behind this apparent "mistake"

ermm.. askwoody? oh! Nice to meet ya!

 

FYI, the black screen of death is NOT caused by the latest Windows updates but by malware. PrevX posted this sensational story on their blog without carefully checking the facts or contacting Microsoft. As usual, the anti-MS news spread like fire on the net, before MS had time to look into the issue. Two days later, Microsoft said that after their investigation they found out that the problem was caused by malware and had nothing to do with the updates. Later, Prevx confirmed that and issued an apology for damaging MS' image. For more information, read this:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1575&tag=col1;post-1575

 

Are you seriously quoting a Ziff Davis publication as proof?

 

http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/48700
http://www.infosecurity-us.com/view/5665/prevx-apologizes-over-microsoft-black-screen-claim/
http://news.idg.no/cw/art.cfm?id=50BC239C-1A64-6A71-CE30818D34FB4D9C

Do a google search for some more information

 

It is better that Avira Free is nag-ware then it would be stopworkingafterthetrialexpires-ware, or, even worse, nonagbutheavybloated-ware or nonagbutlookslikedvdplayer-ware or nonagbutnotupdatingwhileuserthinkitisuptodate-ware

But it is just my 2c.

 

damn right and funny

 

Just a FYI. People that did not even have Prevx installed ended up having BOSD's also. In the end its more of a cover up then actual fact. Could you imagine what MS would have to do in damage control if they ever admitted there own updated fooked up the system ?

 

... but Avira Free is a nagbutnotupdatingwhileuserthinkitisuptodate-ware

You can find the poll here

 

They (Microsoft) have admitted as much before so why not now?

 

They learned there lesson ?

 

Updating problem was resolved some time ago.

 

Thank you, I think I should try it again

 

lol

avast! 5 GUI still looks like a media player cause some deviantartists created this:

http://xcenik.deviantart.com/art/Avast-5-For-Winamp-138325997

 

While I'm no expert in the term "Rogue Software" (I've only heard it used a few times prior to this thread), I did a quick google and the first hit was from Wikipedia:

-------Quote-------
Rogue security software is a form of computer malware that deceives or misleads users into paying for the fake or simulated removal of malware. Rogue security software, in recent years, has become a growing and serious security threat in desktop computing.
-----End Quote-----

So, using this brief (and poorly researched on my part, I admit) statement, Avira does not qualify as rogue. I've been using Avira for roughly 6 months, I hate the nag screen, but clicking on it once a day is a *very* small price to pay for a very good product.

Imagine...you get a 96 load bottle of Tide laundry detergent for free (about 15 bucks USD, give or take, I guesstimate but could be wrong). Now, for that free 15 bucks, you have to give them your email address and have to agree to receive a single ad-related email every day for a month. Would that be worth it? Would it be classified as "rogue detergent"?

While nag screens are annoying, anyone who complains about them while they are using a free product should STFU, uninstall it and find something "better".

 

And I forgot to mention...I don't know of *any* for-profit company that gives anything away for "free". You find free samples of many products, but they are merely advertisements to get you to buy their product. Free software? Might get nag screens. Free television? Put up with the much more intrusive advertisements. Radio? Ditto. You get what you *pay* for. You want free, you deal with the ads. You don't like ads, then PAY!

 

My take on this matter is we all make mistakes. Woody did acknowledge his mistake and released a correction.

Does that diminish his value as an expert? I don't think so. From what I've read his only real mistake was to take someone's word for it. It's only human nature to trust others. You would have to be really paranoid to be above that.

We are all reminded by this to check, double-check and then re-check Despite of that, even the best among us make mistakes occasionally.


To others so eager to judge and condemn in this case: let the one without faults cast the first stone. I know I can't do that.

 

"To others so eager to judge and condemn in this case: let the one without faults cast the first stone. I know I can't do that."

You just did.
Also, when one is in a position where others look to him for guidance, it is irresponsible to take a comment from one person and then publish it as gospel truth.
That is nothing more than gossip.