Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by Taliscicero, Oct 29, 2013.
MBAM Pro as on-demand with scheduled scanning and updating is just excellent for me.
I have no problems so far.
I bought a lifetime license almost the first day they were offered. I have never had any reason for regrets.
Yesterday I posted a question regarding PUP FP? I received a prompt answer and today I ran a scan on my laptop, posted the log, and received a reply in a few minutes.
I consider the response I have received to be extraordinary, and am very pleased.
I have always had high confidence in MBAM, and would not be without it. If I were to go to an AV that would not be compatible with MBAM the AV would have to go.
same here JerryM
That's the way MBAM Pro is set up on my computer, never had a problem with it.
edit: This thread reminded me what a good program MBAM is, so I turned on its real-time protection to see how it does with WSA, and of course smooth as can be.
One of the best software products available today-period!
To back on topic, based on the links provided here, there doesn't seem to be a way for MBAM team to fix this issue within the program itself?
I guess I'm not important, neither is the other guy, difference is my problem actually causes me to not be able to use the program. I also have the problem with scanning, so it's not my fault, and anyone telling me my hardware is to blame drank the cool aid. If you install Windows and had a similar problem, as long as your drivers are compatible no one at windows should tell you to get a new computer and it's your own fault. I know malwarebytes has a giant love fest community around it, but don't tell me I'm wrong because I'm not a devoted fan boy. sure I use the program because it's good, but I'm not gonna sacrifice my left thumb to appease it. I just want what any consumer wants, a product that works. I now understand malwarebytes policy on the little guy not being as important, but to me personally I don't see why in a year and a half the problem still exists.
come at me fan boys.
No one said it was your fault and yes it this is a hardware + OS dependent corner case issue. We were able to replicate it in house only ones out of every computer in the company we tried but the fix is a hell of a lot harder than you have convinced yourself it is. Why on earth would we not just fix it if it was easy?
I want you to picture something if you will. What would MBAM (a very small project compared to your traditional AVs) be like if we dropped everything and took on the laundry list of corner cases and infrequent requests that we have recorded? I know that because this is your issue that it feels like the only issue but trust me, there are other corner cases and a mountain of requests that only a handful of people want. I can tell you that you would not be saying "I use the program because it's good", you would be angry at how shiny our terrible security application was.
We are working hard on something new and this is where our focus is for now. I wish I had a better answer for you than to sit tight for a bit but that is the way it is.
Good Morning! Taliscicero...I admire your stance...on your problem! If there's a Wrong...Find a Solution. I recently ran into a somewhat similar attitude...that being, losing your Commitment and Focus to your customer...regardless of the situation! Any Company regardless of it's size...must keep it's Customer Focus intact...because an unsatisfied customer can and will unleash a toll on it's bottom line. This is not meant to be directed at Malwarebytes...but simply addresses the attitude...if you perceive a wrong...regardless of Popular Opinion...Be True too yourself...and Right That Wrong! Sincerely...Securon
Nosirrah, no one said that software development is easy. But being able to reproduce a bug (even if it's only on one computer) and then not fixing it strikes me as a wrong decision... You never know what other problems that bug hides, and that might affect other users as well (I'm speaking from my personal experience as programmer, not just as a user).
From my experience the only thing the Pro version does is block sites based on a blacklist. My preference would be to run MBAM on demand and use a DNS service like Norton DNS to achieve pretty much the same thing with no performance hit or compatibility issues.
If we could fix this corner case without stopping development of our new version (that has a new code base that may very well fix this and many other issues) don't you think that we would?
Lets put this into a car analogy. Lets say we were about to replace a car but someone wanted us to take the resources for the new car and instead use them to rebuild the engine in the old car so that it could have 5 more HP which is much less HP than the new car would have. Does that make any sense?
We are not mad at you and are not ignoring you. We just need you to understand that our hands our tied here. We have all hands on deck for the new version because this is how we best service our user base as a whole.
That is not at all how it works. We block IP connection incoming and outgoing from our block list, site blocking is no where near as strong as countless new domains appear every day on known bad IPs. Blocking the actual IP proactively defends against these new domains. This BTW is also getting a lot more sophisticated in the future and is one of the reasons we cant drop what we are working on currently.
From my personal experience with all sorts of products, be it software or automobiles or any of a hundred different items, it's always tough for a consumer to hear an owner or company rep say, "We understand", and then not fix the issue.
Often, the company rep will begin to cite statistics, along the lines of what percentage of people are affected by the problem you are experiencing. That always frosts me.
The conversation goes, "But sir, you have to realize, fewer than 1% of our customers have had this happen to them".
To which I reply, "But it has happened 100% of the time to me".
Companies are always ready to share shiny pictures and stunning feature details, and promote "service after the sale", but few of them truly take care of every disgruntled customer. The companies that do help everyone grow a raving fan base, rather than a mostly-satisfied customer base. For obvious reasons, the raving fan base companies are few and far between. The mostly satisfied customer base companies are plentiful, just like their excuses for not fixing all the problems.
And so the consumer is left dangling. The satisfied customers, who basically never experienced any issues, claim the company is doing the best they can. But the people who paid for a product or service and then didn't get what they paid for, well, they need resolution.
Money back guarantees are always the very best remedy for companies who can't (often won't) fix every problem.
Just politely and sincerely offer the customer a full refund.
Hard to argue with that, I would think.
Although this issue doesn't affect me in any way, I'm kind of curious to know what the root cause is. An Engineer's description mind you. For example...
1) Sometimes application software can bring out OS/driver/hardware flaws. The application software isn't at fault, it just creates the conditions under which those flaws show themselves.
2) Sometimes application software can cause issues due to installing a poorly implemented driver/handler, incorrectly manipulating interfaces, what have you. The application software is improperly designed and should be fixed.
3) Sometimes it is neither. For example, a case where even well crafted application software would be expected to create heavy loads that even flawless OS/driver/hardware combinations would struggle with. Where there really is no option other than replacing lower performance hardware with higher performance hardware.
The specific nature of the problem will determine what is reasonable to expect from the developer.
I didn't specify that sites were blocked by hostname instead of IP. I don't think there is a major difference between what I said and your explanation. I wasn't complaining, but I still think I will stick with a DNS service and keep MBAM on demand. It takes 100% of the load off my machine.
Also, I would be the last person to suggest you stop any forward development to tweak what you are hoping to make a legacy product. I work for a software company as well and know the pain of dealing with complaints on software you are working on trying to replace with something newer and better.
The issue here is that the problem does only affect a small % of users AND the entire code base is about to be replaced.
Fixing something that is about to be replaced by something much better for a small handful of people is not a good use of resources.
There is a reason so few PCs are affected with the issue and a reason there is no simple fix.
In reality "bux fix" is a misnomer here, "create a workaround" would be a much better fit.
Although not an absolute guarantee, the chances are that Taliscicero's system is troubled with Deferred Procedure Calls (DPC).
If this is the case, some have solved their problem with driver updates while others have replaced NIC cards with ones that are more efficient. Of course others here may be able to describe this condition in a much more elegant fashion.
Just had to make sure xxJackxx, we still run into a lot of people that think all that part does is block access to web sites.
I think you are going to like what we have in the pipe, it is several steps better than IP blocking. I will admit that IP blocking is a sledge hammer, effective but brutal. What we are working on does not take anything away from IP blocking but does add many more subtle and adaptive option.
Got it. You guys have been repeating that, and I would think that most people agree. But it isn't what I suggested. I didn't suggest fixing something that is about to be replaced.
Good to know. I do have 2 Pro licenses. Can't wait to see it.
I agree. I was having similar issues that all went away when I replaced my ASUS XONAR D2X.
I have already tried upgrading my drivers, that does not work. I have the same sound problem on this laptop and my old desktop PC's both of which are pretty top of the line and should not suffer these problems.
I also would not be complaining now, but I brought the problem up a year and a half ago. "We are working on new code so we don't have time" does not really work when I made a complaint almost two years ago, and if you look at the forums and online there are people who posted about the same thing more then a year ago as well. I was shocked to actually find it was still a problem when I tried the software again.... on another computer as well.
I don't get it... why does AV/AM software have to interact with the sound/nic anyway, I have never had this problem with any other software. What, was Malwarebytes originally coded on an old 1988 Moonwalker arcade cartridge and only now Micheal Jackson has found his way out of the code and decides to cause me audio disturbances?
I also don't want a refund, because I would just re-buy the program anyway when the problem gets fixed, which seems very backwards.
You don't know if it will or wont? Your a programmer right? I thought all programmers use logic to figure out the effects of their code... not just try and see? I don't get it man. I also know for damn sure if you have bugs that need fixed you don't take "everyone" off the main product, you delegate 1-2 people to analysis and re-coding to fix the issue, and if your really that hard pressed... hire new staff.
Never had a problem with their customer service.
Separate names with a comma.