keeping the goal clear is first. zemana and this other stuff is only fetching the ball from behind the line. raxco should stay with defragment and nothing else. but nowerdays markeing push the fear with the evil bad in web, idiots, sorry, but has to be said. they gamble around with peoples fear and people would pay for that crap. and idd - a lot of security software is NOT needed. and fact is that most people dont understand they installed security software and stick with the default settings. which is risky because attackers assume default settings and know about backdoors which are not covered. if computers are hitted by malware its 99% users fault. the rest is a unknown impact which reached system trough a decent adblocker and a possible second defending line. exploits dont need files and are like a hot knife through butter. so the regular security anytime will fail on payload free attacks.
Bingo! I agree 100%. Windows own Windows Defender and Windows Firewall, keeping Windows fully updated, don't participate in illegal activity on-line, and users avoiding being "click-happy" on unsolicited popups, links, attachments, and downloads is all the vast majority of users need. I do recommend occasional supplemental scanning with a second scanner (like Malwarebytes free) just to make the user did not open the door and let something in. But all these extra scanners for this and that are just not needed. As Brummelchen correctly implied, the user is ALWAYS the weakest link security. If users did not dink with Windows defaults, kept Windows updated, and were not click-happy, they would remain safe and secure.
Whether it was not agreeing with the advice, it is about freedom to choose what one runs on their system.
So if you see it once, nobody else needs to see it? While there are many regulars on this site who don't need to see the same message again, there are always many new members and guests who may find a thread through a Bing Google search looking for information about this program or that program who have not seen the message. That's why these messages need to be repeated. New readers need to know too that piling on this security program for this threat and that security program for that threat, and yet another security program for yet another threat is just a waste of system resources - or worse. It is not like years ago with XP when layer upon layer upon layer was needed. FTR, before some one suggests it, my point is not about promoting Microsoft products. Note I didn't until questioned and then my focus was on user discipline/safe computing practices. Very true. But tech support forums are about helping users make the right choice.
Indeed that's true, but what isn't not true is that your choice is automatically the best one for everybody. I for one don't trust my computer security to MS. I trust my computer to those vendors who have earned my trust. Unfortunately MS has blown that. I spent a year fending of their desire to force me to upgrade to win 10. And same is true with Skype. Since they took it over Skype, the are forceful about updates. Now I am fine with that, but every time I update, I have to check defaults as they change to what they want. Bottom line, is the right choice for you is for YOU, but not necessarily everyone else.
But I had not expressed any choice when you came in to stifle my input! All I said was that product "is not needed". Now you seem to be on some rampage against all of Microsoft. This thread has nothing to do with the upgrade to Windows 10 or Skype yet you are now using them to justify your actions? I've stated my point about that product and it remains the same - it is not needed. I'm done here. Good day. (edit comment: Fixed typo)
thats not the problem from my view. i see another competetor for a labeled security program. "hey raxco, nice, i liked their defrag software , has to be good, i'll buy". maybe its a dollar cheaper as zemana - but they forget that raxco is not the author - its still zemana. if raxco finishes this product what will user become? a coupon to change to zemana? everybody want marketshare theses times concerning security. the target should be not to buy some software, more to make users conscious - as Bill pointed out again - that user is the weakest part in the list. i am running very few security software. but i am aware that it always can hit me, either i have a full featured and blown security suite or nothing. the weakest part is users hand with the mouse -> browser or the legacy way with disks and other media, nowerdays usb-sticks. i dont think much about my security concept - once set it dont become many changes. it also control my hand, in some places its prohibted to run programs, it throws me an error - opps, forgot, its ok this way. i dont think much about my security concept - in fact it is much more stable than a security software. thus has benefit - no doubt - but at least those are too intrusive theses times and some dont work together without exceptions which ofc lower security. i curently dont find the security thread where users post their installed solutions - ofc some are decent, but most are overrated and paranoid.
