Spybot's renaissance

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by xpsunny, Oct 30, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. xpsunny

    xpsunny Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Posts:
    163
  2. doktornotor

    doktornotor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Posts:
    2,047
    Ah, Germany, the country where Big Brother is becoming reality. Seriously, I'm already pretty sick of the spying tendencies everywhere, and I certainly wouldn't use any such product, be it from Symantec or anyone else.

    There are enough alternatives, i.a. switching to Linux/BSD altogether for any net activities at least.
     
  3. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    The anti-spyware becomes spyware... yummi. :D
     
  4. Baz_kasp

    Baz_kasp Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Posts:
    593
    Location:
    London
    Sounds like spybot are throwing the toys out of their pram. Whatever happened to communicating with the other company to voice their concerns...from what I can gather there hasn't been such a discussion so far.... They seem to be taking the "lets just confuse normal users even more by labelling companies "bad" just because they have checks for potentially conflicting software" approach (the checks can be skipped)

    And what is this about lowering your security.... uninstalling spybot for Kaspersky or Mcafee is going to make your comptuer less secure? -please.


    No...but I don't see what marketing has to do with it when spybot is a free product and not a replacement for an AV. A simple incompatibilty alert during installation counts as marketing apparently....see a contradiction there anyone?





    Edit:

    I will have a word with someone at KL to see if they can clear up any misunderstanding with SSD.
     
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2008
  5. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    @ Baz_kasp

    You are right . Replacing Spybot for Kaspersky/McAfee/any AV is a good idea . But to some extent I agree with PepiMK . Not talking about Kaspersky but Symantec . I remember they had a version (I haven't checked if it is still the same even with NAV 2009) ... a version that disables Windows Defender because they find it incompatiable . I have even seen a forum post where a Symantec employee wrote that their products disables WD because Symantec Norton will provide better protection than the one WD will .

    I hate what Symantec do - I already have a security center in my Windows , some antispyware (Windows Defender) , etc , they way Symantec acts to replace WD with their products or to replace Windows Security Center with their own . Why not then replace the whole Windows OS with a *better* and *more secure* Symantec OS ?!

    Security vendors write security products for Microsoft OS -Windows . So they must make their products fully compatiable with the OS (and the security vendors must accept the built-in tools such as Windows Defender , Windows Security Center , etc).
     
  6. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    The other argument could be why should we have the likes of Windows Defender installed by default? We should have the choice whether to install it or not. That option is available for XP users, but not Vista users. Yes, you can manually disable it, but some would argue Microsoft are doing exactly the same thing by imposing it on users. ;)
     
  7. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    btw vipre from sunbelt also disables windows defender as default. hate it when companies disable bultin secuirty tools because they are ment to be uncompatible. if it isnt compatible with a bultin tool it shouldnt be listed as vista compatible IMO.
     
  8. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    It's simple. Those products are not compatible with Spybot's TeaTimer, so they don't recommend them.
     
  9. Carver

    Carver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2006
    Posts:
    1,827
    Location:
    USA
    I disconnected the Tea Timer back when I had NOD32, I have Avira Now.
     
  10. icr

    icr Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    1,588
    Location:
    Mumbai
    I too had problems with KIS 09 conflicting with spybot so i installed KIS first and than spybot worked perfectly:D :D :D
     
  11. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    No , Microsoft doesn't do the same thing . I have paid for it when I have paid for my OS . If I have preferred on my own not to use , it will be disabled/deleted . However , if it is running , this will mean I want it and don't want anything disable it (exception only for WF - no two firewalls)


    Why should we have Windows Defender by default ? Why have Security Center and Windows Firewall ? Why have User Account Control ? Why IE ?

    I will asnwer very simple - why OS then ? Why Windows ?


    Windows Defender , Windows Firewall both provide the basic protection everyone needs . Machines without firewall , without any antispyware are highly exposed to attacks . They only didn't add an antivirus because of different business reasons , otherwise they would have added it some. I have bought Microsoft product , I want its things inside . They do provide option to install 3rd party products and to completely ignore the Windows ones.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.