tbeckner
join:2004-03-20
Bend, OR
1 edit | reply to Thaler
Re: This should go to court
said by Thaler  : said by tbeckner :These attempts to reclassify will not work on Microsoft and the Microsoft Anti-Spyware product will become the GOLD STANDARD in the next year. Microsoft's entry into the crapware hunt was a big mark, but I wouldn't write it up as "game over" yet. Plus, a Microsoft "Gold Standard"? Microsoft has some good products, but not everything they put a "Stamp of Approval" has been pure gold. Remember, this is the same company that let Windows ME escape from their beta testing labs not too far back.  I agree with Windows ME (Windows ME wasn't important to Microsoft, Windows XP was), but Spyware/Adware is affecting Microsoft and Mr Gates directly and personally. And the future of Windows hangs in the balance, even the longhorn adoption could be affected.
BTW, even if it isn't the GOLD STANDARD right-away, it started out as the best single product on the market. And what I was attempting to point out, is that these Spyware/Adware/Malware companies do not have enough pull or money to stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as Malware and remove it. So since they cannot stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as junk, the "GAME IS OVER!", and they are wasting their time and money trying to change the mindset of second tier players. They can change everyone's mind, except Microsoft's and they have failed. In this one case, it is good to have a Monopoly that cannot be bought off. It is simple to see that "That's All Folks!". |
|
Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA
| said by tbeckner :BTW, even if it isn't the GOLD STANDARD right-away, it started out as the best single product on the market. And what I was attempting to point out, is that these Spyware/Adware/Malware companies do not have enough pull or money to stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as Malware and remove it. So since they cannot stop Microsoft from classifying their junk as junk, the "GAME IS OVER!", and they are wasting their time and money trying to change the mindset of second tier players. They can change everyone's mind, except Microsoft's and they have failed. In this one case, it is good to have a Monopoly that cannot be bought off. It is simple to see that "That's All Folks!". I still say we'll have to just wait and see on this one. Perhaps MS will be a "gentle giant" among the ad/spyware companies, or maybe it will lay some major monopolistic smack-down on their asses, it is yet to be seen. The players are barely coming out onto the field, and yet you've already declared certain victory. Let MS buck a head or two in the ad/spyware market at least, and then we'll get a better idea of their intentions in the anti-spyware wars. |
|
Grethor
Today Is A Good Day To Format
join:2004-04-14
Puyallup, WA
clubs: | reply to fireflier
My ass is offended. Take it back or my ass will file a lawsuit in a Sanfrancisco court. |
|
DreamWraith
Premium
join:2004-04-07
Mount Vernon, WA | reply to tbeckner
i still fail to understand why you seem to thing it started as the "single best product on the market". your not making any sense. it is hardly up to par with AdAware SE. Let alone a combo of Spybot S&D and Adaware SE. |
|
anonymousexxx
@pacbell.n
| He says that because it is true. The MS product is just a repackaged version of Giant Antispyware, the company/product MS bought in toto. It is universally regarded as the best product. I was using adaware and spybot too until MS announced their new product would be free and spybot teatimer was defeated by the windupdate/adtools spyware attack (which can circumvent a currently fully patched SP2, grrr). So, your faith in the other two freeware products is not longer well placed. I'm here to tell you that the MS/Giant freeware is the best there is at this time...and it's free. I call that a win win win. |
|
wehooper
join:2004-04-25
Spring City, TN
| reply to tbeckner
Don't be too sure of it...
Article in the Register today says Microsoft paid a chunk to a Dutch portal because MS AntiSpyware mistakely blocked access to the site.
The article goes on to say "The incident may spark off a whole parade of court cases by web companies or even spyware merchants who believe that they are illegitimately expelled by Microsoft's anti spyware software"
Read about it here: »www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/22···re_ilse/
Microsoft has deeper pockets and much more to loose. Isn't it logical that they become a larger and more attractive target? Check out the recent settlements and deals the company has made to end anti-trust actions. |
|
packetscan
Premium
join:2004-10-19
Bridgeport, CT
clubs: | reply to PhoenixDown
Mr McBride you tried this with SCO. It's not going to work here either! |
|
tbeckner
join:2004-03-20
Bend, OR
3 edits | reply to DreamWraith
said by DreamWraith :i still fail to understand why you seem to thing it started as the "single best product on the market". your not making any sense. it is hardly up to par with AdAware SE. Let alone a combo of Spybot S&D and Adaware SE. In Independent testing, five products where recommended, Ad-Aware, Giant AntiSpyware (Microsoft), Pest Patrol, Spybot Search & Destroy, and Webroot Spy Sweeper. No product tested found and removed 100% of the Spyware/Adware, but Giant (Microsoft) AntiSpyware removed almost 25% more items that the next best of the 25 products tested, which was Pest Patrol.
I would recommend that you review their testing criteria and methods and make your own judgement.
But since the Microsoft product is free for home or business use (including real-time protection) and is evolving quickly and has the support of a company that will likely not be bought off, has a multi-billion dollar vested interest in getting rid of Spyware/Adware, and has the software and R&D capability unmatched in the world, my bet is on them.
And based upon my review of the testing criteria and methods used in the testing and review, they started with the best product on the market.
Additionally, based upon the results I have had on my eight machine over the last 45 days, I am currently impressed.
It's not a slam dunk, but I believe if Vegas was betting, their money would be on Microsoft, and the odds would be overwhelmingly on their side.
Results of the October 2-4, 2004 tests:
Number of items found:
Spybot Search & Destroy: -- 40 of 134
Webroot Spy Sweeper: ----- 74 of 134
Ad-Aware: ----------------- 82 of 134
Pest Patrol: ---------------- 86 of 134
Giant AntiSpyware: -------- 100 of 134 (Microsoft)
»spywarewarrior.com/ |
|
tbeckner
join:2004-03-20
Bend, OR
2 edits | reply to wehooper
said by wehooper :Don't be too sure of it... Article in the Register today says Microsoft paid a chunk to a Dutch portal because MS AntiSpyware mistakely blocked access to the site. The article goes on to say "The incident may spark off a whole parade of court cases by web companies or even spyware merchants who believe that they are illegitimately expelled by Microsoft's anti spyware software" Read about it here: » www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/22···re_ilse/Microsoft has deeper pockets and much more to loose. Isn't it logical that they become a larger and more attractive target? Check out the recent settlements and deals the company has made to end anti-trust actions. Actually, they might have more to loose, but that is only if they are wrong and in this case they where wrong, and they corrected this situation. Again, remember Microsoft has only been in this field since December. There is a learning curve. At least they weren't pulling WhenU from their detector! 
You might also want to read this review. I agree completely with their assessment. Even with the no product is perfect assessment.
Also, just to let you know I still scan all eight machines with Spybot Search & Destroy 1.3, Ad-Aware SE 1.05, and the current version of Microsoft AntiSpyware 1.0.509, because today no product is perfect.
Currently overlap of scanning products is required, so I am betting on the long-term capability of the company with the most to lose if they don't get rid of this malware and that is Microsoft. Even personally, Gates said last year that his personal machines have never been infected with a virus/worm/trojan, but we was angry because he had been infected with Spyware/Adware. There is something on a personal level, beyond the multi-billion dollar consequences.
»www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?···&page=10 |
|
DreamWraith
Premium
join:2004-04-07
Mount Vernon, WA
| reply to DreamWraith
hmm. havent seen those results anywhere before. thanks for the info. i guess i stand corrected. the funny thing to me is though, that just like everything else, microsoft has bought the tech. just like they bought dos. just like they stole the GUI. and just like they bought the engine that currently runs IE. |
|
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB
| reply to PhoenixDown
Thing is, the malware vendor gets to choose which court he brings the suit in, because they are bringing the suit.
So reasonably the malware vendor will pick the most favorable court in any jurisdiction that they or the ASW vendor has a presence in.
It's not fair, but it is how it is.
So even the combined financial might of MS, CA, Symantec, Dell and IBM might fail.
--
(Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) |
|
