Speakeasy forum

General discussion

SpyWare, What? me Worry? Nah!

by Minor Tron God / October 29, 2005 1:52 AM PDT

I am pretty new to home computing and the internet adventure but I am not new to Electronics, been a Tech for nearly 30 years. Viruses, ''BAD'' they will kill ya, a good realtime antivirus protection program is a must,I agree. AdWare, SpyWare, MallWare, KeyLoggers, TrackingCookies, OH MY! Being a newbie to the Internet OOH Scarey Bears. So I got a SpyWare remover, one you could run stand alone to isolate and remove said ''Scarey Bears'' as well as run realtime to keep it from invading my precious, already slow as hell PC and Dialup connection. I found realtime removal to slow me down so much I quit using it, opting to isolate and remove after any online participation, Fine, Fat and Happy. One time though I ran the Scan, found quite a few new, ''Scarey Bears'', but before isolation and removal I tried something else. I have a couple of different File shredder applications I use, one for it's scheduling ability to overwrite and wipe unused drive space, one for it's Right Click availability. What I did was run the Shredder on all internet cookies and Temp Internet files then, and this is not necessary, on unused disc space. I then ran the SpyWare scanner and found no trace of any ''Scarey Bears''. I kept the the SpyWare remover and practiced this procedure for over a month, always with the same result. I have since removed the Spy Remover and used my procedure instead, just for grins i downloaded another one recently from download.com just to check. Nothing, Zero, Zilch, NoNada por KaKa. Shredding is faster, easier, shredding programs take up less disc space and appearently give the same results. Am I Wrong?, tell me, Inquireing minds want to know. Thanks Y'all.

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: SpyWare, What? me Worry? Nah!
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: SpyWare, What? me Worry? Nah!
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Spybot search & destroy
by grimgraphix / October 29, 2005 2:25 AM PDT

has a immunization feature that blocks downloads of spyware rather than real time removal. I find it to be highly effective when used in conjunction with Adaware and Norton antivirus.

BTW you might want to post this topic over on the PC forums.

BTW I also use a mac now for all internet fun nowadays. No need for spyware blockers or antivirus because nolbody hates mac enough to code for it.


Collapse -
It's not a question of hate. It's money, and, like all
by Kiddpeat / October 29, 2005 1:27 PM PDT

successful embezzlements, it's the one Mac users don't know about that they need to worry about. They're all sitting fat, dumb, and happy with no protection of any kind. Meanwhile, Apple is issuing patches, and Mac nasties are being reported.

Collapse -
Re spybot from Grim
by Minor Tron God / October 29, 2005 1:49 PM PDT

I have used it, but like I said my current computer is slower than President Bush already and anything running in the background makes it slower than his brother JEB. I don't know, like I say I'm a rookie at this, but it seems if you purge that crap after the fact it's just as effective as prevention and a lot less cumbersome on an ineffecient system like mine. I hope to upgrade my system soon so speed does not factor into my thinking. Thanks for the input Grim.

Collapse -
rookie you is, wise you will be....
by jonah jones / October 29, 2005 2:00 PM PDT
In reply to: Re spybot from Grim
I'm a rookie at this, but it seems if you purge that crap after the fact it's just as effective as prevention and a lot less cumbersome on an ineffecient system like mine

if you manage to purge 100% of all that is put on your system by spy/malware and..fix any damage it may have done, your system may return to it's former ineffecient state...

as the ancients said ''an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure''.....

Collapse -
Hey Tron
by grimgraphix / October 30, 2005 1:27 AM PDT
In reply to: Re spybot from Grim

The only PC I'm running in the house at the moment is an old AMD K6 500 mghz. It's not a rager but I keep it for certain PC games that don't run as well on XP machines. Spybot has never affected the performance of this machine to the point you can notice it.

Keep in mind that every time you allow a spyware program to run then that is one more drain on your system so to wait until your done everyday to clean it out is just allowing resources to be excluded from what you want it to do. If your system is as slow as you seemingly are indicating then I would look into hardware problems, adding more memory, and/or reformatting the HD and reinstalling the OS.

Kid... your points are valid but keep in mind a couple things re: Apples. They have firewalls in the OS. Your only unprotected if you choose to be. You can run virus software for it - although the protection lists only cover MS viruses since to date there is no malicious virus for Mac (knock on wood). Apples don't run .exe files or any other automatic open files so you only install a program if you want. So Mac users don't entirely sit "fat, dumb, and happy with no protection of any kind." One other thing, in the 11 months I've had a mac I've seen security updates from Apple almost every month. When I had an XP machine it sometimes was 5 months between security updates which were usually worked around within days. Macs are not perfect but they are less headaches overall so far.


Collapse -
XP and games
by TONI H / October 30, 2005 1:10 AM PDT
In reply to: Hey Tron

XP was never intended to be a gaming machine, but most games can be run well with it if you right click the .exe or shortcut that starts the game, choose Properties and then Compatability tab. Change it in the drop down box to W98 and you're off and running without XP's 'power' interfering with the choppy video and crappy, jerky sound.

I have an old Mac laptop that I just now got an operating system downloaded for. I got it in a yard sale basically for free since it was inside the case and the seller didn't realize the price on the case was only for the case. Couldn't get past the password screen to play with it to see if it would be something I might like enough to invest in a newer system, but some good people in the MAC forum steered me to not only the operating system for it, but also a program that wipes it clean so I can install the OS. Doesn't seem to be a program to just get rid of the password and let it 'boot up'....

I'm also finishing up a download now for Linux Mandrake 10.0 to burn to a cd (free on the website and not pirated)....got three cd's for cdr and also got the dvd one in order to just have one cd if I've a mind to. I'll toss that onto a spare harddrive later on and play with it, too. Been tossing that idea around for years and finally decided to see what all the hoopla is about.

Have to admit that I'm a real diehard Bill Gates worshipper so tinkering I suspect will be as far as I get. Looking forward to Vista since he likes me so much he named it after my street. LOL


Collapse -
Thanks for the tip on XP
by grimgraphix / October 30, 2005 2:49 AM PST
In reply to: XP and games

I knew about the fix you mentioned but never tried it and since I gave away my XP machine to a nephew it is a moot point until I build another PC. BTW what do you do when your loading these games on an XP box and the incompatibility box pops up before it's even loaded. Do you just go ahead and load anyway and then make the adjustment in the compatibility tabs dialog window ?

As I've used the Mac OS10.3 it has grown on me. I still like 98SE and XP sp2 (original installation with the patch included - I find the OS just seems a bit twitchy when its the original and sp2 is added later but it could be the boxes I built since they were all AMD). I even find XP much more customizable but the Mac OS is incredibly stable and memory management can't be beat vs. XP. My only complaint is Mac sacrifices some usability for the sake of style.

I got Bills picture on my mac desktop ! Mug shot circa 1977 courtesy of the smoking gun. He looks like he's in Jr. High. LOL I had that haircut but I grew out of it.


Collapse -
If you like 10.3 you'll love Tiger.
by EdH / October 30, 2005 3:44 AM PST

I agree Macs are more secure but note that XP has a built-in firewall as well.

My PC is totally secure, but my kids are not as careful and I periodically have to go in an clean their machine out, remove spyware and highjackers, etc. It's so much easier to block the stuff than to try to fix it after it's in there.

Collapse -
Err....Tony, WinXP Home is also designed for games.
by John Robie / October 30, 2005 3:33 AM PST
In reply to: XP and games

Millions of gamers use either WinXP Home or WinXP Pro, in fact none that I have read of use Win98/95/ME anymore. Many games will not play on Win98/95/ME at all, just read the requirement on the package when buying for newer games, however many of the old games put out before WinXP and designed for Win98/95/ME do work great and better with my WinXP computer than on my Win98se or WinMe computers.

There are old, old, games that will not play on WinXP, and the fix you explained will work usually, but not always on those.

As a note, the computer specs itself should exceed the requirements as noted on the package of a game for it to play all that great. What make a great difference is the Video Card used.

I have been purchasing PC games for the past 6-7 years, mostly for use by the grandkids when they come over and have quite a large collection including flight sims.

Collapse -
Sorry about the name spelling. I've known
by John Robie / October 30, 2005 11:41 PM PST

you for many years & this is 1st time. Have a friend named Anthony, and then the Sopranos Tony is ingrained...

Collapse -
No poblem...didn't even notice it
by TONI H / October 30, 2005 11:50 PM PST

to be honest, John.

I have XP Pro and I've found that even when the specs on a game box says it's for XP, it doesn't designate which version and most times, cranking the game down to W98 allows the game to run flawlessly, but when XP has 'control' of it the sound and video are all choppy.

I remember something being either written in the forums as XP was coming out or in one of the computer rags I read, that Home was more geared for gaming and Pro was not and was more geared for networking.


Collapse -
by John Robie / October 31, 2005 12:26 AM PST

Yes, it was published some time bacvk that WinXP Home is more suited for non-business programs and games, however many 'gamers' use WinXP Pro and many builders of high end expensive gamer PC's use WinXP Pro. I have read many Gamers forums and yours is the 1st that I've heard when a Game is marked WinXP/Win98 that the particulr game will play better with Win98.

Perhaps with some computers that were upgraded from Win98 to WinXP may have a game play better when cranking the game down to Win98, but never heard of a computer purchased with WinXP Home or WinXP Pro have a game designed for WinXP/Win98 playing better on Win98 than the computer bought with WinXP (only), assuming the Win98 PC does not have a more powerful video card and other stuff. (One of my long run-off sentences :-))

What game(s) is it? If I have, I'll check it out on a Win98 purchased PC, and a purchased WinXP Home PC.

Collapse -
by John Robie / October 31, 2005 12:32 AM PST
In reply to: Hmmm.......

It used to be (before WinXP) that many games would play better without problems on Win98 than Win2000 as gamers found out.

Collapse -
I've got more 98se games
by grimgraphix / October 31, 2005 12:50 AM PST
In reply to: Hmmm.......

than I do XP era games as my interests have moved away from games as I hit my 40's. Many of these games that were developed for 98se (even though XP was out) will display in the vise installer, a warning that the game may not perform properly on an XP os machine. Since I still have a running 98se machine I keep, I just never pursued seeing how they would perform on the XP box. Last game I remember seein g this on was "Black & White" but I think it happened on a few of the Civilization games as well.


Collapse -
I could be wrong, but I've gotten the distinct impression
by Kiddpeat / October 30, 2005 4:07 AM PST
In reply to: Hey Tron

that Mac users think they are bullet proof, and totally ignore security. That's why I think they are fat, dumb and happy. While I realize that Macs would not be infected in the same way as PCs, I also know that they are vulnerable and the OS has been patched multiple times in attempts to close those vulnerabilities. I also keep seeing reports of Mac viruses being a concern.

I use Macs at school. I know there is not a lot of difference in reliability between those Macs and my PC. In fact, they crash more often than my PC. I'm not sure that the Mac community would recognize or admit a problem even if one exists.

My PC is, of course, updated by MS, but it is also updated by Zone Alarm and Symantec on a daily basis.

Collapse -
I would agree that Macs crash as often as PCs...
by EdH / October 30, 2005 5:08 AM PST

except that in my two weeks testing of OS 10.4 I could not make it crash even once. Alas, I was laid off shortly afterward (no connection to trying to crash Tiger).

I must say that WinXP very rarely crashes on me either and it's not a matter of me being gentle.

Mac viruses exist, but I don't believe there have been any dire problems in recent years. Nothing on the level of the many PC threats. We always ran antivirus software of course. Sooner or later something is bound to happpen if you're not careful no matter what you're running.

Collapse -
My home computer has had Windows 2000 in it...
by Josh K / October 31, 2005 12:59 AM PST

...for nearly five years and the OS has not crashed once. No lockups, no nothing. I've had individual apps crash but nothing has brought the OS down with it yet.

Collapse -
100 % protection !!!!!!!!!!
by duckman / October 29, 2005 10:13 PM PDT

Don't do what causes the bad thigs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Collapse -
What comes home on the bottom of your shoes
by Steven Haninger / October 29, 2005 10:47 PM PDT

depends more on where you go walking.;)

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) correct !
by duckman / October 29, 2005 10:50 PM PDT
Collapse -
With 23 acres
by TONI H / October 30, 2005 1:12 AM PDT

cattle, horses, three dogs, and a cat, I'm ALWAYS looking down as I walk. LOL


Popular Forums
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
Laptops 21,181 discussions
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
Phones 17,137 discussions
Security 31,287 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
Windows 10 2,657 discussions


Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?