how save can you make windows?

[Gene E. Bloch]

Two points:

1. MalwareBytes AntiMalware and SuperAntiSpyware are *not* anti-virus
programs. They are anti-spyware programs. There is no problem with
having them installed along with an anti-virus.

2. If you did have two anti-virus programs installed and had no
problems doing so, note that having two installed does not mean you
will have a problem. It means that the *risk* of a problem is
increased. Saying " have never had any problems by having more than
two anti-virus programs "installed at the same time" is like saying
"I've been driving without a seatbelt and have never had any problems
doing so."

Ken,

A quick question for clarification and my own personal knowledge:

I agree that SuperAntiSpyware is not an anti-virus program and I
shouldn't have stated it was. Duh!

I also agree that having two anti-spyware programs active (real-time
protection on) is bad as the two will "butt-heads" causing (severe)
problems.

MalwareBytes on their main page state:

"Malwarebytes products have a proven record of protecting computers
by completely removing all forms of malware, including viruses..."

I'm trying to learn so please bear with me.

If Malwarebytes removes all forms of malware, including viruses,
isn't it at least a "form" of anti-virus? So, if installed for
on-demand scans only and configured as such, does this still expose
the system to the risk of conflicts?

For quite some time I've seen it recommended here and other
newsgroups and forums to have Malwarebytes installed for on-demand
scans in addition to the users real-time protection program. Also,
in Char's reply to my post (below your reply), she says that she
also uses Malwarebytes and I assume that she has it installed and
does not install, scan, then uninstall each time.

I also see the Microsoft Safety Scanner recommended very often for
on-demand scans (especially in Answers) and on its main page states,
in part, "provides on-demand scanning and helps remove viruses..."
Wouldn't this make this a "form" of anti-virus also? I realize the
Safety Scanner differs from MalwareBytes, i.e., is only good for 10
days and essentially must be downloaded for each use with no real
installation, but when you have it actively scanning your system,
does this also present the risk of conflicts? I don't recall seeing
it mentioned on the Safety Scanner page, but should you disable your
real-time protection (in my case, Microsoft Security Essentials) to
eliminate the risks? Also when doing an on-demand MalwareBytes scan?

Sorry, this wasn't really a "quick" question

Thanks in advance as I appreciate your expertise.

OT: I've enjoyed your and Char's recent banter in this group
It's great to see instead of all the bickering and worse nowadays.

There's a *big* difference between on-demand scumming and continuous
background scanning.

The former is not where the butting of heads occurs, the latter is. And
that's what real antivirus programs do.

I can't believe I typed "scumming", so I guess I let the spell-checker
put one over on me

Obviously I meant "scanning".

OTOH, maybe I should try scumming and see if it's as much fun as it
sounds

 

[Ken Blake]

Two points:

1. MalwareBytes AntiMalware and SuperAntiSpyware are *not* anti-virus
programs. They are anti-spyware programs. There is no problem with
having them installed along with an anti-virus.

2. If you did have two anti-virus programs installed and had no
problems doing so, note that having two installed does not mean you
will have a problem. It means that the *risk* of a problem is
increased. Saying " have never had any problems by having more than
two anti-virus programs "installed at the same time" is like saying
"I've been driving without a seatbelt and have never had any problems
doing so."

Ken,

A quick question for clarification and my own personal knowledge:

I agree that SuperAntiSpyware is not an anti-virus program and I
shouldn't have stated it was. Duh!

OK. No problem.

I also agree that having two anti-spyware programs active (real-time
protection on) is bad as the two will "butt-heads" causing (severe)
problems.

MalwareBytes on their main page state:

"Malwarebytes products have a proven record of protecting computers
by completely removing all forms of malware, including viruses..."

I'm trying to learn so please bear with me.

If Malwarebytes removes all forms of malware, including viruses,
isn't it at least a "form" of anti-virus?

I guess you could say that, but its anti-virus capability is very
minor compared to its anti-spyware capability. I certainly wouldn't
recommend just running MalwareBytes AntiMalware and not a real
anti-virus.

So, if installed for
on-demand scans only and configured as such, does this still expose
the system to the risk of conflicts?

Probably, but in this case, the risk is very small. I've never run
into any problems with it.

For quite some time I've seen it recommended here and other
newsgroups and forums to have Malwarebytes installed for on-demand
scans in addition to the users real-time protection program. Also,
in Char's reply to my post (below your reply), she

Is Char a "she"? I hadn't realized that. Char, just curious--can you
let us know, please?

says that she
also uses Malwarebytes and I assume that she has it installed and
does not install, scan, then uninstall each time.

I also see the Microsoft Safety Scanner recommended very often for
on-demand scans (especially in Answers) and on its main page states,
in part, "provides on-demand scanning and helps remove viruses..."
Wouldn't this make this a "form" of anti-virus also? I realize the
Safety Scanner differs from MalwareBytes, i.e., is only good for 10
days and essentially must be downloaded for each use with no real
installation, but when you have it actively scanning your system,
does this also present the risk of conflicts? I don't recall seeing
it mentioned on the Safety Scanner page, but should you disable your
real-time protection (in my case, Microsoft Security Essentials) to
eliminate the risks? Also when doing an on-demand MalwareBytes scan?

Sorry, I know nothing about Safety Scanner.

Sorry, this wasn't really a "quick" question

Thanks in advance as I appreciate your expertise.

You're welcome. Glad to help.

OT: I've enjoyed your and Char's recent banter in this group
It's great to see instead of all the bickering and worse nowadays.

Thanks. I enjoyed it too. I think each of us learned something from
the other.

 

[Char Jackson]

Is Char a "she"? I hadn't realized that. Char, just curious--can you
let us know, please?

A bit off-topic, isn't it? And isn't the mystery better than knowing?


Let's see, Shar Jackson, the woman who was engaged to Kevin Federline
of Britney Spears fame, is female, but I am not.

 

[Chet]

Probably, but in this case, the risk is very small. I've never run
into any problems with it.

It's basically what I thought, having two anti-virus programs
running in the background - monitoring all activity - is the main risk.

An on-demand type program essentially scans files/registry entries
for specific sequences (signatures) of programming/code. And I
assume that this type of scanning is somewhat different than the
monitoring activity of a real-time protection a/v program, so the
risk of conflicts is greatly reduced, but does still exists.

I just want to get this correct as I've recommended to others to
install MalwareBytes for on-demand scanning and would hate to have
recommended an action that has I high possibility of causing grief.
I've had it installed on this and my other machines for as long as I
can remember and have never had a problem, but that's me; perhaps
I'm lucky, but since Win95 I've only experienced maybe 3% of the
problems I see in newsgroups and forums.

Is Char a "she"? I hadn't realized that. Char, just curious--can you
let us know, please?

Oops! Multi-tasking (thinking) is getting slower now that my years
are starting to go faster! Char's reply will answer your curiosity.

Sorry, I know nothing about Safety Scanner.




You're welcome. Glad to help.




Thanks. I enjoyed it too. I think each of us learned something from
the other.

I think others did as well; you both had excellent points from
different perspectives.

Thanks for the reply and clarifications.

 

[Chet]

A bit off-topic, isn't it? And isn't the mystery better than knowing?


Let's see, Shar Jackson, the woman who was engaged to Kevin Federline
of Britney Spears fame, is female, but I am not.

Sorry, I apologize - brain wasn't in gear and unconscious reflex;
have an ex-sister-in-law, Char, short for Charlotte.

 

[Chet]

Two points:

1. MalwareBytes AntiMalware and SuperAntiSpyware are *not* anti-virus
programs. They are anti-spyware programs. There is no problem with
having them installed along with an anti-virus.

2. If you did have two anti-virus programs installed and had no
problems doing so, note that having two installed does not mean you
will have a problem. It means that the *risk* of a problem is
increased. Saying " have never had any problems by having more than
two anti-virus programs "installed at the same time" is like saying
"I've been driving without a seatbelt and have never had any problems
doing so."

Ken,

A quick question for clarification and my own personal knowledge:

I agree that SuperAntiSpyware is not an anti-virus program and I
shouldn't have stated it was. Duh!

I also agree that having two anti-spyware programs active (real-time
protection on) is bad as the two will "butt-heads" causing (severe)
problems.

MalwareBytes on their main page state:

"Malwarebytes products have a proven record of protecting computers
by completely removing all forms of malware, including viruses..."

I'm trying to learn so please bear with me.

If Malwarebytes removes all forms of malware, including viruses,
isn't it at least a "form" of anti-virus? So, if installed for
on-demand scans only and configured as such, does this still expose
the system to the risk of conflicts?

For quite some time I've seen it recommended here and other
newsgroups and forums to have Malwarebytes installed for on-demand
scans in addition to the users real-time protection program. Also,
in Char's reply to my post (below your reply), she says that she
also uses Malwarebytes and I assume that she has it installed and
does not install, scan, then uninstall each time.

I also see the Microsoft Safety Scanner recommended very often for
on-demand scans (especially in Answers) and on its main page states,
in part, "provides on-demand scanning and helps remove viruses..."
Wouldn't this make this a "form" of anti-virus also? I realize the
Safety Scanner differs from MalwareBytes, i.e., is only good for 10
days and essentially must be downloaded for each use with no real
installation, but when you have it actively scanning your system,
does this also present the risk of conflicts? I don't recall seeing
it mentioned on the Safety Scanner page, but should you disable your
real-time protection (in my case, Microsoft Security Essentials) to
eliminate the risks? Also when doing an on-demand MalwareBytes scan?

Sorry, this wasn't really a "quick" question

Thanks in advance as I appreciate your expertise.

OT: I've enjoyed your and Char's recent banter in this group
It's great to see instead of all the bickering and worse nowadays.

There's a *big* difference between on-demand scumming and continuous
background scanning.

The former is not where the butting of heads occurs, the latter is. And
that's what real antivirus programs do.

That's basically what I thought, don't have two running in the
background scanning all activities.

The on-demand scan is more of a file/registry scan and "I assume"
doesn't interfere with the real-time scanning/monitoring (sorta like
system surveillance vs. searching file contents for certain
sequences of code?).

BTW, I liked the scumming!

Thanks for the reply,

 

[Char Jackson]

Sorry, I apologize - brain wasn't in gear and unconscious reflex;
have an ex-sister-in-law, Char, short for Charlotte.

No apology necessary. This being a text-based newsgroup, it's
sometimes hard to tell.

 

[Dave \Crash\ Dummy]

What have you got against New Zealand?!

/Ends/ with z! I don't visit kiwiz.com.

 

[Ken Blake]

A bit off-topic, isn't it?


Yes.


And isn't the mystery better than knowing?

I didn't particularly care, either way. As I said, I was just curious.

Let's see, Shar Jackson, the woman who was engaged to Kevin Federline

Having no interest in that sort of thing, I don't know either of those
names.

of Britney Spears fame,

I know that name, but just barely.

... is female, but I am not.

OK, thanks.

 

[Ken Blake]

No apology necessary. This being a text-based newsgroup, it's
sometimes hard to tell.

Text-based or not, it's always hard to tell. Many people use made up
names that give no indication of their sex, and even if it's a name
that clearly sounds male or female, it isn't necessarily the person's
real name.

I remember once replying to someone named Michele, and mistakenly
thinking it was a man. I thought it was the Italian spelling of
Michael, pronounced mi-KAY-lay, but it was the female name I had
always seen spelled Michelle before that.

 

[Ken Blake]

It's basically what I thought, having two anti-virus programs
running in the background - monitoring all activity - is the main risk.

Exactly. Having something installed but doing nothing is equivalent to
not having it installed. The only risk is when you run it, and as I
said, it's small.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

/Ends/ with z! I don't visit kiwiz.com.

How about sites from New Zealand that end in New Zealand's country code,
which is "nz"?