------=_NextPart_000_0032_01C6E405.55214150
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2963" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT><FONT face=3DArial size=3D6>...ROFL  =
!! =20
:-)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D6></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>oh my God !  ...that was HILARIOUS =

!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>regards, Richard</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>"cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user)" =
<</FONT><A=20
size=3D2>cquirkenews@nospam.mvps.org</FONT></A><FONT face=3DArial =
size=3D2>> wrote=20
in message </FONT><A=20
face=3DArial=20

face=3DArial size=3D2>...</FONT></DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>> =
On Thu, 28 Sep=20
2006 13:55:35 -0700, "What's in a Name?" <BR>>>cquirke (MVP =
Windows=20
shell/user) AKA came up with this jewel:<BR>> <BR>>>> >=20
-------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - -  -  =20
-<BR>>>>   Running Windows-based av to kill active =
malware is=20
like striking <BR>>>>   a match to see if what you =
are=20
standing in is water or petrol.<BR>>>> > =
-------------------- -----=20
---- --- -- - -  -   -<BR>> <BR>>>Speaking of=20
matches-<BR>>>Last year,here in Ohio,a contractor went in to a =
house to=20
check for a<BR>>>gas leak-he used a lighter and blew up the second =

floor.<BR>> <BR>> Well, he *did* find the leak   =
:-)<BR>>=20
<BR>> The trouble with testing to destruction, is it breaks=20
everything...<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>>>--------------- =
----- ----=20
--- -- -  -    -<BR>>    First, =
the good=20
news: Customer feedback has <BR>>    been clear and=20
unambiguous.<BR>>>--------------- ----- ---- --- -- - =20
-    -</FONT></BODY></HTML>

------=

Posted by David H. Lipman on September 28, 2006, 4:41 pm

If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

| Is the Multi AV tool safe to use as an offline alternative to online AV scans
| for dial up users? Or should it only be used in emergencies? I hope this
| question is not a duplicate, because one I posted 5 minutes ago never
| appeared. I have Windows One Care installed as resident, and I use Kasperky
| online scanner for double checking my PC. Most online scans are nearly
| impossible on dialup, and I am looking for a thorough AV tool that I can use
| offline that will not conflict with One Care. I have exerienced good results
| with One Care so far, but I want to cover all my bases.

You ahve altready received some good answers from Leythos and CQuirke.

Let me just say OneCare as an anti virus software just isn't good at all. On
all tests I
have done, it has the lowest catch rates.

You need to remove OneCare and replace it with something more substantial like
Kaspersky or
NOD32.

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

Posted by =?Utf-8?B?T2xkIFJlYmVs?= on September 29, 2006, 9:11 am

If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options

I must admit that I am using One Care with some anxiety, and I was very
troubled that it was not tested in the last round at AV Comparatives. They
say that was because it has not been made available internationally. However,
I am a conservative web surfer, cautious to an extreme about email
attachments, and use IE7. For now, I am determined to test One Care, since
its resource usage is optimal on my PC. Previously, I have used McAfee and
Kaspersky and felt more secure using them. Regarding the Multi_AV: I ran the
Kaspesky component in safe mode - nothing found - but I see no way to avoid
deletion of detected items. What happens if it has a false positive? I
believe this is a disadvantage in using command line scan instead of scans
with a Windows UI. Possibly command line should be used best where there is
a known infection?
--
Regards,
Paul (aka OldRebel)

I used to have a life - now I have a computer!

"David H. Lipman" wrote:

> | Is the Multi AV tool safe to use as an offline alternative to online AV scans

> | for dial up users? Or should it only be used in emergencies? I hope this

> | question is not a duplicate, because one I posted 5 minutes ago never

> | appeared. I have Windows One Care installed as resident, and I use Kasperky

> | online scanner for double checking my PC. Most online scans are nearly

> | impossible on dialup, and I am looking for a thorough AV tool that I can use

> | offline that will not conflict with One Care. I have exerienced good results

> | with One Care so far, but I want to cover all my bases.

> You ahve altready received some good answers from Leythos and CQuirke.

> Let me just say OneCare as an anti virus software just isn't good at all. On

all tests I

> have done, it has the lowest catch rates.

> You need to remove OneCare and replace it with something more substantial like

Kaspersky or

> NOD32.

> --

> Dave

> http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html

> http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

Similar Threads	Posted
Multi-AV	December 17, 2006, 7:39 pm
Multi-AV	October 13, 2008, 7:56 pm
Multi AV Question	October 28, 2005, 12:36 am
Multi-av ...request...	December 29, 2006, 8:35 pm
Problems with Multi-AV	January 16, 2007, 12:01 am
Multi AV scanning tool	December 29, 2005, 2:10 pm
[Multi-AV] Offline Preparation	June 28, 2006, 7:18 am
David, I would like to run your Multi-AV program but it does not run	October 3, 2006, 7:46 am
Question Multi A/V Tool	June 8, 2008, 9:46 am
I'm running Multi-AV's 4 cls's ...	October 1, 2006, 6:06 pm

The site map in XML format XML site map