Hey aee2k
Yeah I really like Spysweepers startup shield. I love all the alerts that spysweeper gives me and I usually try to report any problems i have via the feedback on the program.
Thanks for your input. I agree that you do need an extra program with NIS09 and Spysweeper seems to be the perfect compliment. Thanks for your input. :)
Paying for 2 anti spyware protection programs is not needed. That’s wasted hard earned money. SuperAntiSpyware and Malware Bytes Anti Malware are both free and far superior in detection the Spy Sweeper. Spy Sweeper is also a very heavy program. All you need is NIS 2009 and common sense. Surf with Firefox and if you surf risky then use a Sandbox. You do not need to spend all this money on overlapping protection which can actually make you more prone to infections.
Hi Smoke
Glad you agree with me . Many people forget that Spysweeper is a lot more than just AV & Antispyware so they recommend using only NIS '09 and uninstalling Spysweeper. I've used Spysweeper for many years just because of the real-time shields which are excellent and I will not uninstall it just to get NIS '09 to run. The problem is Symantec's, not Webroot's. I've used both NIS and Spysweeper together for years and there never was a conflict until Nis '09.
Allen
Smoke and aeek2k…you both need to realize the consequences of overlapping security. Also look at your memory and CPU usage for using both programs side by side.
Hi Dieselman
I've been lucky enough to find both programs for free after rebate for quite a few years. It's possible if that were not the case I'd be a bit more agreeable to your line of thought. Whether it's free or not does not change the fact that the realtime shields offered by Spysweeper make it very worthwhile and that there is nothing comparable (at least that I could find) in NIS '09. Symatec told me (about 6 weeks ago) that a fix was planned to allow them to run together. I have to get back to them to find out it's status.
Thanks for your rersponse
Allen
Dieselman
There may be overhead but I don't think there's overlapping security as I selectively run spyware scans and don't use spysweeper's AV (I use Norton's).
Allen
But you are still running 2 real time anti spyware programs. And Spy Sweepers Shields are over rated. If you simply turn off Automatic Program control and turn on Advanced Event monitoring in NIS you will have better protection the Spy Sweeper.
I will research doing what you said and see how it will compare to Spysweeper's shields as soon as I can find the time. I'll answer when I have some concrete answers.
Thanks
Allen
You don’t need the Shields if you also surf with Firefox.
Hi Diesalman743
Thank you for your input.
Recently I have uninstalled NIS09 for the second time. When I originally asked my question I was going to re install NIS09 after I recenty detected and deleted viruses with Webroot Anti-Virus and Anti-Spyware. Though to my dismay, glee perhaps :S , NIS09 did not turn up any new virus threats.
Though after reading your comment I did some research on sandboxes and I have aquired one.Thank you so much for your help.
I just have one more question though. Is there a sandbox that you may reccomend.
I started this email thread back in August, I think. I must provide some input of late. I turned off Spysweeper and use only NIS 2009 and Dieselman's recommendation "Superspyware Free Edition." I have had no problems since then. HOWEVER ... I still run Spysweeper manually, and everytime I do so, it finds many things that I don't want on my PC, telling merchants, etc., how to send me even MORE spyware! Neither of the aforementioned packages found these things, and even if Dieselman doesn't think they are dangerous, I don't like them.
So, I think that Spysweeper does indeed have a place and that its engine is obviously fine tuned toward things that Symantec, Superspyware, and Dieselman aren't worried about. If you are worried about anything that might steal your passwords, tell Macy's what you are shopping for, etc., run Spysweeper manually until it's fixed and becomes compatible with the other guys on the block.
Just my opinion.
Can you elaborate on Spy Sweepers finds. Are they cookies or actual spyware. I can guarantee you that Spy Sweeper cannot detect as much as SuperAntiSpyware and Malware Bytes. What were the infections called?
Hi Dieselman
One thing which must be considered is that the 'P' in 'PC' stands for 'Personal' which is exactly what the choice should be. If someone wants to 'waste' their money by doubling up on programs, Symantec should not take that choice away. And, as I said before, if you're just using Spysweeper's realtime shields, you're not really doubling up anyway. Symantec is notorious for releasing software which causes programs to run poorly or not run at all, waiting for the trouble calls to come in, and then making the fixes. NIS and Spysweeper coexisted for many years and only now, with NIS '09, is there a problem. And the problem was created by Symantec. If Spysweeper is running on the PC, without a problem at the time NIS is installed, then NIS is the invader and the bad guy and is with whom the fault lies. The first question always asked in troubleshooting is "What changed?". Proposing that Spysweeper be removed is not solving the problem but is avoiding it. It's putting a small band-aid on a large wound and not making any attempt to heal it. I mean no disrespect by my thoughts, so please don't interpret them that way.
There are known problems with Spyweeper.
NIS 2009 has been completely reworked from the ground up. Its lighter and faster but yet more powerful. Its not just a newer version of NIS 2008. Hence the incompatibility. If you want to know “What changed” then ask Symantec. A quick answer is everything has been changed. I am a GM technician. Cars and trucks change with every new year. Sometimes being completely redesigned from the ground up such as the Corvette. So because somebody how owns a 1992 Corvette wants to swap parts with his new 1998 Corvette but he can’t cause its is now a completely different car by design does that mean that GM is to blame. Shouldn’t his 1992 parts fit on his 1998 car. NO. Change happens and we need to roll with the changes.
Change is necessary and inevitable. Sometimes good, sometimes not. Companies are out to have their software out first and beat the competition so you’ll buy their product. To be the first kid on the block they quite frequently release the software before all the bugs have been worked out. It then becomes the job of the end user to be the troubleshooter for the just released ‘Betaware’. I’m speaking from experience. Before I took very early retirement I was in IT for 30 yrs, starting as a Programmer and ending as a Principal Consultant for one of the biggest consulting firms in the country. I saw this countless times with mainframe (IBM, Unisys, Data General, etc) software to a variety of PC software (IBM, Microsoft, Ashton-Tate, etc). Doesn’t Microsoft still have ‘Patch Tuesday’, even after all the years Windows still has been around? In not one of all of the computer systems I designed was a program that was working and being used in the old system made to be unusable in the new system (unless it was replaced by something which had the EXACT SAME FUNCTIONALITY). That’s the function of the System Design and Analysis phase of the project. I can’t think of an instance where a client would have been (or was even asked to be) satisfied with ‘Don’t use …… anymore, use …… instead’. They wouldn’t have been clients for long. Another name for a client is an end-user. And WE are end-users. And we are troubleshooting NIS for Symantec.
Everything you said about change is true but you’re still not addressing the real issues:
1. Your solution is certainly a good one but certainly not THE one. Different strokes for different folks.
2. There certainly is more cost and system implications with both NIS and Spysweeper running than with just NIS. But the choice should be a personal one, not one made by Symantec.
3. Symantec created the problem. Symantec should fix the problem. Plain and simple.
Symantec is well-known for creating inconsistencies with new releases of software. Initially a work-around is given. Eventually there’s a patch (new version) which fixes the problem. The problem is you usually have to wait a while because patches are gathered in bunches before the new version is released (unless it’s a major bug fix).
Symantec is well-known for creating inconsistencies with new releases of software. Initially a work-around is given. Eventually there’s a patch (new version) which fixes the problem. The problem is you usually have to wait a while because patches are gathered in bunches before the new version is released (unless it’s a major bug fix).
Exactly,just look at all the problems there were when Firefox 3 came out with Norton 360 v2. and FF is opensource, so symantec didn't check the compatibility of N360 with FF 3, not even in beta testing of FF3.
UR 100% right. When I went to FF3 I found the problem of Identity Safe not working. (with NIS '08). I wanted to keep it so I had to go back to FF2 until Symantec made the fix. Now NIS '09 comes out and creates a problem with Spysweeper. How many countless hours I’ve had to spend over the years backing out of things and going back to older versions because of problems created by Symantec. And we won’t even get into install problems with Symantec’s OWN products. Norton’s answer to install issues is the shotgun approach: NRT. It’s no wonder there are so many out there who won’t ever touch Norton products.
aee2k wrote:
UR 100% right. When I went to FF3 I found the problem of Identity Safe not working. (with NIS '08). I wanted to keep it so I had to go back to FF2 until Symantec made the fix. Now NIS '09 comes out and creates a problem with Spysweeper. How many countless hours I've had to spend over the years backing out of things and going back to older versions because of problems created by Symantec. And we won't even get into install problems with Symantec's OWN products. Norton's answer to install issues is the shotgun approach: NRT. It's no wonder there are so many out there who won't ever touch Norton products.
aee2k, now you're contradicting yourself. We started off with old SpySweeper with new NIS broken so Symantec must fix the new NIS. Now you're saying old NIS with new Firefox broken so, again, Symantec is to blame and must fix the old NIS.
Your assertion that new products must not expose bugs in old products is generally the best customer experience and Symantec strives to abide by that. You don't know how many times I've had my teams put hacks into our code, making the code that much more complex and unmaintainable, just because some other program never anticipated things being done legitimately in a different order or different way. There are times, though, when we have to do things the way that we do and we can't work around other programs' issues.
As an example, let's assume that a program protects two APIs, a short and wide one and a tall and narrow one. The program has a bug when dealing with the tall and narrow API but since 99.99% of the programs in the world use the short and wide API the bug is never exposed. Latter, a new program comes along and uses the tall and narrow API and exposes the bug. Who should fix this? In our case, we will look and see if it is absolutely necessary to use the tall and narrow API or could we, instead, use the short and wide one despite any additional efforts we may have to do. The tall and narrow API was provided, though, because sometimes the short and wide one just won't do and when we run into that case, how is Symantec expected to address the issue?