Avast goes rogue

Topic

New Reply

From reader c: Avast has just taken a page out of Microsoft’s bullying manual. I use Avast Free Antivirus. Several months ago, after resisting nag mes
[See the full post at: Avast goes rogue]

Reply | Quote

Replies

I suggest Bitdefender Free. I use it on my wife’s computer (yes, XP) and it’s great. No nag screens, no ads, light on resources. Just make sure you totally scrape off any other AV first. And you’ll need to register with Bitdefender using a junk email account. They send nothing so it’s no problem.

Reply | Quote

c: could try this: go to Control Panel, Programs, then choose to modify Avira, and remove all unwanted modules.

Reply | Quote

Unfortunately, the anti-spam add-in injected by Avast into Outlook does not appear there. I could disable the Mail Shield module, but that’s one of the main points of having an anti-virus, isn’t it ? And I I’m not even sure it would remove the anti-spam toolbar.

Reply | Quote

Many people suggest Bitdefender Free, however I suppose it’s deliberately not made available in France for marketing reasons, because it does not show on Bitedfender’s French site. I presume there’s no way to fool the system in the long run by pretending you’re in another location.

Reply | Quote

Windows Defender
Endpoint is nearly pointless anyways (pun intended).

Software Restriction polices in Group Policy or Local Security Policies do more, presuming you’re running Pro or above.

How to do it? Look up any tutorial on how to mitigate ransomware infections.

Reply | Quote

A search for “remove avast outlook add-in” gives many results, including links to Avast’s and Microsoft’s Web sites.

It would seem that Bitdefender Free doesn’t appear on Bitdefender’s French page because the free version isn’t available in French. I certainly wouldn’t assume that Bitdefender Free won’t work if you’re in France. If you’re interested in this program, I suggest you simply try and see what happens.

Reply | Quote

This used to work on an earlier version of Avast… Can’t guarantee it still works but might be worth a shot… Make sure to backup your stuff or at least set a restore point first.

open avast
settings
troubleshooting
deselect “self-defense”

go to the avast folder
locate the files:
asOutExt.dll
asOutExt64.dll
move them to another folder (don’t delete, just in case they’re needed to do the email scanning).

reopen avast
go to self-defense and check box to re-enable

open outlook, NO avast anti-spam toolbar…

Reply | Quote

“It seems we are less and less in control of our computers.” Not true, install Linux and use Thunderbird Mail. This stuff just doesn’t happen and you won’t need to mess with anti-virus. Woody is stuck because he makes his living off of Windows but the rest of you don’t need to put up with this crap.

Reply | Quote

BTW I didn’t create this… I found it on an Avast forum and saved it for future reference… Am not using Avast at present but still had this saved in case I go back to it again…

Reply | Quote

A few months ago (or was it last year?) Avast decided to add a footer to users outgoing emails, without asking the user ir even informing. This was even if you used google mail via web browser.
That’s the most blatant malware behaviour I’ve seen from a former good program house.

Reply | Quote

Isn’t Avast now collecting and selling “free” user activity?

Reply | Quote

I was worried when I read the title that this was worse. AVG has done far far worse since the 2013 version.

Also if you had office 2007 or newer I would have suggested to consider installing the 64-bit version, maybe avast isn’t compatible with that. Also newer versions of office with add-ons like that don’t take up extra screen space on the tab-button-toolbar. Maybe complain in the avast forum? (check advanced avast options? they have a lot of them)

I’ve dealt a lot with free AVG and paid/ISP Norton, and from time to time with avast. I’d say AVG has gone way downhill since 2013 (snake oil cleaners, 1-click upgrade to 30 trial of the paid version, homepage hijacking with junkware toolbar — much of which can be creatively disabled). Norton has had a rough go since the 2014 version but seem partially back to normal now.

Norton added an option to auto upgrade to the next years version, but they added an off switch a year before hand. I still suggest a clean install when possible.

Reply | Quote

Here is the link for Avast Free France. https://www.avast.com/fr-fr/index

iPhone 13, 2019 iMac(SSD)

Reply | Quote

The only complete way to remove a previous anti-virus program is to run their own special removal tool. All A/V programs have such a tool. For AVAST – that’s called avastclear.exe – you download it off of the AVAST site. The easiest way to find it is to Google it and choose the link that’s from AVAST.

Reply | Quote

Not sure about the browser one, but I’ve seen many AVs do that when they scan in/out pop/smtp, usually something that gets turned off right away.

“this email has no viruses” = “this package is not a bomb, trust me I’m written on the outside”
pointless edit to my email, turned off.

“But [AV name] now! The sender of this email is using it after all, so should you”
annoying edit to my email, adware. Hey AV you are supposed to protect me from that! Off or uninstall.

Reply | Quote

Quite probably yes. However, it has become a bit of a trend as of late. Or maybe we just know more about it now.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=antivirus+collecting+and+selling+information

AVG made a recent statement that got a lot of attention regarding collection & selling. See the above search results from pcmag.

The thing that I try to remember is what the pcmag article states at the end. “Free isn’t free.” Which means that I must take additional steps to know & understand what I’m getting & how it works. Any new piece of software I get I make sure to go over the options & settings to optimize & customize to my own standards. Default is not good enough for me.

The article from ultratechlife says something at the end of their article that sticks with me too. “Are we keeping our computer safe or allowing someone to invade our privacy, which is contrary to our personal computer security? The choice is up to the end user to make an informed decision.”

Reply | Quote

Linux Mint is probably the most user friendly version of Linux and is a solution for anyone who 1)can’t afford or doesn’t want to live in the Apple walled garden, 2) has simple requirements that can easily be met by Linux. Point 2 means that not all Windows programs or their equivalents can be found on Linux, so the more exotic the Windows program you use the less likely it is Linux will be your solution. This is also true, but to a lesser extent, of Apple. Also Linux Wine while it runs many Windows programs is not 100% so that depending on how exotic the programs are that you need, you’re going to be left with a residue of programs that need Windows. You can always do that on a virtual machine, but it’s still Windows.

With respect to Avast, it was a great program but for several years it has became heavier and heavier with all the bloat-ware, such that it’s really burdensome even on a fast computer. Bitdefender is light and unobtrusive if you can install it (not always possible).

Linux is far less subject to malware than Windows but that is more a function of low Linux market share on desktops, not of intrinsic immunity of Linux to malware. Someone who wants to hack your Linux box can do it. You always need to follow best practices for the security of your system. It’s useful to install a Linux anti-virus and run it occasionally (AFAIK there’s no real on-line antivirus for Linux).

Reply | Quote

I use Trend Micro. My philosophy is: Find a highly-rated commercial (non-free) program, and use that.

If I pay them, I figure they will be more motivated to do the job right than if I don’t pay them. Or, put another way, I can either pay them money, or they will extract my payment in some other way.

This is especially important in securing and protecting my computer. I’ll go with free stuff for other things, but not for my antivirus program.

Reply | Quote

So true. I don’t use Avast myself but a friend of mine does and Thunderbird notifies me (asks me to accept) that external call to Avast you mention via the “Secured with Avast” footer. This is recent and I guess corresponds to what Reader C refers to when mentioning “several months ago”.

This problem was mentioned here : https://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=78428.0

I added 0.0.0.0 ipmcdn.avast.com to my Hosts file since this is the url the footer calls.

Avast is no longer what it once was, i’m afraid

Reply | Quote

I recommend to consider these findings and implications:

https://www.av-test.org/en/news/news-single-view/linux-16-security-packages-against-windows-and-linux-malware-put-to-the-test/

There is apparently no security suite for Linux out there that is really worth to pay money for.

While Linux is not often targetted by malware, this can change and actually does change, and it already right now helps in distributing Windows-aiming malware. If you are like me, running a Linux-Windows dual boot system, or are server for Windows systems (most servers in Windows networks run under Liunux, I read), or interchange datafiles between Linux and Windows installations, you should have some scanner and protection against Windows malware in place – even on Linux systems. Not so much to defend Linux, but to help the protection of Windows.

I remind of how relatively fast things detoriated under Android. Some years ago, Android, basing on Linux btw., was said to be absolutely safe, and that you should be “careful” and only download from Google Playstore. This belief today cannot be longer suppported, if somebodystills tells you you need no security on your Android cellphone or tablet, don’T be shy but laugh that person loud right into his/her face. Even at Google Playstore there is infested software being offered. Google take sit out when they become aware of it, but it cannot prevcent it from entering it in the first. That is especially true for the games section, it seems, so be on your guard.

If Linux should become more popular, the same can and most likely will happen to it as well. Like with browsers under Windows: those that are most targetted are those that are more popular than others.

>>>Your best protection maybe is to use software with as small as possible market shares.<<< No Google. No Adobe. No Microsoft. USE low profile ALTERNATIVES.

Maybe I should stop recommending Linux Mint or Firefox, therefore. Mayb eI should even start tlelign people how bad and liusy they are, so that they would be better off if not using it. LOL

Reply | Quote

The Avast forum topic I mentioned is not correct, it concerns actually another problem than the one of the footer included in emails sent when using Avast, that problem being an Avast user disturbed by an Avast inconsistency when using his email client…

Oops …

Reply | Quote

^ True, so true. Nobody can convince me that a whole business can afford to give away for free the same quality and scale of features that it offers in its payware versions, without getting into fiscal trouble.

Also note that many freeware software lacks many features of the payware version. Often that is constantly-on active background guarding missing. Free AntiVir often only allow active HD scanning, not background guarding.

I would absolutely recommend MBAM, payware, it is a low price for a lifetime license. It has rang in past years most of my alarms, it did more to save me than any firewall/antivir scanner I ever had in use. Its excellent reputation imo is fully deserved because fully confirmed.

I also would recommend to switch off active scripting and any form of autostart in browser.

And get rid of that Java. There is no excuse for coding in Java on PC, I do not understand why some people still do that.

Finally, the frequently updated test lists of the German AV institute are really helpful to differentiate the good fromt he not so good secuirty suites. This institute seems to be economically independant (not paid by the industry), and they base their lists on longterm anyslsis, bnot just on one snapshot in time, they follow the success rate of scanner noit just on one test day in one testing session, but over severls weeks and months. I think you get a much better idea of the software that way, its trends in going up or down in performance over the months. A suite that was good when you bought it, must not still be that when one year has passed.

https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/

Note that these lists are kept separate for various Windows versions and Mac. Microsoft’S inbuild default solutions score badly, Defdender and Essentials, from sub mediocre to simply bad. I use to switch them off. They can and do interfere with the AntiVir scanner I install, and do nothing better but many things worse than professional solutions.

On Windows 7, not updating it anymore over here, i use MBAM, and G-Data (double engine: licensed Bit Defender and an in-house development teaming up with it). Works extremely well over here. No interferences between GData and MBAM(some people report these, but I cannot confirm them). The only disadvantage of GData is that while it does not put a braking foot on the system when I play, active HD scans last considerably longer than most other scanners. Maybe because it scans with two engines.

Reply | Quote

There are two opt-out options when you first install it: settings > general > privacy…

‘Participate in the Avast community’
‘Participate in data sharing’

They are ticked by default but whether they honour the opt-out is anyone’s guess.

Reply | Quote

http://www.bitdefender.fr/

Maybe not the free version on the French site.
However it should be available here
http://www.bitdefender.ro/solutions/free.html
or here
http://www.bitdefender.com.au/solutions/free.html

I used the paid version for a while, but I found it too bloated for my taste. Now I use the Microsoft solutions.
For those users who are very concerned about the internet traffic and they are many among the readers of this site, the paid version of BitDefender is a very good security solution.

Just be aware when proceeding with the payment/renewal/paid support options which can be misleading.

Reply | Quote

Too complicated for most end-users.

Reply | Quote

This is not new behavior by Avast.

Avast has been practicing evil for more than 2 years now. I used that software for years, and really all I ever got was false positives (which they didn’t offer a good workaround for).

The problem when a company takes a stance of “we know better than you what you need” is precisely that arrogance has no place in computing.

My suggestion:

Outfit yourself with a good web blacklist (via your hosts file), learn to be conservative about downlading/running any old program you see, and ditch the 3rd party AV software!

Windows Defender is just fine.

As a suggestion, if you want to get a bit geeky:

http://win10epicfail.proboards.com/thread/105/build-own-hosts-file

-Noel

Reply | Quote

I really believe that Avast has jumped the shark recently.

For most of the past 10 years I have been an Avast evangelist to my family and friends. But I have become more concerned with their focus on “features” instead of detection rates in the past few years. I have been gradually switching over to Avira Free on my high priority PC’s, due to their top tier (equal to Kaspersky and Bitdefender)detection performance and low false positive rates. Their free version uses the same detection engine as their Pro version. The only extra paid features in Pro vs. Free are the web and mail protection.

I had left Avast alone on my home theater PC, because of it’s relatively light demands on the much older PC hardware running Win 7 Pro, and leaving it in their “gaming mode” to avoid unnecessary security popups. Don’t surf the web or email from this box, so it has less exposure generally.

But recently, I noticed a new browser had been installed on this PC. WTF? It turned out an automatic version update from Avast had pushed out their “secure browser” without asking me. They were rather proud of it and insisted that it was previously only available to the “paid version”, but they were now making it available to everyone.

There is just one problem here. They did not consult me, or ask my permission, to install a new browser on my PC.

Duh?

Their forums were on fire for a while from loyal members due to this, but I have moved on. They were obviously tone deaf to the issue.

Seems to be the same strain of complacency that has infected Microsoft management as of late.

My recommendation now for PC’s that need a light footprint AV is to use Bitdefender Free, otherwise Avira Free is the best choice.

The only beef I have with Bitdefender Free is that you cannot set exclusions, or control when the quarantine is used. This could be important if you use this on a critical PC that has a false positive. My home theater is a perfect application for this product

Reply | Quote

I gave up on Avast when I found viruses it apparently didn’t (paid version). They keep sending me naggy emails about how desperately they want me back. This just makes me double down on my lack of enthusiasm.

Reply | Quote

Malwarebytes is no longer offering the lifetime license, but it’s #24.95 for a year’s subscription. However, if you have a lifetime license, they’ll let you transfer it to another computer. I did that when I retired my XP box for a Win 7 a few years back.

Malwarebytes Antimalware plays well with MSE. Haven’t tried it with any other AV programs. They have stated that it should be run with an AV program.

(The free version is a scanner. Buying the license gets you the real time protection.)

Reply | Quote

@NotReallyBob(fromanothercomputer)
Not even Microsoft recommends their Office 64-bit versions. It is safer to stay away from the 64-bit versions of Office until at least Microsoft changes their advice. Too many limitations in 64-bit versions in relation to legacy technologies and ActiveX and COM components are still in use.
https://support.office.com/en-us/article/Choose-the-32-bit-or-64-bit-version-of-Office-2dee7807-8f95-4d0c-b5fe-6c6f49b8d261

Reply | Quote

@Rex There are few of us stuck with Windows in the same way. With a lot of effort Windows is usable though

Reply | Quote

Nobody can convince me that a whole business can afford to give away for free the same quality and scale of features that it offers in its payware versions, without getting into fiscal trouble.

Actually, there’s apparently much more money in sneaky advertising and selling user data than in selling software. See Windows 10. And, while talking about Avast, they have just recently abandoned and completely ruined their paid-for Android mobile security suite. Paid licenses cancelled, all features now “free” for everyone. Childish cartoon-like GUI, useful features gone, buggy like hell, but hey, it’s got a “fancy” GUI (designed to the liking of Avast CEO’s wife) and they nag users with ads all the time.

Reply | Quote

Other than macros there shouldn’t be too many issues. Also the idea was to not be compatible in this case…

Reply | Quote

Be very careful with the avast removal tool, it sets your computer to boot into only safe mode, then unsets it in safe mode. If your safe mode is broken you don’t boot anymore (offline regedit fix).

Reply | Quote

Yeah, that and they require that you “register” every year so they can have yet another way of putting their paid for version in front of you. Then half the time the register thing doesn’t work!

I was about to give up on Avast when I couldn’t register, but then I noticed that I had somehow been re-registered without my doing anything. Things are continually getting weirder.

Being 20 something in the 70's was far more fun than being 70 something in the insane 20's

Reply | Quote

I’ve left avast! on silent mode for years now, only two things I’ve had to deal with are the HTTPS MiTMing (which a lot of vendors seem to be doing these days, and could be part of the “selling” Woody’s mentioned) and the footer thing Barfa mentioned. Both of which were easily dealt with.

That said I’m probably gonna ditch it in the event that I decide to move to 8.1 or newer.

Reply | Quote

I uninstalled Avast recently after they installed their SafePrice plug-in without my permission. I did read that AVG had cleaned up their act – is this true?

Reply | Quote

An unrelated question, i apologize for posting here.

My hard drive recently died & i had to replace it & reset the new one twice due to .net framework 4+ unable to install & windows update not working.

All those problems squared away, got everything working this reset, except windows update. It spikes my cpu around 25%+ constantly while it searches all day & gives no result; all i see is “Checking for updates…”

I have the gwx control panel sir woody recommends & I’ve set to monitor & block all windows 10 related things; updates are set to notify before download & install. Should i disable it again & set my computer to check for a whole day?

Or is there something else i can do? Thanks in advance for any help i get here.

Reply | Quote

Just had exactly the same thing. Program updates are set to Tell me about them but don’t download, but on 2 machines they did it anyway, AND put their Safe Zone Browser on my Desktop which I had to remove in Programs > Avast (right click > Change).

I’ve sent them appropriate feedback!!! and changed the updates setting to Manual – if that doesn’t stop them, after 6 years I’ll be looking elsewhere.

An AV program is supposed to stop malware not create it!

Reply | Quote

Have you seen this?

https://www.askwoody.com/2016/win7-users-install-kb-3161664-to-speed-up-windows-update-scans/

Reply | Quote

I’ve set the update services to manual & don’t check for updates on GWX. I ran wsus offline update; now i’ll make a restore point & backup this amazing tool, among some other files in case things go wrong later.

Everything looks fine now; i have KB3161664 setup, will run it soon.

Reply | Quote

Woody, In your professional opinion- are we, the public of the world, fighting a loosing battle against Microsoft in trying to keep our Windows 7/8.1 and our private lives in tact?

Reply | Quote

Tough question, no simple answer.

In short, we’re losing the battle to keep our private lives private. It isn’t just Windows. It’s ab-so-lute-ly everything. When you think of the privacy implications of, e.g., face recognition on public-facing cameras, the mind boggles.

People need to figure out their tolerance for snooping. Many of the capabilities people want – say, maps with directions on their phones, or Alexa responding to factual questions, or Google sorting out photos – are only possible if they give up some privacy.

I think one of the great political debates of the coming decade will be about data gathering and retention. Right now, we have some (ineffective) safeguards in place for the credit reporting industry. There are more-effective but still holey safeguards with medical data and credit card info. Some day, people are going to demand details about what data is being gathered about them – they’ll want full reporting, and the ability to delete (or at least challenge) data they don’t like.

Or maybe people don’t care. Maybe the benefits being provided (and there ARE benefits) outweigh the loss of privacy. I don’t claim to have a one-size-fits-all answer to the problem.

Reply | Quote

I dumped Avast over two years ago when its intrusions started seriously impacting web surfing and general system performance on my tablet, then on my main laptop. AVG is lighter in these regards, but it does collect and retain user information.

That said, Neil Rubenking of PC Mag has assured us that the AVG “spying” is no worse than genreal Widnows telemetry, and does not identify individual users.

I use AVG onWindows, alongside of Malwarebytes Free and online scanners, such as the one from ESET, plus Microsoft Safety Scanner (the same scanning engine as Widnows dEfender, but no active protections and you have to download the whole program to get updates).

I spend over 90 percent of my computer time in the world of Ubuntu Linux. With the transisition from Firefox to Chromium as the main browser, Ubuntu ids getting more Google-centric, but still not full-on Chrome-centric.

I voluntarily use Chrome Beta in Linux, and I have applied AppArmor and activated the Ubuntu Firewall for all apps.

I further protect my browsers with ad-blocking and script-blocking and tracker-blocking add-ons in all OSes. I only allow Flash content when I click on the Allow Now or Allow Once button.

Am I totally secure? No. Am I totally private? Not likely. But I am doing all this in Linux for one-quarter of the maintenance time and effort and about half the external drive space of Windows 10 Pro.

My tablet is Win 10 Pro. My only real defense there (beyond AV and scanners) is to limit MS Updates using the Neil Carboni Method, and to protect my browsers as I do in Linux.

My financial and email operations are all in Linux.

The only issue will be when I ditch the lapptop for an Intel NUC PC. I bet ubuntu 16.04 with a few tweaks will do just fine in there. Then set up Win 10 Pro as a VM inside Virtual Box.

Windows inside Linux makes more security sense to me than Linux inside of Windows. And much more privacy sense.

Replies and dissent welcomed.

Reply | Quote

I noticed something after wsus offline. I had checked include service packs option, among other things.

Later today i checked some files for the list of available compatibility modes, saw no win7 service pack# option, just windows 7.

i’m confused, desktop functionality has improved, unsure if i have service packs. I saw hundreds of updates during wsus offline.

i am satisfied with current state of desktop; unsure about running KB3161664 setup & re-enable checks for updates.

What do you think sir woody?

Reply | Quote

I think you’re confused

You’re running Win7. You’ve been applying updates. Yes? If so, relax. It isn’t even time to install the June patches – we’re still on MS-DEFCON 2.

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the response Bob. Yes, don’t use the AvastClear tool if your computer is broken. But if your computer is working fine and you want to completely remove AVAST – then use it. Just make sure that you give it the correct location of the AVAST software on your computer when it asks.

Reply | Quote

AVG … really?

It may appear to be light on modern hardware.

But, I tried it as a replacement for Avast on a single core Pentium 4 3.0GHz PC, running Windows 7, and it ran like I had just poured super glue into the registry. Launching any programs experienced terrible lag times.

The same legacy system ran just fine with Avast Free, Avira Free, or Bitdefender Free. No impact to performance whatsoever.

Check out https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/ for the latest detection and performance ratings for each version of Windows.

Another excellent source of AV testing data is at http://www.av-comparatives.org/dynamic-tests/

I agree with your approach to browser protection. The ad-blocking and script-blocking and tracker-blocking add-ons are very effective and usually available as browser extensions at the browser provider’s trusted repository. With a little due diligence using these, it is possible to exceed the bundled browser protection offered by the AV vendor.

I am also a *nix-er. But I have invested in software that cannot run on Mac or Linux yet. Wine is sketchy for these programs so far, so I will have to put up with Windows for the forseeable future.

Windows virtual machines (VM’s) inside Linux can work, (clearly not intended for the PC beginner) but you will still be limited to the state of Linux drivers for attached external hardware. For example, FireWire is not widely supported on Linux. So if you do professional audio or video, you would be better off running a Windows host with guest Linux VM’s. Not sure of the current status for USB3 or Thunderbolt either. It’s just now reaching full support status on Windows.

Reply | Quote

You might not know safemode is broken until avastclear sets your computer to ONLY boot in safemode.

Reply | Quote

Applying updates? all i did was run wsus offline tool, ya know this 1 http://download.wsusoffline.net/

Previous to that, i did not see any service pack option in compatibility mode of random file properties; that’s what i used to check if i had any service packs.

After wsus offline, it was still listing only regular Windows 7, no service packs, even though i selected include service packs in the tool.

Yes, i’m very confused.

Reply | Quote

So Bob – you’re suggesting that because most people can’t tell if their safemode is broken or not – that they not use avastclear.exe and just leave the remnants of AVAST on their computer after they try to uninstall it – to interfere with the next A/V that they install. Right ? …. Why not tell us how to test if “safemode” is going to work or not – or if it is broken.

Reply | Quote

@Mike Merrit…

I would think if one tried booting into Safe Mode and was successful that it’s not broken?

I don’t think Bob was suggesting most people CAN’T TELL if it’s broken, I think it’s most likely he was advising people to “verify” that it functions before using the tool.

If you don’t know how to enter Safe Mode to test it… repeatedly press the F8 key on your keyboard while the computer is booting up and then choose “Safe Mode” from the boot menu that appears.

Reply | Quote

Or, we can test whether our recovery options (restore points and Safe Mode) are working periodically. I may be in the minority, but I push every button once in awhile as a test.

Reply | Quote

On older hardware, I have long recommended not using Windows at all, for this and other performance reasons.

Linux Mint or Lubuntu work well on such hardware, and there will not be this AV problem at all.

Reply | Quote

Linux drivers deserve a separate reply.

When a driver is not in the distro’s own repositories, there are some manufacturers and some third-party PPAs which may support the hardware, at least partially.

I have a NVidia-Intel hybrid laptop, and I need to use the Ubuntu Universe or Multiverse proprietary drivers.

I am well aware of the problem of drivers in Linux for this and other reasons.

My choice of an Intel NUC is not random — I would not attempt to use Linux as the host OS if the entire hardware configuration of the PC and all my intended peripherals for it were not known to work with my favorite distro. Some PCs and some devices work, some simply are not supported.

For example, my ASUS Transformer Book is not fully supported under Linux, so I don’t dare try to convert it.

Reply | Quote

You can’t access foreign Bitdefender sites. you’re redirected to your own country’s.

Even if one could fool Bitdefender with Tor, a VPN or similar solutions, I don’t think it would be wise relying on a version Bitdefender doesn’t want you to use. If they monitor your country when you try to download the software, they probably monitor it while you’re using it.

You depend on constant communication with the vendor’s servers when using an anti-virus. I don’t want to go through all the trouble of installing a forbidden version of Bitdefender, only to realise somewhere down the line that it refuses to work properly (or at all).

Reply | Quote

It’s not a language issue. I’ve standardised English across all my software whenever it’s possible, because the largest and best support resources are in English.

Since we’re on a Microsoft-oriented site, it’s another Redmond scandal that non-English online support is mostly based on automatic translation — and therefore gibberish to a large extent.

You’d think that Microsoft, of all companies, would have some funds to allocate to human-based translation, at least for major world languages, but no.

My experience is of the French language, but if they don’t care to have French translators I don’t think they have Hungarian ones.

This means that every time I go to a Microsoft site, I have to force a change in order to get to the English original — because it would often detect that being in France, I must “want” their info delivered in their rotten, machine-generated French.

Reply | Quote

That’s akin to being a marriage counselor, and telling clients : why did you marry that , anyway ?

Please don’t make me explain again why some of us (meaning : millions) need Windows.

Reply | Quote

Regarding anti-virus, my research (admittedly limited in depth and width) shows, on the contrary, that paid-for versions offer little more than free ones.

The current trend seems to be : put all the real value in the free version (because if you want to make money out of your brand, you can’t afford to harm your reputation by releasing a poor anti-virus), then try to twist people’s arm into upgrading to the paid-for version, by adding useless extras : file shredders, software updaters, anti-phishing modules, password managers, pseudo-VPNs…

Using scare tactics in the process, including nag screens warning of impending doom if you do not fork out $$$.

That’s what Avast does, to the best of my understanding. And there’s no pledge whatsoever that they will stop the snooping antics if you buy the upmarket version.

A few anti-virus tools have a clear-cut attitude : free is scan-only, online protection needs payment (Malware Bytes comes to mind). That’s fair enough.

Reply | Quote

Ha ! Safe Price ! I got that, too. It’s an aggravation, but fortunately it’s easy to get rid of (at least, it was when I did it…).

> Use a Windows account with administrator privileges.

> In Avast : Settings / Troubleshooting / Enable Avast self-defense module = No.

> In Windows Explorer : go to where Avast is installed, delete SafePrice folder.

> In Avast : Settings / Troubleshooting / Enable Avast self-defense module = Yes.

Reply | Quote