I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
(current version) and Windows Mail; some information
from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
fully compatible.

I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
problems.  Should this assumption be revised?

Robert Miles 

I use Windows Security Essentials.

The technician is not correct.
NIS 2010 is not compatible with WLM.

Scanning email is not necessary.  Uninstall NIS 2010 and reinstall without 
the email scanner.
If that is not possible, then use Windows Security Essentials.

-- 
Ron Sommer
MS MVP- Windows Live Mail

wrote in message news:#cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
(current version) and Windows Mail; some information
from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
fully compatible.

I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
problems.  Should this assumption be revised?

Robert Miles

Norton has always been an invasive and destructive program and has never =
been compatible with Microsoft's email clients.  See point 3 here:  =
www.oehelp.com/OETips.aspx#3 =20

steve

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message =
news:%23cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
> fully compatible.
>=20
> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>=20
> Robert Miles=20
>=20
>

I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
(current version) and Windows Mail; some information
from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
fully compatible.

I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
problems.  Should this assumption be revised?

Robert Miles
..
Can you be more specific?  Are you using POP3 accounts and concerned about 
NIS spam filtering?  I'm running NIS 2010 on two machines using Hotmail and 
Gmail (IMAP) accounts.  NIS doesn't try to filter these and I have no 
problems with it. 

Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.

I would suggest replacing Norton with Microsoft Security Essentials.

1: Download and save MSE.

Microsoft Security Essentials
http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/default.aspx

2: Download and save this tool.

Norton Removal Tool
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039

3: Disconnect from the Internet.

4: Remove Norton using the tool and reboot.

5: Install MSE and reboot.
-- 
           Bruce Hagen
         MS-MVP  [Mail]
      Imperial Beach, CA


"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:%23qM1odDILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
> fully compatible.
>
> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>
> Robert Miles
> .
> Can you be more specific?  Are you using POP3 accounts and concerned 
> about NIS spam filtering?  I'm running NIS 2010 on two machines using 
> Hotmail and Gmail (IMAP) accounts.  NIS doesn't try to filter these and 
> I have no problems with it. 

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three 
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single 
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off 
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're 
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience. 

On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 05:03:02 -0500, robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net wrote:

> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
> fully compatible.

Considering that Symantec is publishing applications for Microsoft Windows,
and related products, it is up to Symantec to ensure that their product is
compatible with Microsoft products, not the other way around. Given the
history of problems with Symantec products and Windows, it is best not to
install Symantec products on a Windows system.

-- 
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

"Victek" <victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client 
> >since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a 
> single problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be 
> turned off by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of 
> course you're entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out 
> in my experience.


Nothing specific from Norton or MS, but I have been doing this since 2004 
and while many people do not have an issue with Norton, many people do.

For your reading pleasure.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&&sa=X&ei=F6U4TIKiKZLksQOU8qFR&ved=0CBEQBSgA&q=norton+windows+live+mail+compatibility&spell=1

http://www.google.com/search?q=norton+%2B+windows+live+mail&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1

http://www.google.com/search?q=norton+%2B+outlook+express&rls=com.microsoft:en-us&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&startIndex=&startPage=1
-- 
           Bruce Hagen
         MS-MVP  [Mail]
      Imperial Beach, CA

This has been my experience as well.

No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I have 
kept email scanning on as well.

This issue is a red herring.

Nancy

"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience. 

>Considering that Symantec is publishing applications for Microsoft Windows,
>and related products, it is up to Symantec to ensure that their product is
>compatible with Microsoft products, not the other way around. Given the
>history of problems with Symantec products and Windows, it is best not to
>install Symantec products on a Windows system.
>
-- 
>Norman
>~Oh Lord, why have you come
>~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
>
..
You are quite right that Norton security products were dismal for a number 
of years.  Before they released the 2009 line I avoided them and would 
actively discourage others as well.  But things changed in a big way in 
2009, which led me to reconsider.  Symantec brought in new people with a new 
attitude and that resulted in dramatically improved software.  All the big 
complaints, such as slow install, even slower uninstall, settings corruption 
and heavy drag on system resources, have been addressed.  There have still 
been issues with Symantec's tech support - particularly over the phone - and 
I recommend that people opt for online chat support when needed.  Otherwise 
the products (NIS, NAV, N360) have been very compatible and scored pretty 
well in various reviews.  I understand that some people have had bad 
experiences and simply don't want to revisit any Norton products.  I don't 
know if that's where you're coming from, but in any case I feel the new line 
deserves fresh look.  Sometimes people really do get their act together (at 
least for a time <g>). 

Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
antivirus.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience. 

The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and 
DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing WLM ---- then RE-ENABLED 
it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.

That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.

Nancy

"Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
antivirus.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.

Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  Free, 
lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank you.

NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so 
gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their 
website.


wrote in message news:#cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
(current version) and Windows Mail; some information
from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
fully compatible.

I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
problems.  Should this assumption be revised?

Robert Miles

I'm the desktop architect for a LARGE company.  We have performed tests. 
While the corp version of NIS (known as Symantec Endpoint Protection) works, 
it is highly inefficient.  Contrast that to MS Security Essentials which is 
highly efficient in terms if protection and impact to system.  Users who 
have removed Symantec to go with SE have noticed a nice increase in system 
performance.  It is really noticeable on older machines or those with not 
much memory.t files

The Symantec engineer's only argument to keep their product on my desktops 
was that they update their dat files several times during the day while MS 
only releases one update.  That's a risk I am willing to take!

The server version of the MS is really cool.  You actually have the choice 
of running anywhere from 1 to 8  (yes 8) scanning engines at once.  So yo 
could run the MS engine and the Symantec and the Mcafee at once.  While I 
don't recommend it, for those servers with horsepower to spare that perhaps 
run in a DMZ would benefit.




"Nancy Jackman"  wrote in message 
news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

This has been my experience as well.

No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I have
kept email scanning on as well.

This issue is a red herring.

Nancy

"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience. 

Fyi..Peter Norton sold his company to Symantec in 1990(twenty years =
ago).....well in advance of email scanning inclusion in Norton=20
products and for the majority of the planet pc users also well in =
advance of any widely used Microsoft email client(Outlook Express=20
appeared in 1997)

Any AV client that interferes with a mail program's ability to =
send/receive by scanning email(in/out) or scanning eml files during=20
saving those files on one's machine may inevitably create issues with =
one's ability to send/receive mail.

Some folks have issues with Norton products, others don't..
In the past Norton products  monitored email by pushing it through a =
Norton created server on the user's machine 127.x.x.x   That=20
method ceased quite some time ago(well before NIS 2010)

It is a good idea to disable the following in NIS 2010 when used on any =
email client(Microsoft is not unique nor is WLM)
1. Email scanning in the NAV configuration
2. Confidential Email scanning
3. Antispam filter for Outgoing mail

I've NIS2010 and 2011[beta] with all email scanning features =
periodically enabled/disabled on spare drives(Vista and Win7/WLM Wave=20
3/Wave 4) for quite sometime without issue. The same for Eset NOD32.  =
I've been testing Norton products since Peter Norton started=20
his company(they all fit on a floppy disk).

Does NIS work when enabled...Most of time..but not always....an =
occasional time-out does occur...with NIS10/11 and Nod32 3/4 and=20
almost always creates problems for the same account(a pop3 edu account, =
and not with Gmail, Hotmail, Yahoo using Pop3)

Earlier(pre 2010 versions of NAV or NIS) were much more =
problematic(2005-2009). On the other hand, I have a legacy Norton System =

Works Pro 2003 running on an XP/WLM Wave 4 laptop/512MB/1.0Ghz P3 =
without any problems what so ever and does not consume CPU cycles=20
like Microsoft's Security Essentials.

After over 30 yrs of pc use on Apple, Windows, and Norton and other =
products...
Should email scanning be disabled ?..imo, yes
Will everyone have problems ? Nope.
Is it necessary to switch to another client? ..Maybe.

If one can get buy without problems or disabling email scanning and =
prefer to keep there software until their subscription=20
expires...that's  a decision each person has to make on their own.  It's =
their choice and their money.

If deciding to switch from a third party AV client or suite...due to =
email scanning problems...MSE is  a fair choice(the latest=20
version is more robust than its first RTW version, small footprint, =
effective and it doesn't scan email).

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client =
since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>--=20
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on =
three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned =
off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my =
experience.=20

"Victek" <victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client 
> >since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a 
> single problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be 
> turned off by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course 
> you're entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my 
> experience.

How much do you use newsgroups, and does turning off email scanning
also turn off newsgroups scanning?   The NIS problems I'm seeing are
almost all with newsgroups posts and with withs in storage folders, not with
email still in the Inbox folder.

Robert Miles 

>"osu9400"  wrote in message news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  Free, 
>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank 
>you.
>
>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so 
>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their 
>website.
..
Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the 
current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It is 
now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal Tool. 
You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre 2009. 
It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security software 
are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton Removal 
Tool. 

Good Data.

Thanks.

Nancy

"osu9400"  wrote in message news:##gVcRLILHA.5668@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

I'm the desktop architect for a LARGE company.  We have performed tests.
While the corp version of NIS (known as Symantec Endpoint Protection) works,
it is highly inefficient.  Contrast that to MS Security Essentials which is
highly efficient in terms if protection and impact to system.  Users who
have removed Symantec to go with SE have noticed a nice increase in system
performance.  It is really noticeable on older machines or those with not
much memory.t files

The Symantec engineer's only argument to keep their product on my desktops
was that they update their dat files several times during the day while MS
only releases one update.  That's a risk I am willing to take!

The server version of the MS is really cool.  You actually have the choice
of running anywhere from 1 to 8  (yes 8) scanning engines at once.  So yo
could run the MS engine and the Symantec and the Mcafee at once.  While I
don't recommend it, for those servers with horsepower to spare that perhaps
run in a DMZ would benefit.

"Nancy Jackman"  wrote in message

news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

This has been my experience as well.

No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I have
kept email scanning on as well.

This issue is a red herring.

Nancy

"Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>-- 
>          Bruce Hagen
>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>      Imperial Beach, CA
..
Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience. 

"Victek" <victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:eHn3nEGILHA.4920@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Considering that Symantec is publishing applications for Microsoft 
>>Windows,
>>and related products, it is up to Symantec to ensure that their product is
>>compatible with Microsoft products, not the other way around. Given the
>>history of problems with Symantec products and Windows, it is best not to
>>install Symantec products on a Windows system.
>>
> -- 
>>Norman
>>~Oh Lord, why have you come
>>~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
>>
> .
> You are quite right that Norton security products were dismal for a number 
> of years.  Before they released the 2009 line I avoided them and would 
> actively discourage others as well.  But things changed in a big way in 
> 2009, which led me to reconsider.  Symantec brought in new people with a 
> new attitude and that resulted in dramatically improved software.  All the 
> big complaints, such as slow install, even slower uninstall, settings 
> corruption and heavy drag on system resources, have been addressed.  There 
> have still been issues with Symantec's tech support - particularly over 
> the phone - and I recommend that people opt for online chat support when 
> needed.  Otherwise the products (NIS, NAV, N360) have been very compatible 
> and scored pretty well in various reviews.  I understand that some people 
> have had bad experiences and simply don't want to revisit any Norton 
> products.  I don't know if that's where you're coming from, but in any 
> case I feel the new line deserves fresh look.  Sometimes people really do 
> get their act together (at least for a time <g>).

I'm with you on this, Victek.  I have been using Norton for at least 6 
years, generally without problem (even the 2004 - 8 versions which many had 
issues with). NIS 2009 and 2010 seem to have had much better reviews.  When 
I read of people having problems with NIS 2010 and WLM, I do wonder what 
their setup is, and exactly what the problems are.  I have given up spam 
filtering (my ISP uses SpamAssassin and marks emails it thinks are spam. 
It's often correct, but sometimes wrong.  I suspect that NIS - or any other 
spam filter - is not much different in this respect) as it takes me only a 
few seconds to decide if a mail is spam or not, and just a few more seconds 
to examine the message source to see if it is spam or not.

I've used Norton support a couple of times in the last year and found it to 
be quick and helpful.

NIS isn't perfect (a bit too pushy in certain marketing areas for my 
liking), but it does well in independent AV reviews.  If people based their 
Windows usage on their experiences with 3.0 and continued to do so, would 
they be screaming for all those with XP, Vista, or 7 to wipe them off their 
machines as they can't be any good?  That would make as much sense as the 
continuing clamour to uninstall NIS 2010 due to problems experienced years 
ago with early versions of Norton.

-- 

Jeff 

Bingo!

Nancy

"Jeff Layman"  wrote in message news:i1cvtc$31s$1@news.albasani.net...

[...]

If people based their Windows usage on their experiences with [Windows] 3.0 
and continued to do so, would
they be screaming for all those with XP, Vista, or 7 to wipe them off their 
machines as they can't be any good?

That would make as much sense as the continuing clamour to uninstall NIS 
2010 due to problems experienced
years ago with early versions of Norton.
-- 

Jeff 

I got some more information about compatibility from a Sysmantec/Norton
chat technician today.  They claim that NIS 2010  is partly compatible with
WLM - enough not to interfere with the email functions, but not yet fully
tested for compatibility for other sections, such as the newsgroups section.
Therefore, when you say that NIS 2010 is compatible or not compatible
with WLM, you need to add whether you mean with the email section only,
or with just what other sections.

I'm finding signs that it is not fully compatible with the newsgroups 
section,
but not quickly enough to decide to abandon any use of NIS 2010 yet.

Do you know if any *.nws files, especially those for text-only newsgroups,
can contain anything dangerous to Windows without any effort by the
user to extract it?  If they can't, I may be able to find a way to tell NIS 
2010
not to scan any of the directories containing *.nws files.

Also, today I found a way to give Symantec/Norton suggestions about
how to improve the compatibility with WLM and WM, and gave them
a few.  No idea yet if those suggestions will improve it enough, though.

Robert Miles

"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message 
news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> This has been my experience as well.
>
> No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I 
> have kept email scanning on as well.
>
> This issue is a red herring.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.

Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
on how to do it.

Also, how do you prevent your computer from being exposed
to viruses during the WLM installation?

And is it possible to uninstall and reinstall WLM without losing
anything already downloaded from the email and newsgroups
servers?

Robert Miles


"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message 
news:OUIQtYGILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and 
> DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing WLM ---- then RE-ENABLED 
> it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.
>
> That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
> news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
> In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
> and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
> user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
> antivirus.
>
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.
>

<qp>
The client integration (spam folder, buttons, etc) is supported only for =
Outlook and Outlook Express.  However, users can configure=20
Windows Mail (or other unsupported e-mail clients) to move the tagged =
spam to a spam folder.
To do this, first create a folder called "Norton AntiSpam Folder"
Then create a filter rule in your e-mail client to automatically filter =
e-mails containing the tag "Norton AntiSpam" in the subject=20
header to this "Norton AntiSpam Folder".
Periodically monitor this "Norton AntiSpam Folder" for any non-spam =
mails or False Positives and then delete them.
</qp>



--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

wrote in message news:O4eMZUWILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

I got some more information about compatibility from a Sysmantec/Norton
chat technician today.  They claim that NIS 2010  is partly compatible =
with
WLM - enough not to interfere with the email functions, but not yet =
fully
tested for compatibility for other sections, such as the newsgroups =
section.
Therefore, when you say that NIS 2010 is compatible or not compatible
with WLM, you need to add whether you mean with the email section only,
or with just what other sections.

I'm finding signs that it is not fully compatible with the newsgroups
section,
but not quickly enough to decide to abandon any use of NIS 2010 yet.

Do you know if any *.nws files, especially those for text-only =
newsgroups,
can contain anything dangerous to Windows without any effort by the
user to extract it?  If they can't, I may be able to find a way to tell =
NIS
2010
not to scan any of the directories containing *.nws files.

Also, today I found a way to give Symantec/Norton suggestions about
how to improve the compatibility with WLM and WM, and gave them
a few.  No idea yet if those suggestions will improve it enough, though.

Robert Miles

"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> This has been my experience as well.
>
> No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and =
I have kept email scanning on as well.
>
> This issue is a red herring.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message =
news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client =
since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>--=20
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on =
three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a =
single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned =
off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my =
experience.

Disable NIS 2010
http://community.norton.com/t5/Norton-Internet-Security-Norton/Disable-NI=
S-2010/m-p/206851#M102986




--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

wrote in message news:#tXBngWILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
on how to do it.=20

On Sat, 10 Jul 2010 11:53:17 -0700, Victek wrote:

>>Considering that Symantec is publishing applications for Microsoft Windows,
>>and related products, it is up to Symantec to ensure that their product is
>>compatible with Microsoft products, not the other way around. Given the
>>history of problems with Symantec products and Windows, it is best not to
>>install Symantec products on a Windows system.

First, your new client is broken. Seriously. Same problem that MSOE has,
that Windows Live Mail has (I think). It does not properly strip signatures
when it quotes. So it quoted my signature, including the Usenet standard
'dash-dash-space-endline'. So my news client, which properly strips all text
following the signature separator, stripped your text. Microsoft is probably
never going to fix this problem.

> You are quite right that Norton security products were dismal for a number 
> of years.  Before they released the 2009 line I avoided them and would 
> actively discourage others as well.  But things changed in a big way in 
> 2009, which led me to reconsider.  Symantec brought in new people with a new 
> attitude and that resulted in dramatically improved software.  All the big 
> complaints, such as slow install, even slower uninstall, settings corruption 
> and heavy drag on system resources, have been addressed.  There have still 
> been issues with Symantec's tech support - particularly over the phone - and 
> I recommend that people opt for online chat support when needed.  Otherwise 
> the products (NIS, NAV, N360) have been very compatible and scored pretty 
> well in various reviews.  I understand that some people have had bad 
> experiences and simply don't want to revisit any Norton products.  I don't 
> know if that's where you're coming from, but in any case I feel the new line 
> deserves fresh look.  Sometimes people really do get their act together (at 
> least for a time <g>). 

I was seriously burned by them once. I looked for a replacement, and that
replacement is very good. I don't really care that Symantec has got their
act together. A day late and a dollar short is not good enough to bring me
back.

-- 
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:59:37 -0000, Nancy Jackman wrote:

> Bingo!

Why do I detect the logical fallacy of false analogy?

-- 
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

Why struggle with a cantankerous program?
The Microsoft Security Essentials program is 100% compatible
with Microsoft mail client programs..

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


wrote in message news:#tXBngWILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
on how to do it.

Also, how do you prevent your computer from being exposed
to viruses during the WLM installation?

And is it possible to uninstall and reinstall WLM without losing
anything already downloaded from the email and newsgroups
servers?

Robert Miles


"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
news:OUIQtYGILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing 
> WLM ---- then RE-ENABLED it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.
>
> That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
> In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
> and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
> user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
> antivirus.
>
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.
>

"N. Miller" <anonymous@msnews.aosake.net> wrote in message 
news:1di6hn5angim0.dlg@msnews.aosake.net...
> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:59:37 -0000, Nancy Jackman wrote:
>
>> Bingo!
>
> Why do I detect the logical fallacy of false analogy?

In what way? To quote from your 16.33 post today:
"I was seriously burned by them once. I looked for a replacement, and that
replacement is very good. I don't really care that Symantec has got their
act together. A day late and a dollar short is not good enough to bring me
back."

So you used Windows 3.0 once, got seriously burned, changed to linux (or 
whatever), and don't care that Microsoft now have a much better OS. What's 
wrong with the analogy?

-- 

Jeff 

What are you doing that you are fearful of disabling your anti-malware 
program for 5 minutes?  Don't browse sites of ill repute while you are 
installing.



wrote in message news:#tXBngWILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
on how to do it.

Also, how do you prevent your computer from being exposed
to viruses during the WLM installation?

And is it possible to uninstall and reinstall WLM without losing
anything already downloaded from the email and newsgroups
servers?

Robert Miles


"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
news:OUIQtYGILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and 
> DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing WLM ---- then RE-ENABLED 
> it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.
>
> That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
> news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
> In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
> and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
> user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
> antivirus.
>
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.
>

On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 18:25:14 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

> "N. Miller" <anonymous@msnews.aosake.net> wrote in message 
> news:1di6hn5angim0.dlg@msnews.aosake.net...

>> On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 17:59:37 -0000, Nancy Jackman wrote:

>>> Bingo!

>> Why do I detect the logical fallacy of false analogy?

> In what way? To quote from your 16.33 post today:
> "I was seriously burned by them once. I looked for a replacement, and that
> replacement is very good. I don't really care that Symantec has got their
> act together. A day late and a dollar short is not good enough to bring me
> back."
> 
> So you used Windows 3.0 once, got seriously burned, changed to linux (or 
> whatever), and don't care that Microsoft now have a much better OS. What's 
> wrong with the analogy?

Windows 3.0 never hosed my computer in such a manner that I had to re-load
the operating system. There is no comparison between the kinds of troubles
caused by one, vs. the other.

-- 
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum

<G>

Nancy

"osu9400"  wrote in message news:uGBNKufILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

What are you doing that you are fearful of disabling your anti-malware
program for 5 minutes?  Don't browse sites of ill repute while you are
installing.

wrote in message news:#tXBngWILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
on how to do it.

Also, how do you prevent your computer from being exposed
to viruses during the WLM installation?

And is it possible to uninstall and reinstall WLM without losing
anything already downloaded from the email and newsgroups
servers?

Robert Miles


"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
news:OUIQtYGILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and 
> DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing WLM ---- then RE-ENABLED 
> it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.
>
> That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.
>
> Nancy
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
> news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
> In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
> and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
> user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
> antivirus.
>
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>
>
> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client since 
>>Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>-- 
>>          Bruce Hagen
>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>      Imperial Beach, CA
> .
> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
> three
> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned off
> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my experience.
>

People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I have =
dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and Symantec programs for =
over 10 years and those issues have been ignored by Symantec.  Thousands =
of users have lost messages because of Symantec.  I don't care if they =
are improved.  They will never get my support and I will uninstall the =
crap before ever using a computer that has it on it.  They are =
interested in $$$$ only just as is MS and their concern for the user =
stops after the user has purchased the software. =20

So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us =
who have had to help users over the years know to stay away from the =
POS.

steve

"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message =
news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  =
Free,=20
>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will =
thank=20
>>you.
>>
>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so =

>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their=20
>>website.
> .
> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the =

> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It =
is=20
> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal =
Tool.=20
> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre =
2009.=20
> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security =
software=20
> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton =
Removal=20
> Tool.=20
>

I've already seen enough problems WITHOUT browsing sites of ill
repute.  The best I can tell, two of my computers have downloaded
enough newsgroups posts that no NIS 2010 full scan has finished
for months.


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:uGBNKufILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> What are you doing that you are fearful of disabling your anti-malware 
> program for 5 minutes?  Don't browse sites of ill repute while you are 
> installing.
>
>
>
> wrote in message news:#tXBngWILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> Just how do you turn off and disable NIS 2010 in order to install
> WLM?  When I tried it, I found that Symantec/Norton seems
> to have made it as difficult as they can, and hidden any information
> on how to do it.
>
> Also, how do you prevent your computer from being exposed
> to viruses during the WLM installation?
>
> And is it possible to uninstall and reinstall WLM without losing
> anything already downloaded from the email and newsgroups
> servers?
>
> Robert Miles
>
>
> "Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
> news:OUIQtYGILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> The problems are often generated because the user has not turned OFF and 
>> DISABLED the anti-virus program BEFORE installing WLM ---- then 
>> RE-ENABLED it AFTER the WLM installation is finished.
>>
>> That's not a fault on either Symantec's or McAfee's part.
>>
>> Nancy
>>
>> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
>> news:uS$v5OGILHA.6120@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>> Consider yourself one of the lucky few.
>> In the past 4 years I have counseled thousands of users about Norton
>> and McAfee antivirus products. We've seen hundreds of cases where the
>> user reported back that his problem was resolved after uninstalling the
>> antivirus.
>>
>> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>>
>>
>> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client 
>>>since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>>-- 
>>>          Bruce Hagen
>>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>>      Imperial Beach, CA
>> .
>> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
>> three
>> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
>> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned 
>> off
>> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
>> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my 
>> experience.
>>
>
>

I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around 2003.
Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems using
their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There are
better alternatives.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...

People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I have dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and 
Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored by Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because 
of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get my support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a 
computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as is MS and their concern for the user stops after the user 
has purchased the software.

So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us who have had to help users over the years know to stay away 
from the POS.

steve

"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >"osu9400"  wrote in message news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  Free,
>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank
>>you.
>>
>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so
>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>website.
> .
> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the
> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It is
> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal Tool.
> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre 2009.
> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security software
> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton Removal
> Tool.
> 

And others have helped "thousands of users" who have had infuriating 
troubles with Microsoft software.

This is a continuing Bad Rap on Symantec.

Total Red Herring.

Nancy

"Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message 
news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around 2003.
Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems using
their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There are
better alternatives.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message 
news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...

People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I have 
dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored by 
Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because
of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get my 
support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a
computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as is MS 
and their concern for the user stops after the user
has purchased the software.

So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us who 
have had to help users over the years know to stay away
from the POS.

steve

"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >"osu9400"  wrote in message news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  Free,
>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank
>>you.
>>
>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so
>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>website.
> .
> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the
> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It is
> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal Tool.
> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre 2009.
> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security software
> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton Removal
> Tool. 

To be sure, no software is perfect.
But techs who actually work in this field agree with me.
There is no point in struggling with balky software when good alternatives
are readily available. To each their own.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Nancy Jackman"  wrote in message news:ujazLWrILHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

And others have helped "thousands of users" who have had infuriating
troubles with Microsoft software.

This is a continuing Bad Rap on Symantec.

Total Red Herring.

Nancy

"Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message
news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around 2003.
Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems using
their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There are
better alternatives.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)


"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message
news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...

People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I have
dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored by
Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because
of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get my
support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a
computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as is MS
and their concern for the user stops after the user
has purchased the software.

So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us who
have had to help users over the years know to stay away
from the POS.

steve

"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> >"osu9400"  wrote in message news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  Free,
>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank
>>you.
>>
>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so
>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>website.
> .
> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the
> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It is
> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal Tool.
> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre 2009.
> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security software
> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton Removal
> Tool. 

You don't know what you are talking about.  I've battled Norton and its =
destruction of email messages for over 10 years.  Its crapware and it =
slows your computer down at least 30%.  Here's an example:  =
www.oehelp.com/OETips.aspx#3

I was interviewed by the NY Times for a podcast a couple years ago and =
they were questioning why the antivirus companies were releasing such =
destructive software on the users, and they contacted Symantec and it =
informed them that their security features were more important than any =
email loss to the users.  That's a despicable answer in my opinion. =20

I continue to help people who daily lose their messages due to the lack =
of testing and lack of concern of software writers, including Microsoft.

steve

MS-MVP
Outlook Express / Windows Mail
1998 - present

"Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message =
news:ujazLWrILHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> And others have helped "thousands of users" who have had infuriating=20
> troubles with Microsoft software.
>=20
> This is a continuing Bad Rap on Symantec.
>=20
> Total Red Herring.
>=20
> Nancy
>=20
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)"  wrote in message=20
> news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>=20
> I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around =
2003.
> Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems =
using
> their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There =
are
> better alternatives.
>=20
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>=20
>=20
> "Steve Cochran"  wrote in message=20
> news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...
>=20
> People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I =
have=20
> dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
> Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored =
by=20
> Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because
> of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get =
my=20
> support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a
> computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as =
is MS=20
> and their concern for the user stops after the user
> has purchased the software.
>=20
> So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us =
who=20
> have had to help users over the years know to stay away
> from the POS.
>=20
> steve
>=20
> "Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message=20
> news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> >"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  =
Free,
>>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will =
thank
>>>you.
>>>
>>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's =
so
>>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>>website.
>> .
>> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to =
the
>> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  =
It is
>> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal =
Tool.
>> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre =
2009.
>> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security =
software
>> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton =
Removal
>> Tool.=20
>

At least we agree on that. <G>

Its too bad that others don't consider that some users don't have the =
same pleasant experience with Norton as they do.  Just wait until they =
lose their messages.

steve

"Gary VanderMolen (MVP)" <gary@NoMail.invalid> wrote in message =
news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around =
2003.
> Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems =
using
> their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There =
are
> better alternatives.
>=20
> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>=20
>=20
> "Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...
>=20
> People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I =
have dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and=20
> Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored =
by Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because=20
> of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get =
my support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a=20
> computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as =
is MS and their concern for the user stops after the user=20
> has purchased the software.
>=20
> So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us =
who have had to help users over the years know to stay away=20
> from the POS.
>=20
> steve
>=20
> "Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message =
news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>> >"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials.  =
Free,
>>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will =
thank
>>>you.
>>>
>>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's =
so
>>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>>website.
>> .
>> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to =
the
>> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  =
It is
>> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal =
Tool.
>> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre =
2009.
>> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security =
software
>> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton =
Removal
>> Tool.
>>=20
>=20
>

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
news:%23cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
> fully compatible.
>
> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>
> Robert Miles
I've decided to at least finish the NIS 2010 run the chat
technician started  a few days ago before checking if disabling
NIS 2010 gets around some of the problems I'm having.
Having my internet connection disabled during this disabling
should at least make it safe.

Now at 10,078,701 items scanned and still running.

I'm also thinking or participating in the Windows Live Mail
wave 4 beta test and the NIS 2011 beta test, in order to
suggest where they are incompatible, if I can first make an
adequate complete backup using the disk server I recently
bought.

The best I can tell, Norton is trying to make NIS compatible
with the email portions of both Windows Mail and Windows
Live Mail, with little effort so far for making it compatible
with the newsgroups portion as well.

Robert Miles 

As usual, they are behind the eight ball, too little, too late.
I remember how long it took them to come out with a version
compatible with Vista...

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:#n$qo5qJLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

The best I can tell, Norton is trying to make NIS compatible
with the email portions of both Windows Mail and Windows
Live Mail, with little effort so far for making it compatible
with the newsgroups portion as well.

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
news:%23n$qo5qJLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
> news:%23cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
>> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
>> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
>> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
>> fully compatible.
>>
>> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
>> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
>> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
>> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>>
>> Robert Miles
> I've decided to at least finish the NIS 2010 run the chat
> technician started  a few days ago before checking if disabling
> NIS 2010 gets around some of the problems I'm having.
> Having my internet connection disabled during this disabling
> should at least make it safe.
>
> Now at 10,078,701 items scanned and still running.
>
> I'm also thinking or participating in the Windows Live Mail
> wave 4 beta test and the NIS 2011 beta test, in order to
> suggest where they are incompatible, if I can first make an
> adequate complete backup using the disk server I recently
> bought.
>
> The best I can tell, Norton is trying to make NIS compatible
> with the email portions of both Windows Mail and Windows
> Live Mail, with little effort so far for making it compatible
> with the newsgroups portion as well.
>
> Robert Miles
Finally finished, after scanning 10,624,766 items.

Now doing a manual run of the Disk Defragmenter program.
Expect that to take a few days also, before I'm ready to
disconnect that computer from the internet long enough
to disable NIS 2010 long enough to see if that fixes any of
the problems.

No Disk Defragmenter progress reports to help me estimate
just how long that will take, though.

Robert Miles 

Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this week?



wrote in message news:#cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... 

I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
(current version) and Windows Mail; some information
from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
fully compatible.

I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
problems.  Should this assumption be revised?

Robert Miles 

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0176_01CB2940.C9B577F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once =
completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading and =
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the =
OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...=20

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?
------=_NextPart_000_0176_01CB2940.C9B577F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010=
/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availab=
le.aspx">http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/201=
0/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availa=
ble.aspx</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9C<FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes new roman>To download the beta =
of Microsoft=20
Security Essentials, <A =
href=3D"http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D197385"=20
jquery1279777267973=3D"60">click here</A> to visit the Microsoft Connect =
page to=20
register for the beta. Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the =
instructions for=20
downloading and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The =
above link=20
is for a public beta. The installation of the public beta will remove =
that=20
machine from the OGB.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week?</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0176_01CB2940.C9B577F0--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0923_01CB2971.615AE060
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.  Beta software =
should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once =
completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading and =
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the =
OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...=20

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?
------=_NextPart_000_0923_01CB2971.615AE060
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6001.18470" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c0dcc0>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I would not recommend that standard users install a =
beta from=20
Microsoft, unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.&nbsp; =
Beta=20
software should not be installed by home users on their =
machines.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>steve</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:winstonmvp@gmail.com">winstonmvp@gmail.com</A>&gt; wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
href=3D"news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl">news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448=
@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl</A>...</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'">
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010=
/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availab=
le.aspx">http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/201=
0/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availa=
ble.aspx</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9C<FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3 roman new>To download the beta =
of Microsoft=20
Security Essentials, <A =
href=3D"http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D197385"=20
jquery1279777267973=3D"60">click here</A> to visit the Microsoft Connect =
page to=20
register for the beta. Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the =
instructions for=20
downloading and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The =
above link=20
is for a public beta. The installation of the public beta will remove =
that=20
machine from the OGB.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week?</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0923_01CB2971.615AE060--

What's the OGB?

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

"To download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click here to visit 
the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once completed - you 
will find the instructions for downloading and installing the beta."

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. The 
installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the OGB.


---
....winston
ms-mvp mail 

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
news:%23ZKv2TKKLHA.4636@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
> news:%23n$qo5qJLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
>> news:%23cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
>>> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
>>> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
>>> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
>>> fully compatible.
>>>
>>> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
>>> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
>>> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
>>> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>>>
>>> Robert Miles
>> I've decided to at least finish the NIS 2010 run the chat
>> technician started  a few days ago before checking if disabling
>> NIS 2010 gets around some of the problems I'm having.
>> Having my internet connection disabled during this disabling
>> should at least make it safe.
>>
>> Now at 10,078,701 items scanned and still running.
>>
>> I'm also thinking or participating in the Windows Live Mail
>> wave 4 beta test and the NIS 2011 beta test, in order to
>> suggest where they are incompatible, if I can first make an
>> adequate complete backup using the disk server I recently
>> bought.
>>
>> The best I can tell, Norton is trying to make NIS compatible
>> with the email portions of both Windows Mail and Windows
>> Live Mail, with little effort so far for making it compatible
>> with the newsgroups portion as well.
>>
>> Robert Miles
> Finally finished, after scanning 10,624,766 items.
>
> Now doing a manual run of the Disk Defragmenter program.
> Expect that to take a few days also, before I'm ready to
> disconnect that computer from the internet long enough
> to disable NIS 2010 long enough to see if that fixes any of
> the problems.
>
> No Disk Defragmenter progress reports to help me estimate
> just how long that will take, though.
>
> Robert Miles
>

The Disk Defragmenter program has been running for over 80
hours and still not finished.  It definitely NEEDS at least some
progress reports.

Robert Miles 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CB298C.5E8FBE30
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact, what =
they release as a beta today would have been considered production in =
that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any of my =
machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily able to =
back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.  Beta software =
should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once =
completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading and =
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the =
OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...=20

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?
------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CB298C.5E8FBE30
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dunicode" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6001.18470">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c0dcc0>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>I disagree.&nbsp; This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.&nbsp; The quality of the =
MS betas are=20
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.&nbsp; In fact, =
what they=20
release as a beta today would have been considered production in that =
era.&nbsp;=20
I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any of my =
machines.&nbsp; I=E2=80=99ve had=20
betas on top of betas and was easily able to back out.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; =
BORDER-TOP-COLOR: #000000; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-RIGHT-COLOR: =
#000000; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV>"Steve Cochran" &lt;scochran@oehelp.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...</DIV></DIV></D=
IV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; =
BORDER-TOP-COLOR: #000000; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-RIGHT-COLOR: =
#000000; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I would not recommend that standard users install a =
beta from=20
Microsoft, unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.&nbsp; =
Beta=20
software should not be installed by home users on their =
machines.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>steve</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:winstonmvp@gmail.com">winstonmvp@gmail.com</A>&gt; wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
href=3D"news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl">news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448=
@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl</A>...</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010=
/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availab=
le.aspx">http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/201=
0/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availa=
ble.aspx</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9C<FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes new roman>To download the beta =
of Microsoft=20
Security Essentials, <A =
href=3D"http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D197385"=20
jquery1279777267973=3D"60">click here</A> to visit the Microsoft Connect =
page to=20
register for the beta. Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the =
instructions for=20
downloading and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D3 face=3DTimes>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The =
above link=20
is for a public beta. The installation of the public beta will remove =
that=20
machine from the OGB.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week?</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_000E_01CB298C.5E8FBE30--

The very small chance that something bad will happen when installing=20
this beta software is probably worth the increased level of security.
I can't remember a recent Microsoft beta that wasn't stable or easily =
uninstallable.

--=20
Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
Microsoft MVP program: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.  Beta software =
should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once =
completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading and =
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the =
OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...=20

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0831_01CB29B8.371586B0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I would disagree, but everyone is entitled to an opinion.

I feel sorry for the "little" user who installs such and then finds =
trouble later. =20

steve

"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact, what =
they release as a beta today would have been considered production in =
that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any of my =
machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily able to =
back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.  Beta software =
should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once =
completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading and =
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the =
OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...=20

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0. =20
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?
------=_NextPart_000_0831_01CB29B8.371586B0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

=EF=BB=BF<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.6001.18470" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#c0dcc0>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I would disagree, but everyone is entitled to an=20
opinion.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I feel sorry for the "little" user who installs such =
and then=20
finds trouble later.&nbsp; </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>steve</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:osu9400@hotmail.com">osu9400@hotmail.com</A>&gt; wrote in =
message=20
<A=20
href=3D"news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl">news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120=
@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl</A>...</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 12pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'">
<DIV>I disagree.&nbsp; This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.&nbsp; The quality of the =
MS betas are=20
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.&nbsp; In fact, =
what they=20
release as a beta today would have been considered production in that =
era.&nbsp;=20
I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any of my =
machines.&nbsp; I=E2=80=99ve had=20
betas on top of betas and was easily able to back out.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; BORDER-TOP-COLOR: #000000; =
BORDER-RIGHT-COLOR: #000000">
<DIV=20
style=3D"DISPLAY: inline; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: small; COLOR: =
#000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV>"Steve Cochran" &lt;scochran@oehelp.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...</DIV></DIV></D=
IV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; MARGIN-LEFT: =
5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; BORDER-TOP-COLOR: #000000; =
BORDER-RIGHT-COLOR: #000000">
<DIV=20
style=3D"DISPLAY: inline; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: small; COLOR: =
#000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I would not recommend that standard users install a =
beta from=20
Microsoft, unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.&nbsp; =
Beta=20
software should not be installed by home users on their =
machines.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>steve</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;<A=20
href=3D"mailto:winstonmvp@gmail.com">winstonmvp@gmail.com</A>&gt; wrote =
in message=20
<A=20
href=3D"news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl">news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448=
@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl</A>...</DIV>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'">
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV><A=20
href=3D"http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010=
/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availab=
le.aspx">http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/201=
0/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-availa=
ble.aspx</A></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9C<FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3 roman new>To download the beta =
of Microsoft=20
Security Essentials, <A =
href=3D"http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=3D197385"=20
jquery1279777267973=3D"60">click here</A> to visit the Microsoft Connect =
page to=20
register for the beta. Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the =
instructions for=20
downloading and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DTimes size=3D3>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The =
above link=20
is for a public beta. The installation of the public beta will remove =
that=20
machine from the OGB.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl... </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.&nbsp;=20
</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week?</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0831_01CB29B8.371586B0--

agreed 100%.  the quality has improved dramatically over the years.  In 
fact, I install betas and CTP's for all my Microsoft products.  The last 
problem I can remember was a Vista pre-beta CTP.




"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message 
news:Od$nvYcKLHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

The very small chance that something bad will happen when installing
this beta software is probably worth the increased level of security.
I can't remember a recent Microsoft beta that wasn't stable or easily 
uninstallable.

-- 
Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
Microsoft MVP program: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message 
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, 
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.  Beta software 
should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

“To download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click here to visit 
the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta. Once completed – you 
will find the instructions for downloading and installing the beta.”

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. The 
installation of the public beta will remove that machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message 
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus 
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message 
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this 
> week? 

Too late..

Gary V.(the person responded to) is using version 1.0.1963.0, i.e..the =
Ongoing Beta


--
....winston
MS-MVP[Mail]
--

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...


I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.=20
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.=20
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that=20
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

Yes, I thought I had volunteered for the ongoing beta but wasn't sure.
There is no indication inside the program that it is in the OGB.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
Microsoft MVP program: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com


"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:%23BHJ6dgKLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Too late..

Gary V.(the person responded to) is using version 1.0.1963.0, i.e..the =
Ongoing Beta


--
....winston
MS-MVP[Mail]
--

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...


I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.=20
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.=20
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that=20
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

I was under the impression that your were running the OGB...

So to clarify,
If it came from Connect, 1963 is the  most recent OGB.
If it came from the MSE site, it is a non beta RTW pushed late June.

To determine if participating in the OGB, check your Connect Dashboard. =
If you also signed up for the current MSE public beta, you=20
will have a separate Connect Dashboard entry(without the OGB =
nomenclature).

As noted earlier, installing the public beta on an OGB machine will =
remove that machine from the OGB.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:u270GShKLHA.6100@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Yes, I thought I had volunteered for the ongoing beta but wasn't sure.
There is no indication inside the program that it is in the OGB.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
Microsoft MVP program: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com


"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:%23BHJ6dgKLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Too late..

Gary V.(the person responded to) is using version 1.0.1963.0, i.e..the =
Ongoing Beta


--
....winston
MS-MVP[Mail]
--

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...


I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be in=20
that category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong=20
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,=20
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any=20
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.=20
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.=20
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that=20
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be in=20
that category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong=20
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,=20
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any=20
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.=20
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.=20
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that=20
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be=20
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong=20
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test =
machines.  <G>

OE is not in beta any longer:  www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx   At least =
one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into thinking one =
can have an impact on a MS product.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be=20
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong=20
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

I learned a long time ago that impact is function of approach.

Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why their =
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you=20
can.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...

Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test =
machines.  <G>

OE is not in beta any longer:  www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx   At least =
one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into=20
thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> schreef in bericht 
news:eA9lsUbKLHA.4240@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
> news:%23ZKv2TKKLHA.4636@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
>> news:%23n$qo5qJLHA.5424@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> <robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message 
>>> news:%23cb6RcBILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
>>>> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
>>>> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
>>>> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
>>>> fully compatible.
>>>>
>>>> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
>>>> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
>>>> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
>>>> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>>>>
>>>> Robert Miles
>>> I've decided to at least finish the NIS 2010 run the chat
>>> technician started  a few days ago before checking if disabling
>>> NIS 2010 gets around some of the problems I'm having.
>>> Having my internet connection disabled during this disabling
>>> should at least make it safe.
>>>
>>> Now at 10,078,701 items scanned and still running.
>>>
>>> I'm also thinking or participating in the Windows Live Mail
>>> wave 4 beta test and the NIS 2011 beta test, in order to
>>> suggest where they are incompatible, if I can first make an
>>> adequate complete backup using the disk server I recently
>>> bought.
>>>
>>> The best I can tell, Norton is trying to make NIS compatible
>>> with the email portions of both Windows Mail and Windows
>>> Live Mail, with little effort so far for making it compatible
>>> with the newsgroups portion as well.
>>>
>>> Robert Miles
>> Finally finished, after scanning 10,624,766 items.
>>
>> Now doing a manual run of the Disk Defragmenter program.
>> Expect that to take a few days also, before I'm ready to
>> disconnect that computer from the internet long enough
>> to disable NIS 2010 long enough to see if that fixes any of
>> the problems.
>>
>> No Disk Defragmenter progress reports to help me estimate
>> just how long that will take, though.
>>
>> Robert Miles
>>
>
> The Disk Defragmenter program has been running for over 80
> hours and still not finished.  It definitely NEEDS at least some
> progress reports.
>
> Robert Miles
> 

I spent 5 years testing every build of LH and Vista that was made =
available to the MVPs, trying to get improvements to OE by continuously =
testing and bugging, and made several contributions (the eml file format =
being the way messages are now stored instead of the dbx file, being =
just one of them).  But the code got reset and then all the improvements =
were forgotten and we had to start over in terms of trying to get the =
bugs fixed.  Then they abandoned Windows Mail during the beta and went =
on with what they now call "Windows Live Mail" and refused to fix the =
bugs we had made lists of for years.  We were lied to and our bug =
reports were deliberately ignored, with the exception that they told us =
the MVPs made the best bug reports.  Then they stopped communicating =
with the MVPs completely, except what they decided to force-feed them.

So how would you deal with a mendacious group that ignored (and continue =
to ignore in WLM) bugs and ignored MVP feedback???

My approach has been to continously push for a positive impact on OE and =
Windows Mail -- to fix long standing bugs -- for over 13 years.  The =
success rate has been abysmal, but some features of WLM which are not =
bugs are due to such continuous pressure on the part of the OE MVPs, =
many of whom are no longer active or even alive. =20

I'm a "purist" in the sense that I believe software should exist =
bugfree, as far as possible.  But there is no such feeling on the part =
of those at Microsoft.  They have little or no quality control and they =
continue to release dysfunctional beta software to the general public, =
particularly in terms of the "Mail" product.

The "Mail" product has also been significantly dumbed-down (and =
bugged-up) and has gone from color to b&w in your analogy, so it is =
those who are clammering for b&w who seem to be prevalent, and they have =
forgotten that there was once such a thing as color.


steve

MS-MVP
Outlook Express / Windows Mail
1998 -- present


"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:u2JEEs1KLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I learned a long time ago that impact is function of approach.

Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why their =
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you=20
can.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...

Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test =
machines.  <G>

OE is not in beta any longer:  www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx   At least =
one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into=20
thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week?=20

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CB31AB.126552F0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Steve,
I appreciate your candidness, commitment, and having provided many =
solutions improving my and everyone's computing experience.  Like you,  =
I've been around a long time. Starting with punch cards in the 70's =
through later decades of beta testing products(Apple, Norton, Windows, =
MSN, Hotmail, and Live). If I learned one thing from that past, =
including 30 + years in corporate America, a few more running a =
succesful consulting business and now semi-retired....truth is not =
absolute. Even more so when one is acting from an appointed, =
non-employee position.

How do I deal with it ?
Help people using WLM and Hotmail with solutions, work-arounds when =
available. Tell them what can or cannot be done. Certainly frustrations =
exist(I've a few with WLM..my personal pet peeve is the inability to =
export/import all email fields available in WLM Contacts to a csv file).

MVP Feedback ? The MVP home page says that Microsoft thanks us for =
representing the voice of the community via our feedback. Sometimes that =
feedback works its way into product improvements, sometimes not. Our =
feedback at times may be of eminent worth, yet I've yet to see any =
guarantee leading you, I, or any MVP to believe that said 'worthy =
feedback' will yield our expected desires.

Enjoy it for whatever value you find appropriate(satisfaction of helping =
others, entertainment, hobby, ranting)...it is what is is, but I'm quite =
certain of a few things...MVP-dom is not a job, OE, WM, and Oldsmobiles =
aren't coming back, and the past is just that...the past.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:3BC5D3A9-83C1-4F66-A30F-B8ED1109938C@microsoft.com...

I spent 5 years testing every build of LH and Vista that was made =
available to the MVPs, trying to get improvements to OE by=20
continuously testing and bugging, and made several contributions (the =
eml file format being the way messages are now stored instead=20
of the dbx file, being just one of them).  But the code got reset and =
then all the improvements were forgotten and we had to start=20
over in terms of trying to get the bugs fixed.  Then they abandoned =
Windows Mail during the beta and went on with what they now=20
call "Windows Live Mail" and refused to fix the bugs we had made lists =
of for years.  We were lied to and our bug reports were=20
deliberately ignored, with the exception that they told us the MVPs made =
the best bug reports.  Then they stopped communicating=20
with the MVPs completely, except what they decided to force-feed them.

So how would you deal with a mendacious group that ignored (and continue =
to ignore in WLM) bugs and ignored MVP feedback???

My approach has been to continously push for a positive impact on OE and =
Windows Mail -- to fix long standing bugs -- for over 13=20
years.  The success rate has been abysmal, but some features of WLM =
which are not bugs are due to such continuous pressure on the=20
part of the OE MVPs, many of whom are no longer active or even alive.

I'm a "purist" in the sense that I believe software should exist =
bugfree, as far as possible.  But there is no such feeling on the=20
part of those at Microsoft.  They have little or no quality control and =
they continue to release dysfunctional beta software to the=20
general public, particularly in terms of the "Mail" product.

The "Mail" product has also been significantly dumbed-down (and =
bugged-up) and has gone from color to b&w in your analogy, so it is=20
those who are clammering for b&w who seem to be prevalent, and they have =
forgotten that there was once such a thing as color.


steve

MS-MVP
Outlook Express / Windows Mail
1998 -- present


"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:u2JEEs1KLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I learned a long time ago that impact is function of approach.

Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why their =
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you
can.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...

Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test =
machines.  <G>

OE is not in beta any longer:  www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx   At least =
one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into
thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week? 
------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CB31AB.126552F0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>Steve,</DIV>
<DIV>I appreciate your candidness, commitment, and having provided many=20
solutions improving my and everyone's computing experience.&nbsp; Like=20
you,&nbsp; I've been around a long time. Starting with punch cards in =
the 70's=20
through later decades of beta testing products(Apple, Norton, Windows, =
MSN,=20
Hotmail, and Live). If I learned one thing from that past, including 30 =
+ years=20
in corporate America, a few more running a succesful consulting business =
and now=20
semi-retired....truth is not absolute. Even more so when one is acting =
from an=20
appointed, non-employee position.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>How do I deal with it ?</DIV>
<DIV>Help people using WLM and Hotmail with solutions, work-arounds when =

available. Tell them what can or cannot be done. Certainly frustrations=20
exist(I've a few with WLM..my personal pet peeve is the inability to=20
export/import all email fields available in WLM Contacts to a csv =
file).</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>MVP Feedback ? The MVP home page says that Microsoft thanks us for=20
representing the voice of the community via our feedback. Sometimes that =

feedback works its way into product improvements, sometimes not. Our =
feedback at=20
times may be of eminent worth, yet I've yet to see any guarantee leading =
you, I,=20
or any MVP to believe that said 'worthy feedback' will yield our =
expected=20
desires.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Enjoy it for whatever value you find appropriate(satisfaction of =
helping=20
others, entertainment, hobby, ranting)...it is what is is, but I'm quite =
certain=20
of a few things...MVP-dom is not a job, OE, WM, and Oldsmobiles aren't =
coming=20
back, and the past is just that...<FONT style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: =
#ffff00">the=20
past</FONT>.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:3BC5D3A9-83C1-4F66-A30F-B8ED1109938C@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I spent 5 years testing every build of LH and Vista that was made =
available=20
to the MVPs, trying to get improvements to OE by </DIV>
<DIV>continuously testing and bugging, and made several contributions =
(the eml=20
file format being the way messages are now stored instead </DIV>
<DIV>of the dbx file, being just one of them).&nbsp; But the code got =
reset and=20
then all the improvements were forgotten and we had to start </DIV>
<DIV>over in terms of trying to get the bugs fixed.&nbsp; Then they =
abandoned=20
Windows Mail during the beta and went on with what they now </DIV>
<DIV>call "Windows Live Mail" and refused to fix the bugs we had made =
lists of=20
for years.&nbsp; We were lied to and our bug reports were </DIV>
<DIV>deliberately ignored, with the exception that they told us the MVPs =
made=20
the best bug reports.&nbsp; Then they stopped communicating </DIV>
<DIV>with the MVPs completely, except what they decided to force-feed=20
them.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>So how would you deal with a mendacious group that ignored (and =
continue to=20
ignore in WLM) bugs and ignored MVP feedback???</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>My approach has been to continously push for a positive impact on =
OE and=20
Windows Mail -- to fix long standing bugs -- for over 13 </DIV>
<DIV>years.&nbsp; The success rate has been abysmal, but some features =
of WLM=20
which are not bugs are due to such continuous pressure on the </DIV>
<DIV>part of the OE MVPs, many of whom are no longer active or even =
alive.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I'm a "purist" in the sense that I believe software should exist =
bugfree,=20
as far as possible.&nbsp; But there is no such feeling on the </DIV>
<DIV>part of those at Microsoft.&nbsp; They have little or no quality =
control=20
and they continue to release dysfunctional beta software to the </DIV>
<DIV>general public, particularly in terms of the "Mail" product.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The "Mail" product has also been significantly dumbed-down (and =
bugged-up)=20
and has gone from color to b&amp;w in your analogy, so it is </DIV>
<DIV>those who are clammering for b&amp;w who seem to be prevalent, and =
they=20
have forgotten that there was once such a thing as color.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>MS-MVP</DIV>
<DIV>Outlook Express / Windows Mail</DIV>
<DIV>1998 -- present</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:u2JEEs1KLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>I learned a long time ago that impact is function of =
approach.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why =
their=20
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you</DIV>
<DIV>can.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test=20
machines.&nbsp; &lt;G&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>OE is not in beta any longer:&nbsp; =
www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
At least one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into</DIV>
<DIV>thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups</DIV>
<DIV>Wave 4 is available &lt;eg&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've =
been=20
exposed to beta software for years.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not =
being=20
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be</DIV>
<DIV>inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications =
on=20
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong</DIV>
<DIV>consideration.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I disagree.&nbsp; This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.&nbsp; The quality of the =
MS betas are=20
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.&nbsp; In =
fact,</DIV>
<DIV>what they release as a beta today would have been considered =
production in=20
that era.&nbsp; I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to =
any</DIV>
<DIV>of my machines.&nbsp; I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and =
was easily able to=20
back out.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran" &lt;scochran@oehelp.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from =
Microsoft,=20
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.</DIV>
<DIV>Beta software should not be installed by home users on their=20
machines.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV>http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07=
/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.=
aspx</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, =
click here to visit=20
the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.</DIV>
<DIV>Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for =
downloading and=20
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public =
beta.=20
The installation of the public beta will remove that</DIV>
<DIV>machine from the OGB.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week? =
</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_003B_01CB31AB.126552F0--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0059_01CB318F.691F62A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Bravo!
But things ARE improving =E2=80=93 very, very slowly.
Nancy Jackman
"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:3BC5D3A9-83C1-4F66-A30F-B8ED1109938C@microsoft.com...

I spent 5 years testing every build of LH and Vista that was made =
available to the MVPs, trying to get improvements to OE by=20
continuously testing and bugging, and made several contributions (the =
eml file format being the way messages are now stored instead=20
of the dbx file, being just one of them).  But the code got reset and =
then all the improvements were forgotten and we had to start=20
over in terms of trying to get the bugs fixed.  Then they abandoned =
Windows Mail during the beta and went on with what they now=20
call "Windows Live Mail" and refused to fix the bugs we had made lists =
of for years.  We were lied to and our bug reports were=20
deliberately ignored, with the exception that they told us the MVPs made =
the best bug reports.  Then they stopped communicating=20
with the MVPs completely, except what they decided to force-feed them.

So how would you deal with a mendacious group that ignored (and continue =
to ignore in WLM) bugs and ignored MVP feedback???

My approach has been to continously push for a positive impact on OE and =
Windows Mail -- to fix long standing bugs -- for over 13=20
years.  The success rate has been abysmal, but some features of WLM =
which are not bugs are due to such continuous pressure on the=20
part of the OE MVPs, many of whom are no longer active or even alive.

I'm a "purist" in the sense that I believe software should exist =
bugfree, as far as possible.  But there is no such feeling on the=20
part of those at Microsoft.  They have little or no quality control and =
they continue to release dysfunctional beta software to the=20
general public, particularly in terms of the "Mail" product.

The "Mail" product has also been significantly dumbed-down (and =
bugged-up) and has gone from color to b&w in your analogy, so it is=20
those who are clammering for b&w who seem to be prevalent, and they have =
forgotten that there was once such a thing as color.


steve

MS-MVP
Outlook Express / Windows Mail
1998 -- present


"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:u2JEEs1KLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
I learned a long time ago that impact is function of approach.

Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why their =
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you
can.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...

Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test =
machines.  <G>

OE is not in beta any longer:  www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx   At least =
one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into
thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups
Wave 4 is available <eg>

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...

I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've been =
exposed to beta software for years.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not being =
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be
inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications on =
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong
consideration.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...


I disagree.  This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.  The quality of the MS betas are =
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.  In fact,
what they release as a beta today would have been considered production =
in that era.  I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to any
of my machines.  I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and was easily =
able to back out.


"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message =
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...
I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from Microsoft, =
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.
Beta software should not be installed by home users on their machines.

steve

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message =
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now Available
http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07/20/b=
eta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.aspx

=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, click =
here to visit the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.
Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for downloading =
and installing the beta.=E2=80=9D

- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public beta. =
The installation of the public beta will remove that
machine from the OGB.


--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

"Gary VanderMolen"  wrote in message =
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version 1.0.1963.0.
I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus =
definitions.

Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)


"osu9400" <osu9400@hotmail.com> wrote in message =
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was released this =
week? 
------=_NextPart_000_0059_01CB318F.691F62A0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV dir=3Dltr><STRONG>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: =
14pt">
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New =
Roman">Bravo!</FONT></STRONG></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New =
Roman"></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New Roman">But things ARE improving =E2=80=93 =
very, very=20
slowly.</FONT></STRONG></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New =
Roman"></FONT></STRONG>&nbsp;</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New Roman">Nancy=20
Jackman</FONT></STRONG></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none">
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; =
COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: =
none"><STRONG><FONT=20
size=3D4 face=3D"Times New Roman"></FONT></STRONG></DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BORDER-BOTTOM-COLOR: #000000; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 4px solid; =
BORDER-TOP-COLOR: #000000; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-RIGHT-COLOR: =
#000000; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT-FAMILY: 'Arial'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:3BC5D3A9-83C1-4F66-A30F-B8ED1109938C@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I spent 5 years testing every build of LH and Vista that was made =
available=20
to the MVPs, trying to get improvements to OE by </DIV>
<DIV>continuously testing and bugging, and made several contributions =
(the eml=20
file format being the way messages are now stored instead </DIV>
<DIV>of the dbx file, being just one of them).&nbsp; But the code got =
reset and=20
then all the improvements were forgotten and we had to start </DIV>
<DIV>over in terms of trying to get the bugs fixed.&nbsp; Then they =
abandoned=20
Windows Mail during the beta and went on with what they now </DIV>
<DIV>call "Windows Live Mail" and refused to fix the bugs we had made =
lists of=20
for years.&nbsp; We were lied to and our bug reports were </DIV>
<DIV>deliberately ignored, with the exception that they told us the MVPs =
made=20
the best bug reports.&nbsp; Then they stopped communicating </DIV>
<DIV>with the MVPs completely, except what they decided to force-feed=20
them.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>So how would you deal with a mendacious group that ignored (and =
continue to=20
ignore in WLM) bugs and ignored MVP feedback???</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>My approach has been to continously push for a positive impact on =
OE and=20
Windows Mail -- to fix long standing bugs -- for over 13 </DIV>
<DIV>years.&nbsp; The success rate has been abysmal, but some features =
of WLM=20
which are not bugs are due to such continuous pressure on the </DIV>
<DIV>part of the OE MVPs, many of whom are no longer active or even =
alive.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I'm a "purist" in the sense that I believe software should exist =
bugfree,=20
as far as possible.&nbsp; But there is no such feeling on the </DIV>
<DIV>part of those at Microsoft.&nbsp; They have little or no quality =
control=20
and they continue to release dysfunctional beta software to the </DIV>
<DIV>general public, particularly in terms of the "Mail" product.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>The "Mail" product has also been significantly dumbed-down (and =
bugged-up)=20
and has gone from color to b&amp;w in your analogy, so it is </DIV>
<DIV>those who are clammering for b&amp;w who seem to be prevalent, and =
they=20
have forgotten that there was once such a thing as color.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>MS-MVP</DIV>
<DIV>Outlook Express / Windows Mail</DIV>
<DIV>1998 -- present</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:u2JEEs1KLHA.148@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>I learned a long time ago that impact is function of =
approach.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Purists will always cling to the past...many still wondering why =
their=20
black and white TV's are on the fritz. Enjoy OE while you</DIV>
<DIV>can.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:8A34FFAD-4A6F-4975-B776-37B9EFCCE093@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Yes, I'm well aware of that and won't even install it on my test=20
machines.&nbsp; &lt;G&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>OE is not in beta any longer:&nbsp; =
www.oehelp.com/OEnWin7.aspx&nbsp;&nbsp;=20
At least one is dealing with a known quantity and is not led into</DIV>
<DIV>thinking one can have an impact on a MS product.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:Ox81j3rKLHA.3732@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>As well as many others in these two x-posted newsgroups</DIV>
<DIV>Wave 4 is available &lt;eg&gt;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:409583A1-CC3C-41FA-9DF7-2247A3D5DCE7@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I would never install a beta on my "production" machine, and I've =
been=20
exposed to beta software for years.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:OG21H3iKLHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>Steve's advice is still very valid....note it was qualified as not =
being=20
recommended for 'standard users'. You may or may not be</DIV>
<DIV>inthat category, but for most that are, avoiding beta applications =
on=20
production or their only machine is always worthy of strong</DIV>
<DIV>consideration.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:u3q0HZbKLHA.4120@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>I disagree.&nbsp; This isn=E2=80=99t 1998.&nbsp; The quality of the =
MS betas are=20
vastly improved than what they were several years ago.&nbsp; In =
fact,</DIV>
<DIV>what they release as a beta today would have been considered =
production in=20
that era.&nbsp; I haven=E2=80=99t had any determinatal effects to =
any</DIV>
<DIV>of my machines.&nbsp; I=E2=80=99ve had betas on top of betas and =
was easily able to=20
back out.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Steve Cochran" &lt;scochran@oehelp.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:72C71CBA-0BEC-4A6D-BB77-D3F53902F808@microsoft.com...</DIV>
<DIV>I would not recommend that standard users install a beta from =
Microsoft,=20
unless they want to reformat their machines afterwards.</DIV>
<DIV>Beta software should not be installed by home users on their=20
machines.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>steve</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"...winston" &lt;winstonmvp@gmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:eicoHNWKLHA.3448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>Beta for Next Version of Microsoft Security Essentials Now =
Available</DIV>
<DIV>http://windowsteamblog.com/windows/b/bloggingwindows/archive/2010/07=
/20/beta-for-next-version-of-microsoft-security-essentials-now-available.=
aspx</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>=E2=80=9CTo download the beta of Microsoft Security Essentials, =
click here to visit=20
the Microsoft Connect page to register for the beta.</DIV>
<DIV>Once completed =E2=80=93 you will find the instructions for =
downloading and=20
installing the beta.=E2=80=9D</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>- Note: Caution if part of the OGB. The above link is for a public =
beta.=20
The installation of the public beta will remove that</DIV>
<DIV>machine from the OGB.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>--</DIV>
<DIV>...winston</DIV>
<DIV>ms-mvp mail</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"Gary VanderMolen"&nbsp; wrote in message=20
news:#D$Ds0TKLHA.5716@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Not sure I have the latest, but my MSE says it's version =
1.0.1963.0.</DIV>
<DIV>I clicked the Update button, but all it did was update the virus=20
definitions.</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>Gary VanderMolen, MVP (Mail)</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>"osu9400" &lt;osu9400@hotmail.com&gt; wrote in message=20
news:utGgflQKLHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...</DIV>
<DIV>&gt; Anyone try the new beta of Security Essentials that was =
released this=20
week?=20
</DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV></DIV><=
/STRONG></DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_0059_01CB318F.691F62A0--

Does Microsoft Security Essentials scan the files related to
newsgroups posts for Windows Mail and Windows Live
Mail?  If so does it cause any problems if both Microsoft
Security Essentials and Windows Mail or Windows Live
Mail are running at the same time?

Does it even need to scan the *.nws files?  Why or why not?

Robert Miles

"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message 
news:#Zif2jsILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> At least we agree on that. <G>
>
> Its too bad that others don't consider that some users don't have the same 
> pleasant experience with Norton as they do.  Just wait until they lose 
> their messages.
>
> steve
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)" <gary@NoMail.invalid> wrote in message 
> news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around 
>> 2003.
>> Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems 
>> using
>> their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. There 
>> are
>> better alternatives.
>>
>> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>>
>>
>> "Steve Cochran"  wrote in message 
>> news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...
>>
>> People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I have 
>> dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
>> Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been ignored by 
>> Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because
>> of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get my 
>> support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a
>> computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as is 
>> MS and their concern for the user stops after the user
>> has purchased the software.
>>
>> So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of us 
>> who have had to help users over the years know to stay away
>> from the POS.
>>
>> steve
>>
>> "Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
>> news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> >"osu9400"  wrote in message 
>>> >news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials. 
>>>>Free,
>>>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will thank
>>>>you.
>>>>
>>>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's so
>>>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on their
>>>>website.
>>> .
>>> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to the
>>> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  It 
>>> is
>>> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal Tool.
>>> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre 
>>> 2009.
>>> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security 
>>> software
>>> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton Removal
>>> Tool.
>>>
>>
>>

 

"Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message 
news:#qM1odDILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
> I'm having assorted problems with both Windows Live Mail
> (current version) and Windows Mail; some information
> from a Norton/Symantec chat technician indicates that
> WLM is not compatible with NIS 2010 and WM is not
> fully compatible.
>
> I only installed NIS 2009 after seeing information that is
> known to be compatible with WM, and assumed that upgrading
> to NIS 2010 and/or installing WLM would not cause any new
> problems.  Should this assumption be revised?
>
> Robert Miles
> .
> Can you be more specific?  Are you using POP3 accounts and concerned about 
> NIS spam filtering?  I'm running NIS 2010 on two machines using Hotmail 
> and Gmail (IMAP) accounts.  NIS doesn't try to filter these and I have no 
> problems with it.
I was using only a POP3 account then, but have added an IMAP
account since.  The spam filtering for my POP3 account is not
of interest - the email server already filters it before it reaches
my computers.

I'm far more interested in newsgroups filtering and being
able to import to import everything I have in Windows
Mail into Windows Live Mail, including all the storage folders.

Robert Miles 

I run Windows Mail, Windows Live Mail, and MSE at the same time,
no problems. MSE does no live scanning of incoming or outgoing
messages, but it checks them during scheduled periodic scans,
and when messages are opened or saved.

Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
------------------------------------------------------

wrote in message news:eTrt0M8TLHA.456@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

Does Microsoft Security Essentials scan the files related to
newsgroups posts for Windows Mail and Windows Live
Mail?  If so does it cause any problems if both Microsoft
Security Essentials and Windows Mail or Windows Live
Mail are running at the same time?

Does it even need to scan the *.nws files?  Why or why not?

Robert Miles

"Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message
news:#Zif2jsILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> At least we agree on that. <G>
>
> Its too bad that others don't consider that some users don't have the =
same pleasant experience with Norton as they do.  Just=20
> wait until they lose their messages.
>
> steve
>
> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)" <gary@NoMail.invalid> wrote in message =
news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere around =
2003.
>> Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into problems =
using
>> their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. =
There are
>> better alternatives.
>>
>> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>>
>>
>> "Steve Cochran"  wrote in message =
news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...
>>
>> People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I =
have dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
>> Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been =
ignored by Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages=20
>> because
>> of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never get =
my support and I will uninstall the crap before ever=20
>> using a
>> computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just as =
is MS and their concern for the user stops after the user
>> has purchased the software.
>>
>> So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of =
us who have had to help users over the years know to stay=20
>> away
>> from the POS.
>>
>> steve
>>
>> "Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message =
news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>> >"osu9400"  wrote in message =
news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials. =
Free,
>>>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will =
thank
>>>>you.
>>>>
>>>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's =
so
>>>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on =
their
>>>>website.
>>> .
>>> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to =
the
>>> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  =
It is
>>> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal =
Tool.
>>> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions Pre =
2009.
>>> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security =
software
>>> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton =
Removal
>>> Tool.
>>>
>>
>>

I get little enough email spam that I already get far
more false positives than actual email spam.  I'm far
more concerned with newsgroups spam.

Robert Miles

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ucSMndYILHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> <qp>
> The client integration (spam folder, buttons, etc) is supported only for 
> Outlook and Outlook Express.  However, users can configure Windows Mail 
> (or other unsupported e-mail clients) to move the tagged spam to a spam 
> folder.
> To do this, first create a folder called "Norton AntiSpam Folder"
> Then create a filter rule in your e-mail client to automatically filter 
> e-mails containing the tag "Norton AntiSpam" in the subject header to this 
> "Norton AntiSpam Folder".
> Periodically monitor this "Norton AntiSpam Folder" for any non-spam mails 
> or False Positives and then delete them.
> </qp>
>
>
>
> --
> ...winston
> ms-mvp mail
>
> wrote in message news:O4eMZUWILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> I got some more information about compatibility from a Sysmantec/Norton
> chat technician today.  They claim that NIS 2010  is partly compatible 
> with
> WLM - enough not to interfere with the email functions, but not yet fully
> tested for compatibility for other sections, such as the newsgroups 
> section.
> Therefore, when you say that NIS 2010 is compatible or not compatible
> with WLM, you need to add whether you mean with the email section only,
> or with just what other sections.
>
> I'm finding signs that it is not fully compatible with the newsgroups
> section,
> but not quickly enough to decide to abandon any use of NIS 2010 yet.
>
> Do you know if any *.nws files, especially those for text-only newsgroups,
> can contain anything dangerous to Windows without any effort by the
> user to extract it?  If they can't, I may be able to find a way to tell 
> NIS
> 2010
> not to scan any of the directories containing *.nws files.
>
> Also, today I found a way to give Symantec/Norton suggestions about
> how to improve the compatibility with WLM and WM, and gave them
> a few.  No idea yet if those suggestions will improve it enough, though.
>
> Robert Miles
>
> "Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
> news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> This has been my experience as well.
>>
>> No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I 
>> have kept email scanning on as well.
>>
>> This issue is a red herring.
>>
>> Nancy
>>
>> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client 
>>>since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>>-- 
>>>          Bruce Hagen
>>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>>      Imperial Beach, CA
>> .
>> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
>> three
>> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
>> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned 
>> off
>> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
>> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my 
>> experience.
>
>

 

Lol..catching up on old posts before the group's closure.

Send feedback to Symantec..the quoted 'text' was theirs.

--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

wrote in message news:ecvd9w9TLHA.456@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... 

I get little enough email spam that I already get far
more false positives than actual email spam.  I'm far
more concerned with newsgroups spam.

Robert Miles

"...winston" <winstonmvp@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:ucSMndYILHA.4824@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> <qp>
> The client integration (spam folder, buttons, etc) is supported only for 
> Outlook and Outlook Express.  However, users can configure Windows Mail 
> (or other unsupported e-mail clients) to move the tagged spam to a spam 
> folder.
> To do this, first create a folder called "Norton AntiSpam Folder"
> Then create a filter rule in your e-mail client to automatically filter 
> e-mails containing the tag "Norton AntiSpam" in the subject header to this 
> "Norton AntiSpam Folder".
> Periodically monitor this "Norton AntiSpam Folder" for any non-spam mails 
> or False Positives and then delete them.
> </qp>
>
>
>
> --
> ...winston
> ms-mvp mail
>
> wrote in message news:O4eMZUWILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>
> I got some more information about compatibility from a Sysmantec/Norton
> chat technician today.  They claim that NIS 2010  is partly compatible 
> with
> WLM - enough not to interfere with the email functions, but not yet fully
> tested for compatibility for other sections, such as the newsgroups 
> section.
> Therefore, when you say that NIS 2010 is compatible or not compatible
> with WLM, you need to add whether you mean with the email section only,
> or with just what other sections.
>
> I'm finding signs that it is not fully compatible with the newsgroups
> section,
> but not quickly enough to decide to abandon any use of NIS 2010 yet.
>
> Do you know if any *.nws files, especially those for text-only newsgroups,
> can contain anything dangerous to Windows without any effort by the
> user to extract it?  If they can't, I may be able to find a way to tell 
> NIS
> 2010
> not to scan any of the directories containing *.nws files.
>
> Also, today I found a way to give Symantec/Norton suggestions about
> how to improve the compatibility with WLM and WM, and gave them
> a few.  No idea yet if those suggestions will improve it enough, though.
>
> Robert Miles
>
> "Nancy Jackman" <nanwjackman@beaufort.com> wrote in message
> news:OYOjnKFILHA.4400@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> This has been my experience as well.
>>
>> No problems with NIS 2009 and NIS 2010 in conjunction with WLM -- and I 
>> have kept email scanning on as well.
>>
>> This issue is a red herring.
>>
>> Nancy
>>
>> "Victek"  wrote in message news:ek7kV7EILHA.5448@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>
>>>Nothing made by Norton has been compatible with any MS e-mail client 
>>>since Symantec bought the company from Peter Norton.
>>>-- 
>>>          Bruce Hagen
>>>       MS-MVP  [Mail]
>>>      Imperial Beach, CA
>> .
>> Is there any objective data to document this?  I've been using WLM on 
>> three
>> computers along with NIS 2009 and now NIS 2010 and have not had a single
>> problem.  By default email scanning is on, but it can easily be turned 
>> off
>> by anyone concerned about NIS interfering with WLM.  Of course you're
>> entitled to your opinion, but it is simply not borne out in my 
>> experience.
>
>

The need to scan newsgroup files is probably as diverse as the number of available newsgroups...though it would would seem that 'certain' newsgroups would rank higher than others in one's personal 'need to scan' equation.
--
....winston
ms-mvp mail

wrote in message news:eTrt0M8TLHA.456@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... 

Does it even need to scan the *.nws files?  Why or why not?

Robert Miles

Under Settings in MSE one can disable certain file types, including eml =
and nws.  MSE does not remove spam.  If you delete a message from the =
message store without making a corresponding removal of the reference to =
the message in the database, then there will be a mismatch in that the =
database will still think the message is present when in fact it has =
been deleted.  This screws up the functionality of the messaging =
program, be it WinMail or Walmail.  In OE it would result in destruction =
or corruption of the dbx file and the user often would find that all the =
messages in the folder are gone.  cf.  point #3 here:  =
www.oehelp.com/OETips.aspx#3

steve

<robertmiles@bellsouthNOSPAM.net> wrote in message =
news:eTrt0M8TLHA.456@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
> Does Microsoft Security Essentials scan the files related to
> newsgroups posts for Windows Mail and Windows Live
> Mail?  If so does it cause any problems if both Microsoft
> Security Essentials and Windows Mail or Windows Live
> Mail are running at the same time?
>=20
> Does it even need to scan the *.nws files?  Why or why not?
>=20
> Robert Miles
>=20
> "Steve Cochran" <scochran@oehelp.com> wrote in message=20
> news:#Zif2jsILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>> At least we agree on that. <G>
>>
>> Its too bad that others don't consider that some users don't have the =
same=20
>> pleasant experience with Norton as they do.  Just wait until they =
lose=20
>> their messages.
>>
>> steve
>>
>> "Gary VanderMolen (MVP)" <gary@NoMail.invalid> wrote in message=20
>> news:OJ$fs2pILHA.2276@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> I'm with you, Steve. I lost faith in Norton/Symantec somewhere =
around=20
>>> 2003.
>>> Like you, I've had to assist thousands of users who ran into =
problems=20
>>> using
>>> their security software. I don't care how much they've improved. =
There=20
>>> are
>>> better alternatives.
>>>
>>> Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail)
>>>
>>>
>>> "Steve Cochran"  wrote in message=20
>>> news:F3967FB0-AF0A-4861-A50E-575D70A786FC@microsoft.com...
>>>
>>> People can extoll the virtues of Norton as much as they want to.  I =
have=20
>>> dealt with computer problems caused by Norton and
>>> Symantec programs for over 10 years and those issues have been =
ignored by=20
>>> Symantec.  Thousands of users have lost messages because
>>> of Symantec.  I don't care if they are improved.  They will never =
get my=20
>>> support and I will uninstall the crap before ever using a
>>> computer that has it on it.  They are interested in $$$$ only just =
as is=20
>>> MS and their concern for the user stops after the user
>>> has purchased the software.
>>>
>>> So, the lovers of Norton can tell one how great it is, but those of =
us=20
>>> who have had to help users over the years know to stay away
>>> from the POS.
>>>
>>> steve
>>>
>>> "Victek" <Victek@invalid.invalid> wrote in message=20
>>> news:O7V4aiQILHA.1052@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>>>> >"osu9400"  wrote in message=20
>>>> >news:eD5F3MLILHA.1996@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>>>>Drop NIS now and immediately install Microsoft Security Essentials. =

>>>>>Free,
>>>>>lightweight, efficient, and it never expires.  Your computer will =
thank
>>>>>you.
>>>>>
>>>>>NIS is so wide reaching it is nearly impossible to uninstall.  It's =
so
>>>>>gnarly that Symantec actually makes a removal tool available on =
their
>>>>>website.
>>>> .
>>>> Regarding the difficulty of uninstalling NIS, are you referring to =
the
>>>> current version?  The uninstall was greatly improved in 2009/2010.  =
It=20
>>>> is
>>>> now very fast and so far I've not needed to use the Norton Removal =
Tool.
>>>> You are quite right that this were serious problems for versions =
Pre=20
>>>> 2009.
>>>> It's worth noting though that vendor "removal tools" for security=20
>>>> software
>>>> are not uncommon.  Symantec is not unique in offering the Norton =
Removal
>>>> Tool.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>=20
>=20
>=20
>