Neowin Forums > MS AntiSpyware vs Ad-Aware vs SpyBot

Full Version: MS AntiSpyware vs Ad-Aware vs SpyBot

Neowin Forums > Member Submitted News > Back Page News

Pages: 1, 2, 3

evo0o

Jan 9 2005, 01:33

QUOTE(bangbang023 @ Jan 9 2005, 09:14)

In the end, for someone like me, the subscription fee is the determining factor. I'll stick with the current free alternatives.
[right][snapback]585258590[/snapback][/right]

Exactly.

MvT Cracker

Jan 9 2005, 01:34

lavasofts ad-aware is for adware and finds adware that ms anti spyware can't find
but ms anti spyware is great compared to spybot

thats my opinion

altezza

Jan 9 2005, 06:01

I guess Ad-aware and Spybot is still tad better than MS Antispyware. A good effort by MS but still needs bit of work to do.

VRam

Jan 9 2005, 06:15

I like MS Antispyware alot, but I also Ad-aware too. In Ad-aware's defense, you will never meet a nicer, more helpful community than over at the Lavasoft forums. They will break their damn backs to help someone.

jwmcpeak

Jan 9 2005, 06:21

QUOTE(kev^ @ Jan 8 2005, 13:13)

Yeah good read.

What's funny is the people I forced to use firefox don't ever get spyware anymore. What a tool huh. The others use IE and still get dozens of spyware that they love to remove with GIANT or whichever. That suits me fine

[right][snapback]585256738[/snapback][/right]

What's even funnier is that I use IE most of the time, and I've never gotten any spyware/adware on my comp. But then again, I'm not some mindless moron that clicks "Yes" or "Ok" to every dialog box with a choice.

After many years, I can't think of one instance where I had to remove spyware from any of my 'puters.

VRam

Jan 9 2005, 06:26

I know this lady at work that has so many damn toolbars installed, you can barely see whats on webpages

Yahoo
Google
My websearch
Viewpoint

...And she claims she needs them all!

L3thal

Jan 9 2005, 06:28

QUOTE(denzilla @ Jan 9 2005, 01:26)

...And she claims she needs them all!
[right][snapback]585259697[/snapback][/right]

kainashi

Jan 9 2005, 06:41

QUOTE(slimy @ Jan 8 2005, 17:53)

^ interesting info kanashi, mind telling us where u heard that? on neowin?
[right][snapback]585257877[/snapback][/right]

is there really any reason for them to charge? i don't really think so. i don't see the point to charging for it either.

Mastertech

Jan 9 2005, 07:25

QUOTE

This is the truth. I give specific advice in my Guide on how to prevent Spyware. Once completed you will get nothing more then Cookies with IE, unless of course you like to click on ads.

Shannon

Jan 9 2005, 07:54

When I ran Microsoft's AntiSpyware, it detected a whole 3 threats (which were all harmless false positivies anyway). I then ran Ad-aware and it's results showed 13. I must admit they were all tracing cookies, but why doesn't AntiSpyware search for them? Apart from AntiSpyware's resedential protection and interface, I can't find anything good about it.

I'll stick with Ad-aware thanks.

Hekx

Jan 9 2005, 10:54

QUOTE

..if you chose to use Microsoft AntiSpyware as your spyware removal tool, you will still need to run other tools such as Ad-Aware and SpyBot.

That to me is a problem, it would be nice if there were a combined version or simply only one spyware removal tool being fundemental on Windows. At the moment, I only use Spybot, but common sense and caution also plays apart.

Mastertech

Jan 9 2005, 12:02

QUOTE

I must admit they were all tracing cookies, but why doesn't AntiSpyware search for them?

This is a good point I forgot to mention, for whatever reason Microsoft disabled its ability to search for cookies.

Slimy

Jan 9 2005, 15:32

some1 mentioned something about ms mentioning that cookies were too important with certain sites

DoNuTs©

Jan 9 2005, 15:33

I'd call it MS AntiSpyware + Ad-Aware + SpyBot =

VRam

Jan 9 2005, 15:34

They could just flag the cookies from known scum sites? I think thats a retarded reason not to support cookie deletion. Ad-aware and spybot do daily and I've yet to loase an important cookie.

Slimy

Jan 10 2005, 04:18

agreed, but i don't mind much considering ccleaner can do this job, even better

panacea

Jan 10 2005, 05:27

QUOTE(Preto @ Jan 8 2005, 13:28)

I prefer Ad-aware.....it finds everything
[right][snapback]585256526[/snapback][/right]

id be carefull with just that. i have found stuff on my pc with spybot and blaster even after adaware gave me a clean scan.

Frank

Jan 10 2005, 05:28

QUOTE(slimy @ Jan 8 2005, 11:42)

I'm not complaining and it wasn't posted by one person, i'm just saying that the credit goes to GIANT and not ms as ms only did some renaming and icon changes
[right][snapback]585256595[/snapback][/right]

Giant is now owned by Microsoft (I know you already relise this) so in essense giving Kudos to Giant is the same as giving kudos to Microsoft.

QUOTE(PseudoRandomDragon @ Jan 8 2005, 12:13)

If it has tons of bugs, then how come I used it on 5 different computers without finding a single one?
[right][snapback]585256735[/snapback][/right]

If Internet Explorer and Windows XP has many bugs, why don't I see them on any machine I install Windows XP to?

QUOTE(Samoa @ Jan 8 2005, 15:21)

Funny how MS spyware stuff isn't free, considering it's MS's fault to begin with. They provide the code, which allows others to manipulate it harming us, then MS charges us to correct that harm.

Sound like a maffia or what?
[right][snapback]585257720[/snapback][/right]

I don't completly agree with this. If a copany like Gator bought Giant then yes it would be like the mafia. Since Microsoft doesn't make spyware, it is a completly different story.

QUOTE(bangbang023 @ Jan 8 2005, 18:14)

In the end, for someone like me, the subscription fee is the determining factor. I'll stick with the current free alternatives.
[right][snapback]585258590[/snapback][/right]

I agree.

QUOTE(Fanon @ Jan 8 2005, 23:21)

I agree 100%. After SP2 and one smapp tweak to Internet Settings, I never get any spyware on my machine.

AlphaPrime

Jan 10 2005, 06:18

Does anyone know how many spyware signatures Microsoft (GIANT) AntiSpyware searches for?

SpyBot (Immunize) - 2,337
SpywareBlaster (Immunize) - 3,348
SpyBot - 25,936
Ad-Aware SE - 36,484
SpySweeper - 45,069
Microsoft AntiSpyware - ?

I've found SpySweeper to be the best for me. Although, once I started using Firefox, I haven't had any spyware.

yisman

Jan 10 2005, 16:03

QUOTE(Preto @ Jan 8 2005, 13:28)

I prefer Ad-aware.....it finds everything
[right][snapback]585256526[/snapback][/right]

Read the article.

BTW, I use Ad-aware SE, Spybot, MS, Spyware Blaster, and Spyware Doctor. I also used Spy Sweeper, but its trial version expired, so I just uninstalled it (not paying them $30). I use all the free versions which work well, basically.

yisman

Jan 10 2005, 16:11

QUOTE(Mastertech @ Jan 8 2005, 20:32)

MS Antispyware is ok but it produces false positives, similiar to Pest Patrol. I suspect the tester did not use the latest Beta of Spybot v1.4 B2 with all the latest updates? Also the actual number of Spyware infections a program detects can be misleading since some group them together while others count every single file and registry key. Spybot groups all the files and registry keys for one infection, so its detection rate looks lower then it is. The other thing is how MS Antispyware incorrectly labels remote connect software and certain P2P programs as spyware. This artificially inflates the detection results.

A real test would require better methods. Every system I ran this on that had Ad-aware v1.05 SE and Spybot v1.4 B2 both fully updated, MS Antispyware did not find any new infections. In one or two cases it found a left over registry key or two from files that were removed. Similar to how uninstalled applications leave registry entries behind. Thus the system was not infected but MS Antispyware said it was. These sort of false positives can produce unnecessary panic.

The big False Positive it found on all machines is "Search Squire". It was identifying the Immunized registry entry Spybot made as a Search Squire infection. Not good. It looks like this needs some more work.
[right][snapback]585258679[/snapback][/right]

I have the fully updated versions of Adaware SE and Spybot (I search for updates several times a week), and MS Antispyware still found several things. I also have Spyware Blaster.
The problem is that I mostly use IE, not Firefox.

yisman

Jan 10 2005, 16:14

QUOTE(denzilla @ Jan 9 2005, 01:26)

I know this lady at work that has so many damn toolbars installed, you can barely see whats on webpages

Yahoo
Google
My websearch
Viewpoint

...And she claims she needs them all!
[right][snapback]585259697[/snapback][/right]

A lot of them contain spyware/ad-ware or pseudo-spyware/adware themselves. Mywebsearch definitely does. Not so familiar with Viewpoint. I don't think Yahoo does, but there is no reason to use their toolbar. I just use the Google toolbar, and I'm happy. It doesn't come with attached crap, either.

PseudoRandomDragon

Jan 10 2005, 16:28

QUOTE(Frank @ Jan 10 2005, 05:28)

If Internet Explorer and Windows XP has many bugs, why don't I see them on any machine I install Windows XP to?
[right][snapback]585265568[/snapback][/right]

Because you are used to them?

saxondale.

Jan 10 2005, 16:34

Its not fair to MS, its still in the beta stage so you cant compare, ad aware and spybot have been around much longer and are actually the final thing, MS have just only released there first beta...

dotRoot

Jan 10 2005, 17:26

QUOTE(Samoa @ Jan 8 2005, 16:21)

Funny how MS spyware stuff isn't free, considering it's MS's fault to begin with. They provide the code, which allows others to manipulate it harming us, then MS charges us to correct that harm.

Sound like a maffia or what?
[right][snapback]585257720[/snapback][/right]

The more security you have, the less control you can have. But then again the only 'faulty' code for spyware was really just ActiveX, which you can easily turn off. But you shouldn't have to, I understand. However for an ActiveX to execute you still have to give it permission, and that's the user's fault not MS'.

How would MS fix spyware anyway? Make it so only companies that go through some sort of checkpoint of MS can install on your machine? Then everyone would complain they are trying to control the market even more and they'd get sued again and then Joe Blow would be mad, because Uber-Ultra-Hamster-Dance Screensaver wouldn't be able to be installed on their system.

Besides if MS supplied it for free, then there'd probably be yet another anti-trust sue frenzy against them.

Mastertech

Jan 10 2005, 20:34

QUOTE

You were using Spybot v1.4B2 fully updated? And the things it found, did it include P2P programs, remote connect software and "Searchsquire"? Did you bother to check the other things it found and if they were left over registry entries or actual infections?

yisman

Jan 10 2005, 20:40

Whoops. Looks like I used v1.4B1.
My mistake.

Where can I upgrade to 1.4B2? I went to download.com and it has 1.3!

Mastertech

Jan 10 2005, 21:02

In Spybot got to advanced mode, settings, settings, under "Web Update", check "Display available Beta versions", the update should be visible now when you check for updates.

Yochanan

Jan 10 2005, 22:50

QUOTE(em3 @ Jan 8 2005, 12:24)

Why use a spyware sweeper program like Spybot or MS Antispyware when you can use SpywareBlaser. It prevents spyware from being installed in the first place. When I try other programs to scan my computer for spyware the results are always zero. But maybe it is also because I use Firefox.
[right][snapback]585256800[/snapback][/right]

Firefox, SpywareBlaster and Spybot are an exellent combination. I haven't been infected since I started using all three together. I even paid for the auto-update feature in SpywareBlaster. It's pretty convenient, but I did it more to support the program.

figgy

Jan 10 2005, 23:56

Spybot thinks cookies are spyware?!!

L3thal

Jan 11 2005, 05:32

QUOTE(figgy @ Jan 10 2005, 18:56)

Spybot thinks cookies are spyware?!!
[right][snapback]585269914[/snapback][/right]

Some cookies are indeed spying cookies, therefore considered spyware

Slimy

Jan 11 2005, 13:14

any1 know when the next spybot is coming out?

Mastertech

Jan 12 2005, 05:38

QUOTE

any1 know when the next spybot is coming out?

http://forums.net-integration.net/index.ph...=0&#entry120646

I guess when it is done?

It usually takes them a while to roll out a new version. For now the BETA works pretty well.

Copernic

Jan 12 2005, 09:59

We try to compare MS AntiSpyware with Ad-aware , Spybot etc ... but why someone don't try to run a test between MS AntiSpyware vs Giant Antispyware , to see what is changed on the new MS tool ( if something changed beside the name

) .

Mastertech

Jan 12 2005, 11:46

QUOTE

MS AntiSpyware vs Giant Antispyware

They are practically identical, except the M$ version does not search for cookies and some of the advanced tools have been removed.

wicked33

Jan 12 2005, 11:59

ive tried them all..

Best ones i have come across are spyware doctor and spysweeper..

=p

Mastertech

Jan 12 2005, 12:08

Spyware Doctor's detection rate is much lower then Ad-aware or Spybot. Spysweeper is better but not better then Ad-aware and Spybot and you have to pay for it.

cork1958

Jan 12 2005, 12:11

QUOTE(kev^ @ Jan 8 2005, 14:13)

[right][snapback]585256738[/snapback][/right]

Same here only with Opera, Haven't had squat for spyware in ages!

I have tried the majority of these tools and as quite a few people have already said, no one single program detects everything. So, no matter how good this one is, I'd still keep Adaware and Spybot, along with Spywareblaster.

yisman

Jan 12 2005, 16:59

QUOTE(wicked33 @ Jan 12 2005, 06:59)

ive tried them all..

Best ones i have come across are spyware doctor and spysweeper..

=p
[right][snapback]585278954[/snapback][/right]

I use everything:

Spy Sweeper, Spyware Doctor, Ad-aware, Microsoft/Giant, and Spybot (and Spyware Blaster, of course, but that's not a scan tool).

Spyware Doctor doesn't catch anything except this one cookie that initializes on startup (from Weatherbug). It runs a scan every time I boot up the comp, and it catches the same one thing until last time (I think it's because one of the other programs actually removed it

). I also use the OnGuard protection, but I'm not sure how much it helps.

thunderrooster

Jan 12 2005, 18:21

Pestpatrol finds more than any of them. http://research.pestpatrol.com/Stats/Default.asp

yisman

Jan 12 2005, 18:35

Top pest today is Viewpoint toolbar. Sweet!

Mastertech

Jan 12 2005, 21:08

QUOTE

Pestpatrol finds more than any of them.

Pestpatrol finds less then Ad-aware and Spybot plus it produces alot of false positives. The only ones worth using are:

Ad-aware
Spybot
MS Antispyware
Spy Sweeper (not free)

Slimy

Jan 12 2005, 21:37

^ to add to the list, hijackthis, winpatrol, spywareblaster
all in my sig

thunderrooster

Jan 12 2005, 22:23

Pestpatol detects more than spybot or adware. All the paid ones has false positives cuase thier database is so large. I did a test a few days ago with ms antispyware,pestpatrol and spy sweeper and pestpatrol fount the most on my computer.

Mastertech

Jan 13 2005, 02:34

That doesn't even make any sense you did a test with Microsoft Antispyware, PestPatrol and Spyware Sweeper then claim that PestPatrol detects more then Ad-aware and Spybot?

QUOTE

Also the actual number of Spyware infections a program detects can be misleading since some group them together while others count every single file and registry key. Spybot groups all the files and registry keys for one infection, so its detection rate looks lower then it is.

False Positives are pretty serious since they can do things like remove protection, such as Microsoft AntiSpyware does with Spybot's immunize feature and the "Searchsquire" Immunization. PestPatrol is notorious for not thoroughly testing their detection routines and producing false positives. Spyware Sweeper is the only legitimate pay to play spyware remover that does a decent job and does not produce false positives.

Slimy

Jan 13 2005, 02:42

^ spysweeper has many false positives, although none that i saw were very serious
spybot seems to be slipping behind all the big companies but i hope pepimk will get bak on track with 1.4

nicedreams

Jan 13 2005, 02:54

People have to understand that MS doesn't make all of their software from scratch. Just like their scan disk and defrag used to be from Symantec and now the defrager in XP is just Disk Keeper Lite 7 and most of the other programs aren't made from MS either.

I just wish that some of the products they do make they would do a better job at it. I heard that MS is going to use Pain.net from that one guy in Longhorn, which I think is a tight program. They should make their little utils more powerful, but of course they won't do that, because they want you to BUY BUY BUY a more advanced memory hog that takes forever to load when you just want to do something special.

groberts

Jan 13 2005, 03:02

I'm not sure why they are even doing a Beta, I mean the program has been in existance for a while, so what are they testing? A fully tested program? That makes a lot of sense. I used Giant before MS bought them, and I notice no differences between MS Antispyware and Giant, except the name. Anyway, if you haven't already, go ahead and download it and "test" it out. I love it.

thunderrooster

Jan 13 2005, 04:47

Mastertech, I thinks it well known that all the paid ones detect more than spybot and adaware. Don’t get me wrong I am not trashing spybot and adaware, I have said this in other post, spybot and adaware is must have then if you choose buy one. As far as the false positives like I said all the paid ones do. With a database that big you can’t help it. And yes at one time pestpatrol did have a problem with them, but if you look at most of the programs none of them tells you there will be false positives or have a way to report them. Pestpatrol has always told you there will be false positives and give you a way to report them. I think they had that problem cause of not having enough people checking, but since ca has bought them out they do have enough staff now. They do update more often now and since version 5 I haven’t had hardly any false positives. Actually I don’t remember any.

I agree with groberts. Although they did strip windows 9x support and put their name all over it. And didn’t they take out the cookie part to, probably to cover themselves lol. Them passport cookies are considered tracking cookies.

IAIHMB

Jan 13 2005, 05:01

I believe that Microsoft's Antispyware 1.0 Beta is better than Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition 1.05 and Spybot - Search & Destroy 1.3. Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition 1.05 can't handle the complexity of today's spyware, it only seems to pick up a tracking cookie here and there. Spybot - Search & Destroy 1.3 misses quite a bit of spyware, doesn't give detailed information on the entries that it picks up, which means you could delete something that you wouldn't want to. Microsoft Antispyware 1.0 Beta has picked up everything Bazooka Adware and Spyware Scanner 1.12, and has given me detailed information on everything that it picks up.

Fun Fact: Bazooka Adware and Spyware Scanner 1.12 is what CNet uses to test how well other antispyware programs pick up spyware.

This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.