Re: Getting an error message nearly every time!

Hi David,

I'm back with my problem. I thought Spybot had it fixed but it seem that
I'm still getting the error message each time I do something with Internet
Explorer, so I expect it may be something else.

Do you OR ANYONE OUT THERE have any other ideas??

Thanks much,
Doug



"David Kelsey" <davidkelseyNO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eBD9VuHWFHA.3044@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> What you say makes very good sense to me. On the other hand, some of the
> top software houses, including Microsoft itself, supply updates which are
> unverified, and the instruction usually given is to 'install anyway'. It
> seems that verification takes so long, the next update will be due before
> the last one gets verified.
>
> I do regular spyware scans with Ad-Aware and Spybot, the first of which
> normally gives me 48 objects, which I delete, while if I then run Spybot,
I
> get nothing except congratulations on having a clean machine. I currently
> have 5144 cookies, but if I delete them, I will have to remember 87 login,
> password, secret word, favourite date things, and the place they are
> required, which will tax my tired old brain beyond its powers. I do keep
> them written down, of course, and I shall kick myself if I get burgled,
but
> the chances of that, and of the burglar knowing what to do with my
passwords
> if he finds them, are pretty small. I think it is time the Internet grew
> up, and stopped playing James Bond with every petty site demanding
> registration and passwords etc. before it will let you in to buy something
> from them, or contribute to a forum. I have managed for most of my 75
years
> without needing any of that stuff, perhaps because prior to the Net,
> businesses were not generally run by 18-year old school-leavers. I mean,
> why do I need a password and login to look at my telephone bill? I don't
> care if the whole world knows it was £12.50.
>
> As you imply, you can't really have a rewarding experience, to coin a
> phrase, if you exclude Java and ActiveX. It might help if website
designers
> stopped going for the bells and whistles that most people don't give a
toss
> about, and flung out the Macromedia stuff and Flash, and just settled for
a
> plain and simple site that opened quickly, navigated faultlessly, and gave
> you the opportunity to go elsewhere if you really have to have the fancy
> stuff. Everyone wants to be an art director.
>
> They don't call me Victor Meldrew for nothing!
>
> David
>
>
> "DGuess" <majik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:ulRtiMAWFHA.132@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > "David Kelsey" <davidkelseyNO@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:%23V9mwW%23VFHA.2660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Spyware tends to be blamed for pretty well everything that goes wrong
> >> with computers, but does anyone know what the actual mechanism is that
> >> might cause a machine to go wrong? It can't really be in the interests
> >> of a spyware writer to stop computers working, can it? So are they
just
> >> incompetent programmers, or is there another less obvious agenda?
> >>
> >
> >
> > It's because these spyware writers don't write good code. They want it
out
> > fast and then have plausible deniability if something isn't right. How
> > many times have we heard of companies saying it couldn't be their code
> > thats messing it up and when it's uninstalled things seem to work right
> > again. Windows, IE and OE get blamed for a lot of things in which they
> > aren't the root cause. How many times have you heard people talk about
> > ActiveX like it was the worse thing in the world? ActiveX like Java
both
> > prompt for running unless you have it set to run without asking and
that's
> > a fairly stupid thing to do to begin with.
> >
> > If a publisher can't be verified, it should be a given to not install
> > whatever they are hawking.
> >
> > The programmers don't care as long as they can find a hook to get it
> > installed, be it on top of something else or just straight out.
> >
> > And thinking that Firefox or other browsers are safer is fairly lame as
> > well. You can still install a Java app and find out it's affected the
> > machine in other ways.
> >
> > You can also install that "just gotta have" screen saver or other
freebie
> > and find you've just infected your computer with junkware that really
> > won't uninstall. They don't care is the bottom line. Anything that tries
> > to install something else should be a warning sign that something is up.
> > Yes, some legitimate apps need to install other things, such as DirectX
or
> > .NET to work but things like these are fairly easy to find that they are
> > in the "good to install" category.
> >
> > Most users are fairly inexperienced around computers and the way they
> > work. It's easy to get this crapware by them. No matter how much I or
> > someone else may warn them, they still get the crap on there. They see
> > something and think it's okay to click on it and then you have some code
> > that no means yes and yes means no (and sometimes it doesn't matter
which
> > you click).
> >
> > Then you have the software that is supposed to stop all this stuff and
> > it's just as bad as the malware it's supposed to remove.
> >
> > Getting a user educated is not easy, they don't want to take the time to
> > have to think about something else other than what they think they want
to
> > do.
> >
> > And yes, I have told people in the past to box the computer up and send
it
> > back as they were too stupid to own one. While it's been few and far
> > between, I can only take so much of someone who can't remember how to
copy
> > or paste or where the START button is only so many times.
> >
> > Keep up to date Antivirus software and it's definitions, an anti-spyware
> > and it's definitions, a HOSTS file which will redirect some ads to the
> > local machine where it can't be found are some things everyone should
do.
> > The "up to date" part is the most neded once something is installed. I
> > know a guy here locally that swears he has an antivirus program and
can't
> > possibly be infected. He's also still in the mood of Windows 95 is a fad
> > and DOS RuLeZ!. Dr. Watson is the AV and there hasn't been definitions
for
> > it in ages but yet he maintains his computer isn't infected with
anything.
> > I can't recall how many times I've heard him say he had to rebuild his
> > hard drive because it wouldn't boot suddenly. Couldn't possibly be a
boot
> > virus of some type on there....
> >
> > I could go on and on about this but it doesn't do any good. People
install
> > things reguardless of the warnings they don't understand.
> >
>
>


.