<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Second Beta of Windows Defender Available</title>
	<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685</link>
	<description>Independent Tech News and Product Reviews from former VP and head of CNET.com and Longtime Computer Shopper Columnist, Alice Hill author of the popular "Hard Edge" column. Originally named AliceandBill.com.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:33:59 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: slashdotcoma</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12832</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 03:46:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12832</guid>
					<description>Nice looking product... only problem is I don't have a PC that is (or the time to) totally infected with malware... or a PC with any malware (sic) ... but the buttons look nice</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice looking product&#8230; only problem is I don&#8217;t have a PC that is (or the time to) totally infected with malware&#8230; or a PC with any malware (sic) &#8230; but the buttons look nice
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Lockergnome's Tech News Watch</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12794</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 18:55:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12794</guid>
					<description>&lt;strong&gt;Second Beta Of Windows Defender Available&lt;/strong&gt;

Jimmy Daniels of RealTechNews writes: Microsoft has posted the second beta version of Windows Defender, formerly know as Windows Antispyware for download. The site says 25 million active customers....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Second Beta Of Windows Defender Available</strong></p>
<p>Jimmy Daniels of RealTechNews writes: Microsoft has posted the second beta version of Windows Defender, formerly know as Windows Antispyware for download. The site says 25 million active customers&#8230;.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Jimmy</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12783</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 14:17:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12783</guid>
					<description>I agree John, one would think they would spend more time on fixing the problem form the OS side, instead of another utility. Wouldn't this compare to a car manufacturer whose keyless entry devices all operate the same vehicle and you have to buy one to make yours work right?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree John, one would think they would spend more time on fixing the problem form the OS side, instead of another utility. Wouldn&#8217;t this compare to a car manufacturer whose keyless entry devices all operate the same vehicle and you have to buy one to make yours work right?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: John Corliss</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12780</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:43:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12780</guid>
					<description>Is it just me or does anybody else notice that there is a distinct conflict of interest in Microsoft creating (and eventually selling) anti-malware programs?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it just me or does anybody else notice that there is a distinct conflict of interest in Microsoft creating (and eventually selling) anti-malware programs?
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12777</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:53:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12777</guid>
					<description>The interface is completely different, more friendly in some ways.  One major feature has been removed,  Tracks Eraser, a one stop shop to remove your history, cookies, typed address, search terms, files displayed in various media players etc...   This was a handy feature for those that like to leave minimal history behind.  IE7 supports a similar One Click feature, perhaps that is why it has been scrubbed from this release.

Will test it out on Thursday when I install it on a friends heavily infected PC.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The interface is completely different, more friendly in some ways.  One major feature has been removed,  Tracks Eraser, a one stop shop to remove your history, cookies, typed address, search terms, files displayed in various media players etc&#8230;   This was a handy feature for those that like to leave minimal history behind.  IE7 supports a similar One Click feature, perhaps that is why it has been scrubbed from this release.</p>
<p>Will test it out on Thursday when I install it on a friends heavily infected PC.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: David Johnston</title>
		<link>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12671</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2006 23:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.realtechnews.com/posts/2685#comment-12671</guid>
					<description>I downloaded it and it seems fine to me, though it doesn't notify when a program needs your approval or not and it does nothing that I can see to block programs from running or accessing the net even if they have not been marked as fine by the user.  That seems like strange to me...  Anyway, other than that it's about the same as the old one as far as scanning goes.  I'm not about to infect my PC with spyware just to test how good it really is, but it did pick up all the instances of VNC on my computer (they are there on purpose though) which is a plus in my book.  Scanning also seemed pretty light on resources and fast.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I downloaded it and it seems fine to me, though it doesn&#8217;t notify when a program needs your approval or not and it does nothing that I can see to block programs from running or accessing the net even if they have not been marked as fine by the user.  That seems like strange to me&#8230;  Anyway, other than that it&#8217;s about the same as the old one as far as scanning goes.  I&#8217;m not about to infect my PC with spyware just to test how good it really is, but it did pick up all the instances of VNC on my computer (they are there on purpose though) which is a plus in my book.  Scanning also seemed pretty light on resources and fast.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.574 seconds -->
