Upgrading from 4 to 4.1 wise ? experiences ?

[misery]

I have been thinking about upgrading to 4.1 from version 4. But a few users have had problems. Which makes me VERY wary.

Can I have some experiences from people who have upgraded to 4.1 ?
Good ones, bad ones ?

I don't really mind that 4.0 takes much time to start.

I think I asked why 4.1 is faster, but I don't remember the response. Any answers ? I'm just paranoid. Which is a good thing.

[someguy]

I have been thinking about upgrading to 4.1 from version 4. But a few users have had problems. Which makes me VERY wary.

Can I have some experiences from people who have upgraded to 4.1 ?
Good ones, bad ones ?

I don't really mind that 4.0 takes much time to start.

I think I asked why 4.1 is faster, but I don't remember the response. Any answers ? I'm just paranoid. Which is a good thing.

Its fine. I havent had any problems with it at all. Much faster to load.

[Paulas]

Being paranoid about PC-Tools products is understandable given the SD 5 debacle.

However, I uninstalled SD 4 yesterday and then installed SD 4.1 without any problems. It certainly seems faster than SD 4 and I have experienced no problems in the 36 hours I have been running it.

[Gambit]

I too have been running SDv4.1 for a few days now and its running great.

[Keith Warner]

My answer is that it depends on your system. On an older, smaller computer like mine (see sig), going from 4.0 to 4.1 slowed things noticeably, so back to 4.0.


;)

[someguy]

My answer is that it depends on your system. On an older, smaller computer like mine (see sig), going from 4.0 to 4.1 slowed things noticeably, so back to 4.0.


;)

So you're saying 4.0 loads faster than 4.1 on your machine? *Very* strange, almost unbelievable.

[Keith Warner]

No, I meant 4.1 slowed everything else down.

[Gambit]

This is probably due to the improvements on the OnGuard tools. Probably working harder then the tools in 4.0 (enhanced protection). I cannot notice any slow down issues with v4.0 and v4.1. The slow down will most likely relate to your computer specs Keith.

[Keith Warner]

So, now, does everyone understand that the enhancements in 4.1 slowed down my old box (like I said to begin with)???



:rolleyes:

[tom.tdw]

4.1 is meant to be faster

this might be resolved by smartupdates
This is probably due to the improvements on the OnGuard tools. Probably working harder then the tools in 4.0 (enhanced protection). I cannot notice any slow down issues with v4.0 and v4.1. The slow down will most likely relate to your computer specs Keith.

[Keith Warner]

I give up. It's a moot point, anyway, as I have NO Spyware Doctor installed. I saved the 4.0 installer in case I get into trouble and need a good scan/remove tool. For a Firefox user that's all Spyware Doctor is really good for, as Browser Guard only protects Bill Gates' illegitimate child anyway.


KW

[jondow]

:) , one thing thats annoying me in 4.1 is that it doesent remove tracking cookies on any manual scan you have to enable onguard for tracking cookies to be removed this is anoying because i only use sd as a on demand scanner:confused: my subscription ends in 4 days carnt see me renewing at the moment

sygate
windows defender
kaspersky
spywareblaster
on demand scanners - avg antispyware "free" & Dr web's cureit "free"

[tom.tdw]

v5 does protect firefox but not v4

i found this really annoying before 5 came out

this is something to look into for 4.2 (or what ever the next release is called)
I give up. It's a moot point, anyway, as I have NO Spyware Doctor installed. I saved the 4.0 installer in case I get into trouble and need a good scan/remove tool. For a Firefox user that's all Spyware Doctor is really good for, as Browser Guard only protects Bill Gates' illegitimate child anyway.


KW

[misery]

Well, I've made up my mind.

So 4.1 has been made faster by slowing down other things ! That's a real smart solution. And I see that there is supposedly some problem with cookies, at least for some people. AND some people experienced other problems.

I won't be upgrading to ANY new version of the Spyware Doctor (or is it patient?).

[Bernhard]

If you use firefox, you don't need OnGuard? Or is this not correct?

[XR6]

I now have 4.1 on 3 PCs - 2 that were running 4.0, and one that had SD5. All start faster (especially the one that was running SD5), and run OK. So yes, I wouldn't expect you to have any problems. Just make sure that you have a copy of the 4.0 setup file just in case.

[mjq424]

Hi Bernhard

If you use firefox, you don't need OnGuard? Or is this not correct?
You do need OnGuard active to prevent malware infection. If you have other software that has real-time protecttion, then thats fine, but otherwise it leaves you opento infection.

[redwolfe_98]

one thing thats annoying me in 4.1 is that it doesent remove tracking cookies on any manual scan you have to enable onguard for tracking cookies to be removed this is anoying because i only use sd as a on demand scanner:confused: my subscription ends in 4 days carnt see me renewing at the moment

you should send an email to pctools and tell them that you are not renewing your subscription for SD because its "disk scanner" does not flag tracking-cookies..

i have sent pctools a couple of emails, recently, about SD's not flagging tracking-cookies, but you know how their support is.. they don't seem to understand the things that you are trying to tell them.. the emails just go back and forth, back and forth..

however, as far as cookies go, cookies are easy to deal with.. you should blcok third-party cookies in IE/tools/options/privacy.. also, you can easily delete cookies (IE/tools/options/general/"delete cookies")..

still, i agree.. spyware doctor should flag tracking-cookies..

[someguy]

you should send an email to pctools and tell them that you are not renewing your subscription for SD because its "disk scanner" does not flag tracking-cookies..

i have sent pctools a couple of emails, recently, about SD's not flagging tracking-cookies, but you know how their support is.. they don't seem to understand the things that you are trying to tell them.. the emails just go back and forth, back and forth..

however, as far as cookies go, cookies are easy to deal with.. you should blcok third-party cookies in IE/tools/options/privacy.. also, you can easily delete cookies (IE/tools/options/general/"delete cookies")..

still, i agree.. spyware doctor should flag tracking-cookies..

Just noticed in another thread they finally noticed that the cookie scanner was missing from the setup package. Guess it'll be on update soon. Yay! :)

[tom.tdw]

If you use firefox, you don't need OnGuard? Or is this not correct?
cookie guard is just a small part of onguard

in general firefox is a lot safer than ie

[Keith Warner]

While I agree that in general Firefox is a safer browser than Inferior Explorer, I also think the landscape is changing. While the thieves are like electricity and follow the path of least resistance, the other criminals, who are looking for a challenge, are increasingly being drawn to the open-source browsers available today. For that reason I am always looking for the best protection I can find.



;)

[mjq424]

Hi
Thats a good call. However, open source means that exploits can quicly be found and remediated by the user community. Also, FF has more security options, especially for downloads. ActiveX malware has no effect on FF so that stops alot too.