Avira--Holy Smokes! What CR mag has to say.

[W. eWatson]

I thought I'd try the free Avira. I noted CR magazine rated (67) it
first among the free anti-malware, but showed a caveat. The catch is
"...it persistently tries to seel you its untested $27 pay version."
Persistent is correct. Good grief. One is practically hounded during
installation. You need to call them to activate it, and provide your
shipping address. A window or two comes up about buying the full
producet. Then they install three components. I immediately took them
off my PD. Done with that product. The product morphed into CyperDefender.

BTW, it's weakest feature according to CR is false positives.
Performance was good. Scan speed was very high. Ease of use was good, as
was resources (whatever that is). June 2010 issue.

Symantec, BitDefender and G Data were the top three (pay) suites.

It was noted that Avira had released a new version (minor revisions) at
the time of the review, but wouldn't change their rating. (MCAfee was
rated #8 with a score of 49.)

Ah, I just got my June 11 issue. Avira had about the same rating, and
McAfee fell considerably to a score of 31.

MSE fell amongst the freebies. Low on net threats.

 

[Nil]

I thought I'd try the free Avira. I noted CR magazine rated (67)
it first among the free anti-malware, but showed a caveat. The
catch is "...it persistently tries to seel you its untested $27
pay version." Persistent is correct. Good grief. One is
practically hounded during installation. You need to call them to
activate it, and provide your shipping address.

Absolutely untrue. You do NOT have to call them to activate. That
statement calls into question your entire review.

Avira Free's main downside is that it throws up an ad when you update
the virus definitions. There are several ways to disable that behavior.

 

[W. eWatson]

Absolutely untrue. You do NOT have to call them to activate. That
statement calls into question your entire review.

Avira Free's main downside is that it throws up an ad when you update
the virus definitions. There are several ways to disable that behavior.

Untrue or not, it certainly threw up two different windows that stated it.

The CR review. Not in question at all.

To top this off, I see that it put a CyberDefender in my FF toolbar,
which I noticed. Pure dribble.

 

[Bert Hyman]

To top this off, I see that it put a CyberDefender in my FF toolbar,
which I noticed. Pure dribble.

Why would Avira put "CyberDefender," a competitors product, in your
FireFox toolbar?

 

[Nil]

Untrue or not, it certainly threw up two different windows that
stated it.

I don't believe that. And you didn't have to call, did you, so it's not
true. I've installed Avira many times, and I've never had to call. The
company is reputable and ethical. I don't believe they would lie about
that.

What was the exact wording of the message?

The CR review. Not in question at all.

I'm questioning YOUR review.

To top this off, I see that it put a CyberDefender in my FF
toolbar, which I noticed. Pure dribble.

Avira does not do that. They have no connection to CyberDefender. It
sounds like you have other problems that are unrelated to Avira.

 

[VanguardLH]

I thought I'd try the free Avira. I noted CR magazine rated (67) it
first among the free anti-malware, but showed a caveat. The catch is
"...it persistently tries to seel you its untested $27 pay version."
Persistent is correct. Good grief. One is practically hounded during
installation. You need to call them to activate it, and provide your
shipping address. A window or two comes up about buying the full
producet. Then they install three components. I immediately took them
off my PD. Done with that product. The product morphed into CyperDefender.

BTW, it's weakest feature according to CR is false positives.
Performance was good. Scan speed was very high. Ease of use was good, as
was resources (whatever that is). June 2010 issue.

Symantec, BitDefender and G Data were the top three (pay) suites.

It was noted that Avira had released a new version (minor revisions) at
the time of the review, but wouldn't change their rating. (MCAfee was
rated #8 with a score of 49.)

Ah, I just got my June 11 issue. Avira had about the same rating, and
McAfee fell considerably to a score of 31.

MSE fell amongst the freebies. Low on net threats.

As I recall, it is registerware. I never had to dial a telephone number
to validate its installation. So I have to wonder if your loose use of
"call them" may have meant you need to give a valid e-mail address to
get the confirmation e-mail which has the product's registration number.
Avast is registerware, too, and the one that I use. Yes, you do have to
provide a valid e-mail but no one is forcing you to use your true e-mail
address. Use a temporary or disposable email account, like at Hotmail,
Yahoo, or Gmail. Use an e-mail alias, like with Sneakemail or aliases
if you have a paid Yahoo Mail account. If your ISP lets you create
e-mail accounts (besides your "owner/admin" one) then create one and use
temporarily to delete later when you no longer want it.

I don't recall the installation being the bear that you describe with
the barrage of promos for their payware version. Of course, I never do
typical or default installs because you don't know what fluff or
foistware you might get stuck with. I always do custom installs.

Note that most reviews of security products are based on their *paid*
versions. You didn't mention if you were looking at freeware or
payware. The freeware version of Avira is missing components that ARE
included in the freeware version of Avast, so coverage comparisons of
the payware versions doesn't necessarily translate well to coverage
comparisons of the freeware versions. The freeware version of Avast,
for example, includes their Web Shield and now a Script Behavior
component (but probably should be disabled or not installed for now)
that is missing in the freeware version of Avira.

Avira typically gets a higher malware coverage rate than Avast but
remember those comparisons are, again, based on the payware versions.
Avira has more false positives than Avast but then Avira's rate is
higher - except Avast has more infection vectors covered than Avira (in
the freeware versions of each).

Avira and Avast are both adware. They both have ads that are presented
during their use. AntiVir, after getting acquired by Avira, became far
more nusiancesome is shoving the adware in your face. In Avast, the
only time you see their ad is when you load their configuration UI. In
Avira, you get a popup ad everytime it does a signature update (which is
every day unless you define more scheduled jobs to update more often and
also then see the popup ad more often). There are workarounds to
getting rid of both Avira's splash screen when it loads (which is an ad)
and when it updates; however, I usually look for equivalent freeware
products that are just as good and either not adware or subdued adware,
and not having to discover and commit workarounds to get rid of
nuisances of adware in your face.

You might also want to consider a different facet of security software:
how well the product disinfects your host. While many of the top-rated
AV products have a good showing as regards to their pest coverage, they
may do poorly in regards to their ability to disinfect a system. Avira
isn't that good as disinfecting a host. Avast isn't much better. MSE
is better but only regarding the lower coverage of pests that it finds.
Typically I rely on daily partition imaging to give me backups to let me
revert my host to a prior state since disinfection by AV programs has
always been less than stellar.

 

[VanguardLH]

To top this off, I see that it put a CyberDefender in my FF toolbar,
which I noticed. Pure dribble.

You don't remember what you've installed on your host and now you're
focusing on Avira but you remember installing that one. CyberDefender
has nothing to do with Avira or their products. That is a totally
different company. CyberDefender is subscriptionware (free to try;
$30/year after the trial expires) that probably got installed because
you always do typical or default installs which include fluff or
foistware; i.e., other products are bundled with a leader product.
You'll end up with lots of junk on your host which you don't know about
because you chose not to perform a custom install.

There are products, for example, that bundle in a desktop shortcut to
eBay. The product is obviously not from eBay nor owned by eBay but the
vendor gets a stipend if they bundle eBay with their product (and the
user of that product happens to use that encoded shortcut to buy, sell,
open an account, or otherwise do something at eBay). Other typical
foistware included in dummy installs (i.e., typical or default installs)
are Ask Toolbar, Bing Toolbar, Google Toolbar, and Yahoo Toolbar. If
you elect not to do a custom install where you select what to install
then it was your choice to include everything a vendor chose to bundle
in their installation package.

I just did a test install of Avira (freeware version) in a virtual
machine. CyberDefender was not included as foistware in the bundling of
Avira's installation package. Today it was, well, nothing. I did a
custom install and no foistware was listed.

I have to wonder from where you downloaded Avira. Many of the download
sites will show download links but emphasis them for products they are
advertising. I've heard many times where users get a so-called download
page for a product and click on the wrong link. There's a big green
button saying "Download Now" but its for some advertised product, not
the product you wanted to download which has a smaller link elsewhere on
the web page. You might've download the installer for something else,
or you got the download from a non-reputable download site which bundled
(wrapped) some foistware with the product you thought you were getting.

 

[VanguardLH]

I thought I'd try the free Avira. I noted CR magazine rated (67) it ...

Oh, CR Magazine. Might that be www.crmagazine.com, a magazine about
cancer research (American Associate for *C*ancer *R*esearch)? Who would
care about a review on anti-virus software dumped there?

Could it be the Corporate Responsibility online magazine at
http://www.thecro.com/? Nope, wouldn't care about AV reviews there,
either.

Next time you want to reference an article (and if it's online) then
give a URL link to the article. Without the evidence of the article, no
one but you would know how their ratings were measured or even if they
disclosed their measurement strategy.

 

[Paul]

Untrue or not, it certainly threw up two different windows that stated it.

The CR review. Not in question at all.

To top this off, I see that it put a CyberDefender in my FF toolbar,
which I noticed. Pure dribble.

Did you get the Avira download from the Avira site, or did you
get it from "Softpedia" or one of those other download warehouse
sites ? It could be, that the version of "Avira" you downloaded,
isn't what you think it is. And thus, your experience isn't the same
as everyone else.

What I do, as part of researching software, is use Wikipedia to get
the company's main web site. Then, I look for the software there.
That gets me here.

http://www.avira.com/en/free-download-avira-antivir-personal

I clicked that link, and I'm getting this - 52,676,424 bytes.
MD5SUM = c6a4d3d827b54dad28b659f27f964c1b

http://dlce.antivir.com/package/wks_avira/win32/en/pecl/avira_antivir_personal_en.exe

If I enter c6a4d3d827b54dad28b659f27f964c1b into a search engine, it
tells me the file version I downloaded is Avira 10.0.0.648 .

How does that compare to your download ? Was your download
a different size ? A different version ? Are we comparing the
same thing ? Did the download site include a "little extra something" ?

Paul

 

[Nil]

Did you get the Avira download from the Avira site, or did you
get it from "Softpedia" or one of those other download warehouse
sites ? It could be, that the version of "Avira" you downloaded,
isn't what you think it is. And thus, your experience isn't the
same as everyone else.

I've seen you mention Softpedia a couple of times now in similar
contexts. Is that site known to distribute compromised or altered
versions of software from other vendors?

I would never use Softpedia's service anyway - I always go to the
product's official site - but I've run across the site before.

 

[W. eWatson]

Why would Avira put "CyberDefender," a competitors product, in your
FireFox toolbar?

Good question. I'll address this below.

 

[W. eWatson]

Oh, CR Magazine. Might that be www.crmagazine.com, a magazine about
cancer research (American Associate for *C*ancer *R*esearch)? Who would
care about a review on anti-virus software dumped there?

Could it be the Corporate Responsibility online magazine at
http://www.thecro.com/? Nope, wouldn't care about AV reviews there,
either.

Next time you want to reference an article (and if it's online) then
give a URL link to the article. Without the evidence of the article, no
one but you would know how their ratings were measured or even if they
disclosed their measurement strategy.

Consumer Reports. It's very popular.

Well, it looks like the install went astray. I see I had three accesses
to www.avira.com in my history file on FF. Somewhere along the line, I
veered off the CyberDefender. It seems to be a different flavor of malware.

It seems like something of a ransom product. I did remove three of its
components via Control Panel remove. However, there is one lingering
effect. Something of an ad CyberDefender is on my toolbar. If I click on
it, it opens an ad for it. If I right click on it, it gives me some
choices such as Like it, Clear Search History, Help, Privacy, Home Page, ...

I have not yet figured out how to remove this artifact. In fact, I think
part of the game is contacting them and they remove it for a fee. That's
a guess.

See
http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/cyberdefender-c95821.html
http://techie-buzz.com/scams/is-cyberdefender-a-scam.html

This looks like some sort of scam. Not quite sure how to get out of it
now. I did a reset-default on the toolbar. No change. Perhaps removing
FF and installing it again.

 

[Paul]

I've seen you mention Softpedia a couple of times now in similar
contexts. Is that site known to distribute compromised or altered
versions of software from other vendors?

I would never use Softpedia's service anyway - I always go to the
product's official site - but I've run across the site before.

I'm using their name as an example, because it shows up easily in
searches, and people will be familiar with being offered downloads
there. I don't go around vetting these sites. Life is too short.

If you're curious, you can use siteadvisor. That's one way to
do an overview of a site, if you've never been there before.
Just tack the site name onto the end of the link, and see if
there is an entry for it.

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/softpedia.com

Example of a download analysis. Now, is this bad, or is this good ?
I'm confused. It looks for all the world, like whatever this download
is supposed to be providing, it's coming with a Google Toolbar.
Maybe that is what it's for ?

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/softpedia.com/downloads/16738755/

*******

I try to encourage people to go to the originating site, so
there is one fewer variable to deal with.

I'm seeing enough reports like this, like "I got this extra
toolbar", to suspect we're not all seeing the same files.
And most of the people who file such reports, never post
the URL for where they got it. You have to drag the truth
out of them. On my web browser, it's real easy to copy the
download link from the download dialog, so it isn't that hard
to figure out where I got a file.

http://dlce.antivir.com/package/wks_avira/win32/en/pecl/avira_antivir_personal_en.exe

I know there are a few originating sites, that include
things like toolbars, to pay for the download bandwidth.
Some of them, may actually have two or more download files,
with a different "prize" in each one. If two people go to the
same site, they can have a different experience, and receive
a different toolbar offer in the installer. So that is also an
option.

But in this case, I took a quick look around with 7ZIP, and
I'm not seeing any obvious signs of extra crap in there. It
just looks like an AV installer, with some fairly large files
for the database. On some other downloads I've checked out,
I can see a separate folder with the "prize" in it.

I wish I had more OS licenses, so I could try some of this
stuff in virtual machines (sandbox), and see what happens. As it is,
I usually end up limiting myself to checking with 7ZIP. Or
if sufficiently curious, run the package in Wine under
Ubuntu Linux. That way, if I'm lucky, I might get a copy
of the installed files.

Paul

 

[VanguardLH]

I've seen you mention Softpedia a couple of times now in similar
contexts. Is that site known to distribute compromised or altered
versions of software from other vendors?

I would never use Softpedia's service anyway - I always go to the
product's official site - but I've run across the site before.

Avira's freeware version has the web site link take you back to CNET, so
Avira dumps you back to a "warehouse site" to get a download of their
freeware. So despite going to avira.com, you're taken to CNET to get
the download.

Softpedia is another downloading site. Some of its links are to its own
file servers; however, some links take you to the vendor's site. Some
vendors want the download site to house the file so that site gets its
bandwidth consumed for the download. Some vendors want to have their
products listed at the download site but want the file to come from
their own site and are willing to incur the impact of bandwidth for the
download.

The problem with CNET (download.com), Softpedia, and other download
sites is often they present a download page but the big "Download Now"
button is *not* for the product you wanted. Instead it is for one of
their advertiser's products shown on that download page. The user often
just clicks on the most obvious download button figuring that's the one
for the product they were looking at.

I usually don't have problems at CNET (download.com) or Softpedia in
having the site trying to lure me away from the correct download link.
But look at something like at BrotherSoft:

http://www.brothersoft.com/avira-antivir-personal---free-antivirus-download-47759.html?bottom

When I disable my ad blocker, what I saw (this time) was:

- A top window frame with a big green button for downloading TeamViewer.
- "Before you download _Click here to check for PC errors_".
- A link to download AVG 2011.
- Links to the downloads for Avira.
- Another link to AVG 2011.
- A couple links for Google Chrome.

The page is a mess of links and it's easy for the non-alert user to
click on the wrong one. This shoving of crap links while nearly hiding
the correct link is why I don't use the BrotherSoft downloading site.
They're being far too surreptitious in trying to get you to click on
something other than what you wanted to download.

 

[Nil]

The problem with CNET (download.com), Softpedia, and other
download sites is often they present a download page but the big
"Download Now" button is *not* for the product you wanted.
Instead it is for one of their advertiser's products shown on that
download page. The user often just clicks on the most obvious
download button figuring that's the one for the product they were
looking at.

Right. There's a little link over here for the product you want and a
big blinking green "DOWNLOAD ME!" button over there for something you
*don't* want. Yes, that's a real problem. Even I've clicked the wrong
button, and I know what to watch for. It's very sneaky and underhanded
of them.

The page is a mess of links and it's easy for the non-alert user
to click on the wrong one. This shoving of crap links while
nearly hiding the correct link is why I don't use the BrotherSoft
downloading site. They're being far too surreptitious in trying to
get you to click on something other than what you wanted to
download.

I haven't come across Brothersoft yet, but I will keep a wary eye out
for it.

 

[Nil]

If you're curious, you can use siteadvisor. That's one way to
do an overview of a site, if you've never been there before.
Just tack the site name onto the end of the link, and see if
there is an entry for it.

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/softpedia.com

Thanks - that's a good tool to be aware of. I'll bookmark it - I know
I'll have some use for it.

 

[VanguardLH]

Consumer Reports. It's very popular.

Ah, didn't think of that one. Of course, in the past, I never thought
of Consumer Reports for software reviews but they are handy for stuff
like vacuum cleaners, laundry washing machines, etc.

I see why you might not have included a link to the Consumer Report
article. As I recall, many if not most of its articles are protected by
a login after you pay to be a member. Another reason why I don't visit
there for AV comparative reviews.

Well, it looks like the install went astray. I see I had three
accesses to www.avira.com in my history file on FF. Somewhere along
the line, I veered off the CyberDefender. It seems to be a different
flavor of malware.

I'm not sure about it being malware but ransomware yes. I've heard that
Network Dynamics that produced spyblocs (which is fakeware - claims to
report on lots of infections but won't remove any of them until you pay
for the full product; see http://preview.tinyurl.com/44a6ou8) and then
renamed themselves to become CyberDefender. This is the same type of
fakeware you see sometimes when trying to visit a site but it's been
hacked or they're a malicious site that redirects you to some site that
pretends to scan your computer and finds lots of infections but you have
to buy their product before it will do anything. Yep, that sure is a
company and practice where you would trust your credit card number, uh
huh, sure, yu betcha (roll eyes).

Coverage is very low (i.e., it's a crappy product), like only 3% malware
detection, and they contrive their revenue by charging something like
$250 for a support call. That they defend themselves as a publicly
traded company is a worthless excuse. There are companies foisting
television ads claiming your computer will run gads faster after buying
their software or service. They don't guarantee anything gets fixed or
improved ... and that's what happens in the vast majority of suckers
that buy into these promises. These same boobs must be the same ones
buying miracle braclets made of twisted cable, like you use to pull up
your garage door, with ball bearing soldered to the ends.

I've also read that CyberDefender's tech support has used MalwareBytes'
AntiMalware (MBAM) while claiming it was their product trying to fix an
infected computer. They don't have a real product that does anything
useful.

http://forums.malwarebytes.org/inde...14&hl=cyberdefender&fromsearch=1&#entry422514

That was dated about a year ago. Maybe MBAM has added removal info to
their product by now. Apparently CyberDefender showed up in MBAM's
forum to challenge the claim they are malware and pointed at malware
that pretends to be their product. To me, CyberDefender still looks to
be, at least, garbageware. Some users have noted that after an
uninstall of CyberDefender that left behind remnant registry entries
that MBAM alerted on them and removed them. SuperAntiSpyware is another
candidate. You never bothered to mention what anti-virus software you
use, if it has been updated, and if you used it to perform a manual scan
of all files, memory, and the registry (and if it will do a boot-time
scan when most of the OS and other startup programs are quiescent or
unloaded).

I've heard lots of users that use Revo Uninstaller but I cannot vouch
for this product, especially regarding CyberDefender (or its malware
imposters). They don't provide a list of products for which heuristic
rules are embedded in their hardcoded and updated database of known
products to determine if they specifically target CyberDefender.

It seems like something of a ransom product. I did remove three of its
components via Control Panel remove. However, there is one lingering
effect. Something of an ad CyberDefender is on my toolbar. If I click
on it, it opens an ad for it. If I right click on it, it gives me
some choices such as Like it, Clear Search History, Help, Privacy,
Home Page, ...

Did you try the uninstall instructions at their web site?

At http://cyberdefender.custhelp.com/app, under "How do I uninstall"
topic and then picking their product that you installed, they give no
instructions on how to manually uninstall their product. Often this can
be an indicator that they don't know how their product installs because
it is someone else's product with their brand slapped onto it. They
want you to reinstall the full product to then retry using the
Add/Remove Programs applet. Yeah, sure, that's just what you would do
with garbageware bordering on rogueware.

Perhaps removing FF and installing it again.

That will do nothing to solve your problem with the scamware.

 

[W. eWatson]

Ah, didn't think of that one. Of course, in the past, I never thought
of Consumer Reports for software reviews but they are handy for stuff
like vacuum cleaners, laundry washing machines, etc.

I see why you might not have included a link to the Consumer Report
article. As I recall, many if not most of its articles are protected by
a login after you pay to be a member. Another reason why I don't visit
there for AV comparative reviews.


I'm not sure about it being malware but ransomware yes. I've heard that
Network Dynamics that produced spyblocs (which is fakeware - claims to
report on lots of infections but won't remove any of them until you pay
for the full product; see http://preview.tinyurl.com/44a6ou8) and then
renamed themselves to become CyberDefender. This is the same type of
fakeware you see sometimes when trying to visit a site but it's been
hacked or they're a malicious site that redirects you to some site that
pretends to scan your computer and finds lots of infections but you have
to buy their product before it will do anything. Yep, that sure is a
company and practice where you would trust your credit card number, uh
huh, sure, yu betcha (roll eyes).

Coverage is very low (i.e., it's a crappy product), like only 3% malware
detection, and they contrive their revenue by charging something like
$250 for a support call. That they defend themselves as a publicly
traded company is a worthless excuse. There are companies foisting
television ads claiming your computer will run gads faster after buying
their software or service. They don't guarantee anything gets fixed or
improved ... and that's what happens in the vast majority of suckers
that buy into these promises. These same boobs must be the same ones
buying miracle braclets made of twisted cable, like you use to pull up
your garage door, with ball bearing soldered to the ends.

I've also read that CyberDefender's tech support has used MalwareBytes'
AntiMalware (MBAM) while claiming it was their product trying to fix an
infected computer. They don't have a real product that does anything
useful.

http://forums.malwarebytes.org/inde...14&hl=cyberdefender&fromsearch=1&#entry422514

That was dated about a year ago. Maybe MBAM has added removal info to
their product by now. Apparently CyberDefender showed up in MBAM's
forum to challenge the claim they are malware and pointed at malware
that pretends to be their product. To me, CyberDefender still looks to
be, at least, garbageware. Some users have noted that after an
uninstall of CyberDefender that left behind remnant registry entries
that MBAM alerted on them and removed them. SuperAntiSpyware is another
candidate. You never bothered to mention what anti-virus software you
use, if it has been updated, and if you used it to perform a manual scan
of all files, memory, and the registry (and if it will do a boot-time
scan when most of the OS and other startup programs are quiescent or
unloaded).

I've heard lots of users that use Revo Uninstaller but I cannot vouch
for this product, especially regarding CyberDefender (or its malware
imposters). They don't provide a list of products for which heuristic
rules are embedded in their hardcoded and updated database of known
products to determine if they specifically target CyberDefender.


Did you try the uninstall instructions at their web site?

At http://cyberdefender.custhelp.com/app, under "How do I uninstall"
topic and then picking their product that you installed, they give no
instructions on how to manually uninstall their product. Often this can
be an indicator that they don't know how their product installs because
it is someone else's product with their brand slapped onto it. They
want you to reinstall the full product to then retry using the
Add/Remove Programs applet. Yeah, sure, that's just what you would do
with garbageware bordering on rogueware.


That will do nothing to solve your problem with the scamware.

Back to last restore point, which wasn't long ago. I would think that
would do it.

 

[Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]]

I thought I'd try the free Avira. I noted CR magazine rated (67) it

first among the free anti-malware, but showed a caveat. The catch is
"...it persistently tries to seel you its untested $27 pay version."
Persistent is correct. Good grief. One is practically hounded during
installation. You need to call them to activate it, and provide your
shipping address. A window or two comes up about buying the full
producet. Then they install three components. I immediately took them
off my PD. Done with that product. The product morphed into CyperDefender.

BTW, it's weakest feature according to CR is false positives.
Performance was good. Scan speed was very high. Ease of use was good, as
was resources (whatever that is). June 2010 issue.

Symantec, BitDefender and G Data were the top three (pay) suites.

It was noted that Avira had released a new version (minor revisions) at
the time of the review, but wouldn't change their rating. (MCAfee was
rated #8 with a score of 49.)

Ah, I just got my June 11 issue. Avira had about the same rating, and
McAfee fell considerably to a score of 31.

MSE fell amongst the freebies. Low on net threats.

Nonsense. There is no such animal. I've install Antivir Free on
hundreds of PCs. I pop-up per day to buy the free version. Nothing in
the installer that hounds you. Stop spreading FUD. You got some other
installer, not Antivir.

- Thee Chicago Wolf [MVP]

 

[Paul]

Right. There's a little link over here for the product you want and a
big blinking green "DOWNLOAD ME!" button over there for something you
*don't* want. Yes, that's a real problem. Even I've clicked the wrong
button, and I know what to watch for. It's very sneaky and underhanded
of them.


I haven't come across Brothersoft yet, but I will keep a wary eye out
for it.

Some of the sites that I get PDF hardware datasheets from, try
to make a game of hiding the download they offer, so they get
more page impressions while you flail around looking for your
document. In some cases, I've taken to using "View Source", to
see if there really is a link to a document on that page or not.

If you can't see it, for all of the "Download Me" and "Scan your
PC now" buttons, then View Source might help.

Paul