Out of date download!

[Guest]

I've just today downloaded the Beta version of AntiSpyware from the Microsoft
website because my old version wasn't working. Installation went smoothly
but when I ran the program I received a message that the program expiry date
was 31 December 2005. Can anyone explain why this should be so?

 

[Andre Da Costa]

Did you install over the older build? If so, uninstall it, delete the
Microsoft AntiSpyware folder located under c:\program files\Microsoft
AntiSpyware, restart and install to a non-default location such as c:\msas
--
Andre
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
FAQ for MS AntiSpy http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm

 

[Guest]

I did uninstall the old version first but did install the new within the
program files folder. I wondered if it was just that the Microsoft site
hadn't updated the beta version download for a 2006 version.

ACJ

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Did you save the download, and then double-click it to run it? Or did you
run directly from the download dialogue?

--

 

[Guest]

Hello

I have had the same problem..
I was using firefox to download it the new version..

use IE to download it.. or clear the cache. firefox seems to pull it from
the last time you downloaded it

dose this help

 

[Bill Sanderson]

It certainly seems to be a cache-related problem of some sort. Suggesting
pulling it in via an alternative browser may be very helpful. I've got one
or two situations in which alternative sites have not helped--perhaps an
alternative browser is the next step. OTOH, as I recall, in that thread the
user claims to have cleared his cache as well.

 

[Guest]

I cannot now recall but if I ran it from the dialogue box, surely I wouldn't
have got the out of date message. I still get it now trying to run the
program from my desktop, so I do wonder if the website hadn't been updated
to send the correct download. Can someone confirm anyway that a current
version appears there now.

ACJ

 

[Bill Sanderson]

I can confirm that I've updated about 4 dozen machine sucessfully, many of
them via separate downloads via the Microsoft Download center link.

I can confirm that the version I've just downloaded in the last hour or so
has this timestamp
Tuesday, November 15, 2005 7:19:16 PM

(right click the downloaded file, choose properties, digital signature tab,
details.)

This should be the correct file.
--

 

[Guest]

I have had the same problem, but in my case it was the first time I've
downloaded it, followed all the destructions carefully, installed, message
says expired Dec 31 2005, yet i d/l'ed it on 4 Jan 2006, so I can confirm
that the file version coming out of Microsofts site is definitely OUT OF DATE
and not the updated version mentioned on microsofts webpage; oh well just
another waste of time thanks to the worlds biggest and least reliable
software company

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Tell me about your Internet Service Provider? Big? Little? Have you
checked with them to see whether they run a cache to help with their
bandwidth and get the customers a little more speed on popular downloads?

Any chance that your long or short date format is set to anything other than
the default?

--

 

[Guest]

I'm with ntl on braodband and as a non-expert hadn't considered this
possibility. I don't know how to check my long or short date format. The
set-up version I have is 9.0.333.0 6.54mb. I have looked in the program
folder and see there is an errors file with a considerable number of entries
not that I can interpret them.

I do appreciate your help but fail to understand why Microsoft do not
monitor the forum and defend themselves against comments. I'm also with AOL
and the slagging off that goes on in their forums is unbelievable.

ACJ

 

[Guest]

This is pathetic, got same prob as above, tried the deleting directory and
storing it somewhere else but no good. I also cleaned out my IE cache and
temp internet files online and offline.

I now rely on this program for my realtime protection.
So now I no longer have realtime protection due to a complete balls up by
those responsible for MS updates.

I'm going to look on the net, see if any download sites have the new
version. 'sigh'

 

[Bill Sanderson]

Ronnie - I've got a couple of messages elsewhere that point towards a
corrupted file in the installation folder (\program files\microsoft
antispyware) as a possible cause for this issue.

Are you saying that, in your case, you deleted this folder, and still are
seeing that when you install from the download, it states that it is already
expired?

One user reported setting his clock back to pre-December 31, running
Microsoft Antispyware, and seeing the correct (for .701) expiry details
displayed. He then set the clock to the correct date and all has been well
since.

I would use some caution doing this--beta software or other software which
is date-sensitive may not take kindly to such a change--but it is what was
reported, and might be worth trying.


--

 

[Bill Sanderson]

AOL collects money for their services. Microsoft is providing this as an
explicitly unsupported beta program--no money coming back for it, and
considerable money being spent to maintain the infrastructure and work on
the successor product--which will also have a free version, as well as being
part of some subscription products.

They do, at times, monitor these forums, but this has been a holiday period
when staff are thin on the ground, and they've had a major security issue to
deal with, as well.

I've had some leads in another like thread in the .install group which lead
me to this suggestion:

Please consider deleting or renaming \program files\microsoft
antispyware\gcUserData.gcd

in your current installation.

Then try starting Microsoft Antispyware from the start menu.



--

 

[Guest]

Bill

Thanx for your comments but I shall now drop out of this forum and look
elsewhere for anti-spy protection because a lot of the discussion is beyond
me and I don't want to scuttle around for further advice or take any actions
which I might later regret.

To my mind Microsoft is a big enough organisation to answer the simple
question as to whether the Beta download I acquired on the date stated was
definitely the latest version and should have overidden anything else I had
on my computer, notwithstanding that I had uninstalled the previous outdated
version. If so then your comments abouts NTL caching the download might be
the answer. In that case Microsoft themselves should take up the issue with
NTL - pie in the sky but why not?

What also occurs to me that if a company has a Beta product out there, they
would surely want to participate in any discussions about its viability. I
can't see the point in setting up a forum and ignoring it, so hopefully
(holiday season over) someone at Microsoft will take on board my comments and
if I do decide to give the product another trial sometime in the future, it
will then have overcome all teething problems.

ACJ

 

[Guest]

Bill - Well I did a search on google and ended up at

http://blogs.msdn.com/mswanson/archive/2005/01/06/347639.aspx

I used the download link in the first line and it installed successfully
this time

Ronnie

 

[Bill Sanderson]

It's a bit ironic that you found a link which dates from the start of this
beta--just a few days over a year ago--which, in fact, points to the correct
download link for the current code--quite a few versions later than was at
that link when the article was published.

And--for whatever reason, your update worked properly this time around.
I'm still pretty clueless about what is going on--except that I think that
the issue is not in Microsoft's download servers at this point.

--