reoccuring viruses

One final question, have you actually thought through what you are saying?
I suspect not otherwise you would see how foolish you are in recommending
that system restore be disabled BEFORE cleansing rather than being reset
once the system is clean. That you continue to recommend such action
brings into question any advice that you might give to other users in this
or any other newsgroup.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



oops!! wrote:

Noel,

I've read through your post basically because you're not screaming
and with the respect you deserve as a proficient poster in the
ME-related
NG's.

I am sorry but some of the posts in this thread are unworthy of you
or Mike.

One point I must clear, I am NOT defending Symantec/Norton in any
way, and I'm surprised you can't remember some of my comments on
that. But, never mind.

That was a simple quote, but as you know I could point you somewhere
else:

http://www.pchell.com/virus/systemrestore.shtml
http://www.trendmicro.com/en/securit...n_me_clean.htm
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1618204,00.asp

Point 1 to 4: I am 100% pro-SR. I only claim, and will until proved
wrong, that SR should be turned off BEFORE cleaning the system.

Point 5: gave me a good laugh. I don't differ too much.

Point 6: MVP's disagreements. Of course they do as normal people do,
but the fact of you or Mike being on one of the sides of discussion
don't make you the right choice. I am on the other side as you may
have noticed.

And as a final comment Noel, thank you for posting your thoughts.

You do seem to want to impress on others how little you understand about
the workings of system restore. Your first statement proves that as
anyone who uses their brain can work out for themselves.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



oops!! wrote:

Mart,

Thank you for your comments.

1. Mike is not right, and SR should be turned off BEFORE cleaning the
system.

2. I am 100% pro-SR.

3. Quoting Symamtec doesn't make me their defence lawyer, or whatever.

4. You will see in some of my posts I said Mike is one of the best,
if not the best, around. That doesn't make him faultless.

As you may see from other posts there are MVP's that think
differently too.

Thank you again and take care.

What we are seeing here is a number of people who know about the workings
of system restore pointing out the errors contained in your posts. That
you are unable to see this is unfortunate and I can only suggest you think
about what you are saying and the consequences to a user of their
following your flawed and dangerous advice.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



oops!! wrote:

Typically, we should have at least 5 or 6 "MVP's" more posting in
defence of the pack.

How is it possible you fail to see how sad that is?

Quoting Noel Paton, somewhere along this thread:

Yes , there are MVP's who recommend....

....and Mike, myself and others are discussing this subject with them
elsewhere, in an effort to iron out the disagreements....

....are almost unanimous in their opinion that SR should NOT be disabled...

Why is it that disagreeing with you is considered.. let's say poor
reasoning?

You're too narrow minded to see outside the narrow road you're walking.

Unworthy of you, but keep on the good work.

I have more important things to do today, rather then discussing the sex of
angels.

Cheers,

Zee





"Mike M" wrote in message
...
You do seem to want to impress on others how little you understand about
the workings of system restore. Your first statement proves that as
anyone who uses their brain can work out for themselves.
--
Mike Maltby MS-MVP



oops!! wrote:

Mart,

Thank you for your comments.

1. Mike is not right, and SR should be turned off BEFORE cleaning the
system.

2. I am 100% pro-SR.

3. Quoting Symamtec doesn't make me their defence lawyer, or whatever.

4. You will see in some of my posts I said Mike is one of the best,
if not the best, around. That doesn't make him faultless.

As you may see from other posts there are MVP's that think
differently too.

Thank you again and take care.

Zee,

Thank you for your comments.

You are most welcome. But it is such a shame that you didn't read or
understand them fully.

1. Mike is not right, and SR should be turned off BEFORE cleaning the
system.

Please re-read my previous reply, a sentence from which is reproduced below
in case you missed it :-
"As one who has benefited from using Mike's method (on more than one
occasion!), I'm sticking with his argument...."

2. I am 100% pro-SR.

Good for you! Sadly, it appears that there are some who aren't.

3. Quoting Symamtec (sic) doesn't make me their defence lawyer, or
whatever.

Err.. but it was YOU, who quoted the Symantec URL in the first place. I only
cut and pasted a "snippet" from it to try to illustrate your
misunderstanding and re-enforce MY point.

4. You will see in some of my posts I said Mike is one of the best, if not
the best, around. That doesn't make him faultless.

I'm sure that Mike would be the first to admit it - but I'm also sure that
Mike can speak for himself.

As you may see from other posts there are MVP's that think differently
too.
Which - like your previous statement - doesn't make them faultless either.

Thank you again and take care.

Thank you, I will - and likewise with you.

Mart


"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Mart,

Thank you for your comments.

1. Mike is not right, and SR should be turned off BEFORE cleaning the
system.

2. I am 100% pro-SR.

3. Quoting Symamtec doesn't make me their defence lawyer, or whatever.

4. You will see in some of my posts I said Mike is one of the best, if not
the best, around. That doesn't make him faultless.

As you may see from other posts there are MVP's that think differently
too.

Thank you again and take care.

Zee




"Mart" wrote in message
...
Come on, Zee! - You know Mike's right.

It *may* be "Common Practice" - condoned only by those who have never
thought Mike's argument thru' - but surely "Best Practice" is to keep all
your options available.

Every time I've seen Mike offer this advice (which are many!), he has
ALWAYS
warned of the dangers of selecting the wrong SR point - which is
basically
only what Symantec are hinting at in their blurb, but not explaining. A
vague :-
"... System Restore has the potential of restoring an infected file on
your
computer, even after you have cleaned the infected files from all the
other
locations."
seems to be your (and their) only justification.


Sorry Zee, but Symantec's case does not appear to offer any other "hard
evidence" for disabling SR, for this issue to become "Best Practice"

If you are so paranoid about re-introducing the virus "yourself" -
through
neglect, or is that Bad Practice! - then surely the solution is to flush
System Restore *AFTER* clearing the problem - or better still, adjust the
size of SR until you've FIFO'd the virus away. After all, it is quite
harmless whilst it's still in the _SR folder - 'finger trouble' excepted
g

As one who has benefited from using Mike's method (on more than one
occasion!), I'm sticking with his argument - no forgiveness required!

I'm not an MVP, but a strong advocate of SR - IMHO, SR is a grossly
under-used, under-promoted and mis-understood utility)

Mart


"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Mike,

Just thought about it... you're right...

Everyone else is wrong...

Even other MVP's...?? You got it a notch higher than expected!

Oh, yes I'm so embarrassed for embarrassing you that I'll just take my
coat
and leave.

Don't worry, we will forgive you.

Zee

snipped

Zee,

As I have already said, I'm NOT an MVP, just a sad old punter - BUT my claim
to fame is that I have used Mike's 'method' myself and recovered a 'badly
infected' system which would otherwise have been 'Very Difficult' or even
'Impossible' had I previously disabled SR.

That's good enough for me.

The 'sad' thing is that you keep ignoring the very strong case for keeping
it enabled.

Mart



"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Typically, we should have at least 5 or 6 "MVP's" more posting in defence
of
the pack.

How is it possible you fail to see how sad that is?

Zee





"Richard G. Harper" wrote in message
...
As far as I can see the only forgiving to be done is in the reverse order
of
where you think it needs to be done.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User]
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
* My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Mike,

Just thought about it... you're right...

Everyone else is wrong...

Even other MVP's...?? You got it a notch higher than expected!

Oh, yes I'm so embarrassed for embarrassing you that I'll just take my
coat
and leave.

Don't worry, we will forgive you.

Ordinarily I'd ask you not to insult my shortcomings - why I wear bifocals
is my own business. However, since following logical discourse seems
difficult for you, please do feel free to insult my physical infirmities
instead of discussing the real issue.

I'm also overweight and balding, if that helps.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User]
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* for the benefit of all. Private mail is usually not replied to.
* My website, such as it is ... http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Oops, I forgot you're a bit short sighted too.

Disregarding for the moment this disagreement about the advisibility of
disabling SR prior to running an AV scan, or for any other reason, Zee, I
direct your attention to your particular words here to Mr. Mike Maltby, and
to others elsewhere directed to Mr. Richard Harper.
IMO, these constitute a personal attack, unrelated to any technical
discussion about computer business.
This is not acceptible in this ng, nor really anywhere else. We are
civilized here. If you wish to troll, do so elsewhere.
If you continue in this vein, I suggest you will soon not be obtaining any
responses to any inquiries or posts here.

Like your choice in disabling SR on your personal computer, it's your
"personal" choice.

Neither Mike M, Noel Paton, Richard Harper, Mart, nor any one else here
really needs my support since many users here understand the importance of
SR to maintain the WinME computer. Readers can review years of our comments
to aid them. IMHO, you are the one willing to take an unnecessary, possibly
catastrophic risk.
Hopefully, less informed readers of this thread will understand this and
avoid your advice. Many already understand the inadvisibility of using
Norton tools, or following Symantec advice, under WinME.

We pride ourselves in the Millennium ng's for being compassionate and
courteous, and expect the same from you despite how heated any disagreement
may become. There is no excuse for lack of grace under pressure.

Thank you in advance for your serious, careful reconsideration, and any
consideration of an apology to those personally attacked,
so we can return to a technical discussion avoiding personalities,
--
Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...t/default.aspx
Your cooperation is very appreciated.
------
"oops!!" wrote in message
...

Mike,

LOL

I'm sure your *wisdom* is proportional to your lack of education and good
sense.

But, that's so typical of too many MVP's.

Enjoy your life, mate.

Zee



"Mike M" wrote in message
...

SNIP

Richard G. Harper wrote:
Ordinarily I'd ask you not to insult my shortcomings - why I wear bifocals
is my own business. However, since following logical discourse seems
difficult for you, please do feel free to insult my physical infirmities
instead of discussing the real issue.

I'm also overweight and balding, if that helps.


I'll thank you not to put "overweight" and "balding" into the
"infirmities" category.



Rick
"robust with easily accessible carb backups" with a
"light maintenance tonsure"

I think Richard meant his "I'm also ..." to mean the overweight and balding
aspects were "in addition to", and not to be in the same catagory as his
"infirmities".
But it's equally possible that I am wrong! He frequently thinks in ways
that I cannot imagine beforehand.
--
Jack E. Martinelli 2002-05 MS MVP for Shell/User / DTS
Help us help you: http://www.dts-L.org/goodpost.htm

http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...t/default.aspx
Your cooperation is very appreciated.
------
"Rick T" wrote in message
...
Richard G. Harper wrote:
Ordinarily I'd ask you not to insult my shortcomings - why I wear
bifocals
is my own business. However, since following logical discourse seems
difficult for you, please do feel free to insult my physical infirmities
instead of discussing the real issue.

I'm also overweight and balding, if that helps.


I'll thank you not to put "overweight" and "balding" into the
"infirmities" category.



Rick
"robust with easily accessible carb backups" with a
"light maintenance tonsure"