Good Free News Reader for Vista?

  • Thread starter Thread starter GTS
  • Start date Start date
G

GTS

As another poster noted KB933566 creates the same problem as a prior
update with Windows Mail if using blocked sites list via SpywareBlaster
or Spybot Immunize. It renders the program unusable.

I use Windows Mail as a news reader only and am looking for a good free
alternative. Would appreciate any recommendations. (I use Thunderbird
for Email but it's news features are mediocre.)

Thanks.
 
GTS said:
As another poster noted KB933566 creates the same problem as a prior
update with Windows Mail if using blocked sites list via SpywareBlaster or
Spybot Immunize. It renders the program unusable.

I use Windows Mail as a news reader only and am looking for a good free
alternative. Would appreciate any recommendations. (I use Thunderbird
for Email but it's news features are mediocre.)
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_news_clients
 
Microsoft has indicated that third party programs are not supposed
to be adding thousands of entries to the Restricted Sites list.
Why do you insist on using flawed security software that is not
Vista compatible?

Gary VanderMolen
 
If you have seen any actual comment from Microsoft on this, I'd
appreciate a link or reference.

I'm not convinced that the use of the blocked sites list is a 'flawed'
practice. Blocking know malicious web sites has some merit. Ironically
MS must think so too if they have now made a practice of checking
Windows Mail content against the blocked sites list.
 
Thanks! I had looked at that earlier. They indicate it's a 30 day free
trial and then $29.95 to buy, although I remember Agent as free in the
past. There's some ambiguity. Maybe the trial and refers to use of
their news server?
 
GTS said:
Thanks! I had looked at that earlier. They indicate it's a 30 day free
trial and then $29.95 to buy, although I remember Agent as free in the
past. There's some ambiguity. Maybe the trial and refers to use of their
news server?
Click to expand...

There used to be a cut down version Free Agent but that has been withdrawn.

Try Xnews or Mesnews for full function free newsreaders.
 
What is your reasoning for not wanting to add malicious sites to the
Restricted Sites list? Surely there is a reason Microsoft included a
Restricted Sites category.
 
Microsoft intended it for people who wanted to avoid returning
inadvertently to sites they visited but never wanted to return to.
As such, it was meant to support a couple dozen sites.
SpyBot et al abused this feature by adding some 8000 sites
which totally overloads other functions which need to process
that site list. 'Malicious' sites are constantly changing their identity,
and this is not the way to handle it.

Gary VanderMolen
 
Seems the slow response problems with mail only occur when I first start
Windows Mail after that it's ok, even if I close and open it again later.
As far as slowness with the news reader I only notice it when leaving one
group going to another and only if there is a lot of messages. I don't
think the restricted sites list has anything to do with these problems.
 
I see nothing in Microsoft's material to support your spin on their
intent. The following from
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms537183.aspx#restricted is
typical of the description of the restricted site zone in various
discussions of the issue.

"Restricted Sites Zone
Use the Restricted Sites zone for Web sites that contain content that
can cause (or have previously caused) problems when downloaded."

Previously you claimed "Microsoft has indicated that third party
programs are not supposed to be adding thousands of entries to the
Restricted Sites list" which also cannot be validated anywhere.

Your statement that "'Malicious' sites are constantly changing their
identity..." is also misleading. Many of the sites added to the
restricted zone by these spyware programs have been around for years and
are a frequent source of infection (particularly for careless and
non-technical end users). I can't count how many machines I've serviced
impacted by Zedo and some of the others that are usefully added to the
restricted zone. Unfortunately, what some malware sites do change
regularly is their IP address which means they can't be blocked by the
host file (which is sometimes misleadingly suggested as an alternative
to restricted sites though it has other value).

It may be that the addition of huge numbers of sites to the restricted
zone is not a good mechanism. Unfortunately it works well and it's not
at all clear that there is a good alternative. To my knowledge,
Microsoft has not yet commented on the problem with Windows Mail and we
don't know whether this performance problem is an unintended bug or
signals a change in position re. the viability of the restricted sites list.

Many of us in these news groups are professionals and respect factual
reasoned discussion. Making up unsubstantiated statements and positions
by Microsoft doesn't contribute to a useful dialog.

--
 
Different people have different "slowness" problems,
depending on what their mix of third party security programs is.

I haven't noticed any slowness at my end.

Gary VanderMolen
 
Having spent some 18 years doing tech support for PCs,
and a beta tester for Microsoft since 1995, I am pretty good
at reading in between the lines when it comes to official
announcements from the big players. Official dogma
is not the same as how it really works out in the field.
For example, you'll never hear Microsoft admit publicly that
McAfee and Norton security products don't play well with
Windows computers, yet every tech worth his salt knows this.

Gary VanderMolen
 
Gary VanderMolen said:
Microsoft intended it for people who wanted to avoid returning
inadvertently to sites they visited but never wanted to return to.
As such, it was meant to support a couple dozen sites.
SpyBot et al abused this feature by adding some 8000 sites
which totally overloads other functions which need to process
that site list. 'Malicious' sites are constantly changing their identity,
and this is not the way to handle it.
Click to expand...


Putting a URL in Restricted Sites does not prevent you from going to it, it
just increases the security when you do. The default settings, for example,
will not allow scripts to run on Restricted sites.
 
Back
Top