Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.comp.software.firefox > #14641 > unrolled thread

I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.software.firefox

Contents

  I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes carson@invalid.com - 2025-08-22 14:25 -0500
    Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-08-22 22:42 +0200
      Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes carson@invalid.com - 2025-08-22 16:46 -0500
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-08-23 06:49 +0200
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> - 2025-08-23 08:29 +0200
          Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-23 10:45 -0500
    Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-22 23:35 -0500
      Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes ron@invalid.com - 2025-08-23 00:29 -0500
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes carson@invalid.com - 2025-08-23 00:31 -0500
          Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-08-24 03:26 +0200
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-23 10:44 -0500
    Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-23 00:03 -0500
      Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 02:42 +0000
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-23 23:16 -0500
          Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-08-24 04:26 +0000
    Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2025-08-23 22:32 +0800
      Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes Frank Miller <miller@posteo.ee> - 2025-08-24 03:13 +0200
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 10:51 -0700
          Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> - 2025-08-24 14:42 -0500
            Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> - 2025-08-24 14:58 -0700
        Re: I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2025-08-26 21:21 +0800

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#14641 — I Got Rid Of All Those Computer "Security" Woes

First of all, this isn't spam for some program or other. The program I'm
mentioning has been "extinct" for some years, but it can still be
downloaded and installed as a freebie.

It is incredibly simple unlike Sandboxie and others of that type.  One
click for On/Off and that's all that is needed.

The program is Time Freeze.

 Toolwiz Time Freeze 4.3.1.5000
Author: Toolwiz Software
Date: 06/02/2016
Size: 2.80 MB
License: Freeware
Requires: Win 10 / 8 / 7 / Vista / XP
Downloads: 112592 times

"Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will
protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in
low disk level".

Many people complain it is "no longer supported".  I doesn't need
supporting.  I've used it for years with no problem. You might also
notice it has been downloaded over a hundred-thousand times.

I have not used any AV or so-called security program for years.  Time
Freeze has totally protected my system through the years.

Another thing it is great for is installing apps that don't need reboots
to load themselves into the guts of Windows.  You can run those apps and
see if you really want to keep any of them. If you don't, reboot and
they're gone when  Windows reloads.

You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any programs you
do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You then have to turn off
Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected Windows and install the program.
You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program will
then show up in the protected Windows.

Bookmark updates will also have to be copied to the second drive and
reloaded the same way.

This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.

If you are interested in trying Time Freeze you must download it from
the Majorgeeks link and not the author's link.  The author's link is
dead.

The site for the program:
https://www.majorgeeks.com/files/details/toolwiz_time_freeze.html

The proper download link:
https://www.majorgeeks.com/mg/getmirror/toolwiz_time_freeze,1.html

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#14643

Carson,

> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool
> that will protect your system from any unwanted changes and
> malicious activity in low disk level".

As I told you a couple(?) of years ago, that may true, but that doesn't make 
it an AV product - and you should not be advertising it as such.

> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any
> programs you do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You
> then have to turn off Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected
> Windows and install the program.
> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program
> will then show up in the protected Windows.

And if the newly installed program contains malware you are f*cked - and you 
won't even know.

> Bookmark updates will also have to be copied to the second drive
> and reloaded the same way.

And all sorts of configurations and, if you are a gamer, all save-games. 
That becomes tedious rather quickly.  Heck, you could not even, in the 
filebrowser, change the view mode from "list" to "details" and expect it to 
be there the next day.

Bottom line : If you save/store *anything* while having "time freeze" active 
with the intention to use it the next time you are effectivily circumventing 
its protection : if your "configuration storage" medium gets infected you 
will be re-infecting the clean OS every time you access it.

The product is good for school computers so a pupil can play with it - 
including putting viri on it or trashing the 'puter by deleting/changing 
system files - and than restore the machine to a clean state, but no more 
than that.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14644

On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 22:42:34 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid>
wrote:

>Carson,
>
>> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool
>> that will protect your system from any unwanted changes and
>> malicious activity in low disk level".
>
>As I told you a couple(?) of years ago, that may true, but that doesn't make 
>it an AV product - and you should not be advertising it as such.

I never  said it was an AV program.  I said it protects one from
downloading malware.

>> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any
>> programs you do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You
>> then have to turn off Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected
>> Windows and install the program.
>> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program
>> will then show up in the protected Windows.
>
>And if the newly installed program contains malware you are f*cked - and you 
>won't even know.

IF, IF is all your type knows.  How about IF your machine is NOT already
infected? 

>> Bookmark updates will also have to be copied to the second drive
>> and reloaded the same way.
>
>And all sorts of configurations and, if you are a gamer, all save-games. 
>That becomes tedious rather quickly.  Heck, you could not even, in the 
>filebrowser, change the view mode from "list" to "details" and expect it to 
>be there the next day.

The above has nothing to do with what I posted.  Your nonsense does not
denigrate Time Freeze's usefullness in the slightest.  

I never played a "game" on my computer.  If "gamers" find your
explanation of why it isn't for them realistic it does not invalidate
usage of Time Freeze for other computer users. 

>Bottom line : If you save/store *anything* while having "time freeze" active 
>with the intention to use it the next time you are effectivily circumventing 
>its protection : if your "configuration storage" medium gets infected you 
>will be re-infecting the clean OS every time you access it.

You are correct in the above assumption.  I should have posted that when
I do download an app or program, I ALWAYS check it with - 
https://www.virustotal.com/old-browsers/
https://virusscan.jotti.org/
https://www.garyshood.com/virus/

My bad that I didn't add that to my post.  However, I assume that anyone
who would even be interested in such a program as Time Freeze would
realize the shortcoming of permanently installing any saved program.

>The product is good for school computers so a pupil can play with it - 
>including putting viri on it or trashing the 'puter by deleting/changing 
>system files - and than restore the machine to a clean state, but no more 
>than that.

The above is  a shoddy, misleading attempt to belittle Time Freeze.  I'm
not goingy to reply to it.

>Regards,
>Rudy Wieser
>

- Carson - 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14649

carson@invalid.com wrote:
> On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 22:42:34 +0200, "R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid>
[..snip..]
>>The product is good for school computers so a pupil can play with it - 
>>including putting viri on it or trashing the 'puter by deleting/changing 
>>system files - and than restore the machine to a clean state, but no more 
>>than that.
> 
> The above is  a shoddy, misleading attempt to belittle Time Freeze.  I'm
> not goingy to reply to it.

You already did, dude! ;-)

Also this doesn't belong to alt.comp.software.firefox at all.
Your software is just a little toy for ancient Windows users.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14653

Carson,

>>As I told you a couple(?) of years ago, that may true, but that
>> doesn't make it an AV product - and you should not be advertising
>> it as such.
>
> I never  said it was an AV program.  I said it protects one from
> downloading malware.

You advertised it as a *replacement* of AV and "Security Programs".

>>The product is good for school computers so a pupil can play with
>>it - including putting viri on it or trashing the 'puter by
>>deleting/changing system files - and than restore the machine to a
>>clean state, but no more than that.
>
> The above is  a shoddy, misleading attempt to belittle Time Freeze.
> I'm not goingy to reply to it.

"Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will 
protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in low 
disk level."

Thats all it is.   It also makes the 'puter useless when any kind of 
persistance is expected.    You know, normal home usage.

Regards,
Rudy Wieser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14657

"R.Wieser" <address@is.invalid> wrote:

> Carson,
> 
>>>As I told you a couple(?) of years ago, that may true, but that
>>> doesn't make it an AV product - and you should not be advertising
>>> it as such.
>>
>> I never  said it was an AV program.  I said it protects one from
>> downloading malware.
> 
> You advertised it as a *replacement* of AV and "Security Programs".
> 
>>>The product is good for school computers so a pupil can play with
>>>it - including putting viri on it or trashing the 'puter by
>>>deleting/changing system files - and than restore the machine to a
>>>clean state, but no more than that.
>>
>> The above is  a shoddy, misleading attempt to belittle Time Freeze.
>> I'm not goingy to reply to it.
> 
> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will 
> protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in low 
> disk level."
> 
> Thats all it is.   It also makes the 'puter useless when any kind of 
> persistance is expected.    You know, normal home usage.
> 
> Regards,
> Rudy Wieser

Plus users reported their computer became unbootable after a "restore"
by TimeFreeze.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14648

<carson@invalid.com> wrote:

>  Toolwiz Time Freeze 4.3.1.5000
> Author: Toolwiz Software

I trialed that program many years ago.  It worked, but it does not
protect your setup.  It is merely another image backup program that
allows you to restore your drives to a prior state ... just like an
image backup will do (e.g., Macrium Reflect, but which is no longer
free, but there are alternatives).

> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will
> protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in
> low disk level".

It does NOT do that at all.  It doesn't protect.  It restores to a prior
state.  If you get infected, the malicious activity goes unchecked.

> I have not used any AV or so-called security program for years.  Time
> Freeze has totally protected my system through the years.

It will NEVER alert you to a malicious infection.  That is NOT its
purpose.  You won't know you are infected, nor will it block attempted
infections.  You could end up operating a zombie host for as long
between restores.  The shorter your restore intervals, the less the
malware will do harm to you, or to others.  As I recall, it can do a
restore on a reboot, but that also means anything YOU changed is lost in
that interim.

TimeFreeze does not protect.  It restores.

> Another thing it is great for is installing apps that don't need reboots
> to load themselves into the guts of Windows.  You can run those apps and
> see if you really want to keep any of them. If you don't, reboot and
> they're gone when  Windows reloads.

Same is true for any imaging program.  However, instead of taking a
complete snaphot of the state of your drive(s) (i.e., full image
backup), an imaging backup program can do full, differential, and
incremental image backups.  When installing a new program, you can run
an increment backup which consumes far less storage space than a full
image backup.

> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any programs you
> do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You then have to turn off
> Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected Windows and install the program.
> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program will
> then show up in the protected Windows.

Doesn't TimeFreeze store state snapshots letting you choose to which you
revert for a restore?  If not, you could easily end up with infected
restores.  With image backup software, you can walk backward through the
backups to get to one prior to the infection.

> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.

Obviously you don't care about malware behavior between your TimeFreeze
restores.  I've seen users that don't give a gnat's fart about their
host becoming a zombie, or how it harms others, if it doesn't harm them,
and they do a fresh install after a while to get rid of the malware.
You are doing the same: your infected host is a danger to yourself, your
data, and to others in the interim between image restores.  Plus, if you
don't have multiple prior snapshots from which to restore, you won't
know you got infected in the old image, so you end up restoring the
infected image.

TimeFreeze is NOT about protection again malware.  Stop making that
false claim.  It is only about restoring to a prior state.  That
includes undoing any actions you commited, like registry edits, config
tweaks, and software installs.  You can also lose licenses to payware if
you weren't provided with a product key separate of the install (i.e.,
you recorded the key somewhere else since a file with it on your drive
will disappear after a restore).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14651

On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 23:35:25 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

><carson@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>  Toolwiz Time Freeze 4.3.1.5000
>> Author: Toolwiz Software
>
>I trialed that program many years ago.  It worked, but it does not
>protect your setup.  It is merely another image backup program that
>allows you to restore your drives to a prior state ... just like an
>image backup will do (e.g., Macrium Reflect, but which is no longer
>free, but there are alternatives).
>
>> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will
>> protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in
>> low disk level".
>
>It does NOT do that at all.  It doesn't protect.  It restores to a prior
>state.  If you get infected, the malicious activity goes unchecked.
>
>> I have not used any AV or so-called security program for years.  Time
>> Freeze has totally protected my system through the years.
>
>It will NEVER alert you to a malicious infection.  That is NOT its
>purpose.  You won't know you are infected, nor will it block attempted
>infections.  You could end up operating a zombie host for as long
>between restores.  The shorter your restore intervals, the less the
>malware will do harm to you, or to others.  As I recall, it can do a
>restore on a reboot, but that also means anything YOU changed is lost in
>that interim.
>
>TimeFreeze does not protect.  It restores.

It restores.  If your machine was uninfected when Time Freeze was
installed, it will restore to that uninfected state.

If save a file when protected you must check out that file with the
sites I posted.  It is almost - almost - a sure thing that those sites
will catch any malware in the downloaded file.

>
>> Another thing it is great for is installing apps that don't need reboots
>> to load themselves into the guts of Windows.  You can run those apps and
>> see if you really want to keep any of them. If you don't, reboot and
>> they're gone when  Windows reloads.
>
>Same is true for any imaging program.  However, instead of taking a
>complete snaphot of the state of your drive(s) (i.e., full image
>backup), an imaging backup program can do full, differential, and
>incremental image backups.  When installing a new program, you can run
>an increment backup which consumes far less storage space than a full
>image backup.

That's a lotta talk but does not prove a dang thing about the
effectiveness of Time Freeze.

>> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any programs you
>> do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You then have to turn off
>> Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected Windows and install the program.
>> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program will
>> then show up in the protected Windows.
>
>Doesn't TimeFreeze store state snapshots letting you choose to which you
>revert for a restore?  If not, you could easily end up with infected
>restores.  With image backup software, you can walk backward through the
>backups to get to one prior to the infection.

Jeesh!  Read my initial post for gawd sake.  It - again - reminds you of
how to check any post before restoring.  It's amazing how deceptive you
are.

>> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
>> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
>> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.
>
>Obviously you don't care about malware behavior between your TimeFreeze
>restores.

One more time - read my 2nd post on how to protect yourself with the
method I posted.  Wake up and READ!

DEL
>

Your final paragraphs are on the same subject that I made totally clear
as to "restoring".   I'm  not going to keep repeating my two original
post over and over.  

You have a really bad problem with logice - and apparently with the
understanding of what you are reading.

This is my last answer to your deception.  Anyone can read my first and
second posts on this matter and decide for themselves whether the
program is worth a try or not.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14652

On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 00:29:15 -0500, ron@invalid.com wrote:

>On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 23:35:25 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
>
>><carson@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Toolwiz Time Freeze 4.3.1.5000
>>> Author: Toolwiz Software
>>
>>I trialed that program many years ago.  It worked, but it does not
>>protect your setup.  It is merely another image backup program that
>>allows you to restore your drives to a prior state ... just like an
>>image backup will do (e.g., Macrium Reflect, but which is no longer
>>free, but there are alternatives).
>>
>>> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will
>>> protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in
>>> low disk level".
>>
>>It does NOT do that at all.  It doesn't protect.  It restores to a prior
>>state.  If you get infected, the malicious activity goes unchecked.
>>
>>> I have not used any AV or so-called security program for years.  Time
>>> Freeze has totally protected my system through the years.
>>
>>It will NEVER alert you to a malicious infection.  That is NOT its
>>purpose.  You won't know you are infected, nor will it block attempted
>>infections.  You could end up operating a zombie host for as long
>>between restores.  The shorter your restore intervals, the less the
>>malware will do harm to you, or to others.  As I recall, it can do a
>>restore on a reboot, but that also means anything YOU changed is lost in
>>that interim.
>>
>>TimeFreeze does not protect.  It restores.
>
>It restores.  If your machine was uninfected when Time Freeze was
>installed, it will restore to that uninfected state.
>
>If save a file when protected you must check out that file with the
>sites I posted.  It is almost - almost - a sure thing that those sites
>will catch any malware in the downloaded file.
>
>>
>>> Another thing it is great for is installing apps that don't need reboots
>>> to load themselves into the guts of Windows.  You can run those apps and
>>> see if you really want to keep any of them. If you don't, reboot and
>>> they're gone when  Windows reloads.
>>
>>Same is true for any imaging program.  However, instead of taking a
>>complete snaphot of the state of your drive(s) (i.e., full image
>>backup), an imaging backup program can do full, differential, and
>>incremental image backups.  When installing a new program, you can run
>>an increment backup which consumes far less storage space than a full
>>image backup.
>
>That's a lotta talk but does not prove a dang thing about the
>effectiveness of Time Freeze.
>
>>> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any programs you
>>> do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You then have to turn off
>>> Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected Windows and install the program.
>>> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program will
>>> then show up in the protected Windows.
>>
>>Doesn't TimeFreeze store state snapshots letting you choose to which you
>>revert for a restore?  If not, you could easily end up with infected
>>restores.  With image backup software, you can walk backward through the
>>backups to get to one prior to the infection.
>
>Jeesh!  Read my initial post for gawd sake.  It - again - reminds you of
>how to check any post before restoring.  It's amazing how deceptive you
>are.
>
>>> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
>>> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
>>> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.
>>
>>Obviously you don't care about malware behavior between your TimeFreeze
>>restores.
>
>One more time - read my 2nd post on how to protect yourself with the
>method I posted.  Wake up and READ!
>
>DEL
>>
>
>Your final paragraphs are on the same subject that I made totally clear
>as to "restoring".   I'm  not going to keep repeating my two original
>post over and over.  
>
>You have a really bad problem with logice - and apparently with the
>understanding of what you are reading.
>
>This is my last answer to your deception.  Anyone can read my first and
>second posts on this matter and decide for themselves whether the
>program is worth a try or not.

Sorry, Folks.  I goofed and used my ron nym instead of my carson nym.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14666

carson@invalid.com wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 00:29:15 -0500, ron@invalid.com wrote:
[..snip..]
> 
> Sorry, Folks.  I goofed and used my ron nym instead of my carson nym.

For god's sake motherfucker: get your shit together or just fuck off!
Nobody called some sock puppet like you to poison newsgroups with
dangerous and goofy advertisement about some mysterious software.
You don't even have a valid reply address, so it's safe to assume you're
just a troll.
*FOAD*

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14656

<ron@invalid.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 22 Aug 2025 23:35:25 -0500, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:
> 
>><carson@invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>>  Toolwiz Time Freeze 4.3.1.5000
>>> Author: Toolwiz Software
>>
>>I trialed that program many years ago.  It worked, but it does not
>>protect your setup.  It is merely another image backup program that
>>allows you to restore your drives to a prior state ... just like an
>>image backup will do (e.g., Macrium Reflect, but which is no longer
>>free, but there are alternatives).
>>
>>> "Toolwiz Time Freeze is a free instant system protection tool that will
>>> protect your system from any unwanted changes and malicious activity in
>>> low disk level".
>>
>>It does NOT do that at all.  It doesn't protect.  It restores to a prior
>>state.  If you get infected, the malicious activity goes unchecked.
>>
>>> I have not used any AV or so-called security program for years.  Time
>>> Freeze has totally protected my system through the years.
>>
>>It will NEVER alert you to a malicious infection.  That is NOT its
>>purpose.  You won't know you are infected, nor will it block attempted
>>infections.  You could end up operating a zombie host for as long
>>between restores.  The shorter your restore intervals, the less the
>>malware will do harm to you, or to others.  As I recall, it can do a
>>restore on a reboot, but that also means anything YOU changed is lost in
>>that interim.
>>
>>TimeFreeze does not protect.  It restores.
> 
> It restores.  If your machine was uninfected when Time Freeze was
> installed, it will restore to that uninfected state.
> 
> If save a file when protected you must check out that file with the
> sites I posted.  It is almost - almost - a sure thing that those sites
> will catch any malware in the downloaded file.
> 
>>
>>> Another thing it is great for is installing apps that don't need reboots
>>> to load themselves into the guts of Windows.  You can run those apps and
>>> see if you really want to keep any of them. If you don't, reboot and
>>> they're gone when  Windows reloads.
>>
>>Same is true for any imaging program.  However, instead of taking a
>>complete snaphot of the state of your drive(s) (i.e., full image
>>backup), an imaging backup program can do full, differential, and
>>incremental image backups.  When installing a new program, you can run
>>an increment backup which consumes far less storage space than a full
>>image backup.
> 
> That's a lotta talk but does not prove a dang thing about the
> effectiveness of Time Freeze.
> 
>>> You do have to have a second drive or USB drive to save any programs you
>>> do wish to  permanently install in Windows. You then have to turn off
>>> Time Freeze and reboot into unprotected Windows and install the program.
>>> You then click Time Freeze to "ON" and reboot.  The new program will
>>> then show up in the protected Windows.
>>
>>Doesn't TimeFreeze store state snapshots letting you choose to which you
>>revert for a restore?  If not, you could easily end up with infected
>>restores.  With image backup software, you can walk backward through the
>>backups to get to one prior to the infection.
> 
> Jeesh!  Read my initial post for gawd sake.  It - again - reminds you of
> how to check any post before restoring.  It's amazing how deceptive you
> are.
> 
>>> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
>>> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
>>> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.
>>
>>Obviously you don't care about malware behavior between your TimeFreeze
>>restores.
> 
> One more time - read my 2nd post on how to protect yourself with the
> method I posted.  Wake up and READ!
> 
> DEL
>>
> 
> Your final paragraphs are on the same subject that I made totally clear
> as to "restoring".   I'm  not going to keep repeating my two original
> post over and over.  
> 
> You have a really bad problem with logice - and apparently with the
> understanding of what you are reading.
> 
> This is my last answer to your deception.  Anyone can read my first and
> second posts on this matter and decide for themselves whether the
> program is worth a try or not.

And you, under yet another nym, do not understand how the product works,
or you insist on lying on how it protects against malware.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14650

<carson@invalid.com> wrote:

> ...
> The program is Time Freeze.
> ...

I didn't notice the OP's cross-post to the Firefox newsgroup.  Has
nothing to do with Firefox!  The OP's article is off-topic in the
Firefox newsgroup to which he cross-posted, and similar to his false
claims that it protects against malware.  Wrong newsgroup, invalid
claims.  TimeFreeze is an image backup program providing an image
snapshot to which a drive can be restored. There are tons of imaging
software with much of it currently supported.

TimeFreeze was freeware.  Firefox, LibreOffice, and tons of other
programs are freeware, but sharing the freeware category does not make
TimeFreeze on-topic to all other freeware.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14669

On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 00:03:32 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> TimeFreeze was freeware.  Firefox, LibreOffice, and tons of other
> programs are freeware ...

Freeware <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware> is not Free software 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14671

Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 00:03:32 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
> 
>> TimeFreeze was freeware.  Firefox, LibreOffice, and tons of other
>> programs are freeware ...
> 
> Freeware <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware> is not Free software 
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>.

What term do you propose that would encompass both freeware and free
software?  Freeshit?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14672

On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 23:16:31 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> On Sat, 23 Aug 2025 00:03:32 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
>> 
>>> TimeFreeze was freeware.  Firefox, LibreOffice, and tons of other
>>> programs are freeware ...
>> 
>> Freeware <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeware> is not Free software
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software>.
> 
> What term do you propose that would encompass both freeware and free
> software?

I wouldn’t.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14654

On 23/8/2025 3:25 am, carson@invalid.com wrote:
> First of all, this isn't spam for some program or other. The program I'm
> mentioning has been "extinct" for some years, but it can still be
> downloaded and installed as a freebie.
> .....
> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.


I installed the OEM (evalution) version of Norton Internet Security 
which came with a cheap motherboard I bought recently, just for fun. It 
might suddenly prevent me clicking the address bar. I immediately 
uninsatlled it! :)

-- 
   @~@   Simplicity is Beauty! Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch!
  / v \  May the Force and farces be with you! Live long and prosper!!
/( _ )\ https://sites.google.com/site/changmw/
   ^ ^   https://github.com/changmw/changmw

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14665

Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
> On 23/8/2025 3:25 am, carson@invalid.com wrote:
>> First of all, this isn't spam for some program or other. The program I'm
>> mentioning has been "extinct" for some years, but it can still be
>> downloaded and installed as a freebie.
>> .....
>> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
>> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
>> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.
> 
> 
> I installed the OEM (evalution) version of Norton Internet Security 
> which came with a cheap motherboard I bought recently, just for fun. It 
> might suddenly prevent me clicking the address bar. I immediately 
> uninsatlled it! :)

The last software with "Norton" in it's name worth buying and using it
was "Norton Commander 5.5" and maybe "Norton Utilities 8.0".
Everything after that branded with "Norton" was bullshit for Windows.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14684

On 8/23/25 18:13, Frank Miller wrote:
> Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>> On 23/8/2025 3:25 am, carson@invalid.com wrote:
>>> First of all, this isn't spam for some program or other. The program I'm
>>> mentioning has been "extinct" for some years, but it can still be
>>> downloaded and installed as a freebie.
>>> .....
>>> This bit of extra work is worth it.  No more AV nor "Security Programs"
>>> nonsense. As I previously said, I've been using this program for about
>>> five years without a single problem with XP and Windows 7.
>> 
>> 
>> I installed the OEM (evalution) version of Norton Internet Security 
>> which came with a cheap motherboard I bought recently, just for fun. It 
>> might suddenly prevent me clicking the address bar. I immediately 
>> uninsatlled it! :)
> 
> The last software with "Norton" in it's name worth buying and using it
> was "Norton Commander 5.5" and maybe "Norton Utilities 8.0".
> Everything after that branded with "Norton" was bullshit for Windows.

He originally just gathered together a mess of previously-developed free 
software, did some cosmetic stuff and called it the Norton Utilities. 
Cheesy.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
     Cthulhu for President in 2024. Why vote for a lesser evil?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14691

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> Frank Miller wrote:
>
>> Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>> 
>>> I installed the OEM (evalution) version of Norton Internet Security
>>> which came with a cheap motherboard I bought recently, just for
>>> fun. It might suddenly prevent me clicking the address bar. I
>>> immediately uninsatlled it! :)
>> 
>> The last software with "Norton" in it's name worth buying and using
>> it was "Norton Commander 5.5" and maybe "Norton Utilities 8.0".
>> Everything after that branded with "Norton" was bullshit for
>> Windows.
> 
> He originally just gathered together a mess of previously-developed
> free software, did some cosmetic stuff and called it the Norton
> Utilities. Cheesy.

Actually, back then, the competitors were Norton Utilities and Central
Point's PC Tools.  Both existed at the same time.  Unerase was the big
tool in the Norton suite.  Symantec bought Norton, and later also bought
PC Tools claiming they would expound on that tool set, but what they
really did was to get rid of PC Tools to go forward with Norton
Utilities.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Utilities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_Tools_(software)

Neither were "previously-developed free software" which has you
implythat the tools in the suites were stolen, borrowed, or forked.
Peter Norton wrote his own tools.  Central Point was a software
development company, not a software publisher rebranding and
redistributing the work of others.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Norton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Point_Software

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#14693

On 8/24/25 12:42, VanguardLH wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Frank Miller wrote:
>>
>>> Mr. Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I installed the OEM (evalution) version of Norton Internet Security
>>>> which came with a cheap motherboard I bought recently, just for
>>>> fun. It might suddenly prevent me clicking the address bar. I
>>>> immediately uninsatlled it! :)
>>> 
>>> The last software with "Norton" in it's name worth buying and using
>>> it was "Norton Commander 5.5" and maybe "Norton Utilities 8.0".
>>> Everything after that branded with "Norton" was bullshit for
>>> Windows.
>> 
>> He originally just gathered together a mess of previously-developed
>> free software, did some cosmetic stuff and called it the Norton
>> Utilities. Cheesy.
> 
> Actually, back then, the competitors were Norton Utilities and Central
> Point's PC Tools.  Both existed at the same time.  Unerase was the big
> tool in the Norton suite.  Symantec bought Norton, and later also bought
> PC Tools claiming they would expound on that tool set, but what they
> really did was to get rid of PC Tools to go forward with Norton
> Utilities.

That reminded me of the big fat paperback that came with a disk full of 
useful utilities and provided really good explanations for everything -- 
I thought that was called PC Tools, but probably not.  It killed me to 
contribute that book to the library (long after DOS was obsolete) but I 
figured they could handle it professionally.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norton_Utilities
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PC_Tools_(software)
> 
> Neither were "previously-developed free software" which has you
> implythat the tools in the suites were stolen, borrowed, or forked.

No, just used. I was familiar with some of the stuff already.  Not all, 
of course, and there's nothing actually wrong with bundling stuff up, 
but I thought it was... opportunistic, perhaps.

> Peter Norton wrote his own tools.  Central Point was a software
> development company, not a software publisher rebranding and
> redistributing the work of others.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Norton
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Point_Software

I really hate the way the new (to me) TB sometimes handles backspaces -- 
converting them to CRLFs at the end of the text before the sig.  No idea 
why it does this, but it's maddening.

-- 
Cheers, Bev
     "I'm sorry I ever invented the Electoral College."
                                     Al Gore 11/08/00

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.software.firefox

csiph-web