Free antivirus by MS

[Chosen One]

I saw an article today on MSNBC that Microsoft and Computer Associates are offering a 12 month antivirus software.
http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/index.cfm?

Uhhh, yeah....... No thank you M$ :butt:

[slgrieb]

I'm pretty sure this was Aladdin's Etrust antivirus software before it was CA's baby. A truly abysmal product. But, in case you missed it, Microsoft aquired RAV Antivirus
a few months ago. If that doesn't up your paranoia level, nothing will

[Rockafella]

There are so many people out there that criticize microsoft for its software. When you are a big giant like them that tries to tie in features that everyone wants or suggests, there are bound to be some problems. It doesnt matter how much money or people you have to test it. Look at NASA and how much money they spend just to launch a shuttle and things still go wrong. If you hate microsoft products that much then why are you using them? Some of you are sitting there bitching typing away on your microsoft box using internet explorer but still choose to use it anyway. Yeh I do all the patches that they come out with sometime but at least they are trying to fix the problems as they find them instead of ignoring them. :butt: :butt: :butt:

[Froghead]

Well, my NAV 2003 subscription runs out in 10 days so might as well give a try.

[confus-ed]

If I want free antivirus, I'll use AVG! No way would I trust MS to have anything to do with A/V . Dam, part of the reason why we NEED A/V is because OF ms and it's loose security practises.

then Ya_know said ...

That's a damned fool statement

So I'll say, 'Oh no its not !' ... its quite true

It strikes me that any true NOS (win xp/w2k/w2003 are definately NOSs not just O/Ss) should include 'anti-whatever' measures as standard especially if they want to push the internet as a 'standard' way of communicating. So I guess it is time M$ got around to adding what should have been there in the first place, if their NOS made a better hash of 'controlling incoming network traffic' (definately a requirement of any NOS) then would we need anti-virus stuff ? Maybe not as it couldn't get on there in the first place ! Its a pretty shonky NOS that allows unregulated traffic around it anyway, then again that's M$ for you !

A/V along with Firewall (both ways firewall) are NOS features, so if you want to call software a NOS, like Uncle Bill insists on calling it, then you'd better bundle these bits

& edit

Since this already reads like a 'confus-ed rant' ..

If you hate microsoft products that much then why are you using them

... because 'everyone' else does ... its not my fault that Uncle Bill blagged you all ... the market dominace is now so entrenched that sooner or later you'll find yourself having to deal with the 'devil' like it or not ... I've gotta eat too

[Matridom]

This software was avaialble earlier in the year, may i think, when windows 2003 first came out, The demo i downloaded is a full version with no limitation and no subscriptions.. It runs very nicely, and i do enjoy how it integrates into active directories. It's worth the download

[supatech]

Download it here


ftp://ftpez.ca.com/pub/myeTrust/apps/EZArmor.exe

no need to fill anything out.

[hogman]

Hmm, the chap who says he is happy with AVG should note this.

I had a laptop running AVG 7 with windows 2000. It did a full scan every three days and said the laptop was clean.

I installed the EZ package above after I removed the AVG.

Lo and behold, once the laptop had rebooted it repoted that a virus was installed on the laptop - the same one that was clean with AVG.

the virus?

W32.Interbot.10.trojan

So are you still happy? I for one will not be going back to AVG.

[confus-ed]

the virus?

W32.Interbot.10.trojan

Where's the 'shot self in foot' smiley ? ... trojans though undesireable aren't viruses, different anti-virus vendors have different approaches as to what they consider 'viral' & therefore what's up to them to 'kill' ... Its not at all uncommon for one anti-virus to say its 'clean' and another 'not' - that's entirely dependant on what they are looking for.

Most folks have anti-virus & then a range of approaches to clear up trojans & the even more 'grey' malwares which seem to find their way onto your system without express approval. That's why there are products like spybot, adaware & hijackthis (all designed to get diallers, trojans & malware, NOT viruses) !

Oh & now I 'shot you down' ... Welcome to windrivers Hogman

[slgrieb]

My problem with MS software aquisitions has less to do with whining about Microsoft products, and more about their anti-trust conviction. All to often, as MS has included new "features" in Windows, it has been at the expense of companies that may have a better product, but have trouble competing with freebies. Microsoft rarely makes a move that doesn't have a long term strategic benefit to Microsoft, but not neccesarily, the end user.

[hogman]

I hardly consider that a shooting down - more of a rant by someone who did not understand my post.

I mentioned the fact that I had AVG.

I also mentioned the fact that I did not have this "Virus/trojan" under AVG as it was ignored. However I found the problem with the new "Free" software offering from Microsoft.

So why should one FREE product be better than another FREE product?

This is not a question aimed at you but the community as a whole. Microsoft have been attacked considerably for their lack of security. Now they bundle an Anti-Virus package (That works) together with one of the best firewalls out there, give it away free of charge, and people jump all over them.

I am not a M$ fan. I believe there should be a choice, but don't dis a product just because it has M$ label on it.

I once loved Norton Anti-Virus, until I realised how much it was slowing my system down!!

This package is neat, no frills but functional. and from Microsoft that has to be a reflection of how they should look at their future business model. Cut out the crappy shadow effects and make the software engineers do their job properly and ensuring that the code is fully tested and PROVEN before beta testing it on millions of customers.

I remember the days when beta testers were PAID!!

[confus-ed]

I hardly consider that a shooting down - more of a rant by someone who did not understand my post.

Err umm not to get into a real 'rant' about this ... but there's a fundamental technical difference between a virus & a trojan, & that was the point I was making which YOU don't seem to 'get' ...

A virus deliberately destroys data or somehow 'monkeys' with your system in an attempt to destroy it ... Trojans on the otherhand along with malware attempt to discover information from your computer, you can have a registry full of trojans, diallers malware etc & still have a working system (even if it is transmitting all your keystrokes to Bin Ladden!) with a virus it will die eventually as the virus replicates it code. You might actually want/need your trojan/malware there to use certain 'services' (I use the phrase advisedly for 'things' like Kazza!)

I think I made it pretty clear that I consider ALL these fuctions as an inherant part of any NOS, if I have a beef with Uncle Bill, it most definately ain't about supplying free stuff !

I sure as sh!t agree with this bit though, whether you 'get' the technical point I'm making or not ...

Cut out the crappy shadow effects and make the software engineers do their job properly and ensuring that the code is fully tested and PROVEN before beta testing it on millions of customers.