Print 87 comment(s) - last by Jack Ripoff.. on Nov 27 at 4:19 PM

Computer protection starts at home.  (Source:
Microsoft looks to take the fight to malware makers with its own free product

Microsoft has long annoyed security software makers over the last decade as it has rolled out free products which often offer a competitive alternative to competitor's packaged software free-of-charge.  Microsoft merely offered a decently competitive product for a much cheaper price -- free.

With its firewall and antispyware (Windows Defender) built into Vista, business for private firewall software already has taken a hit.  Now in a move that is sure to make Trend Micro, McAffee, Norton, and other security software makers lose sleep; Microsoft has announced that in 2009, it will offer free antivirus software.

To understand this new announcement, a quick trip down memory lane is in order. 

Microsoft first entered the antivirus software business in 1992 with its Microsoft Anti-Virus product, which it contracted to Central Point Inc. (later acquired by Symantec).  The software was designed for Microsoft DOS 6.0 through 6.22 and could detect an impressive 1,234 viruses.  Unfortunately, there were no updates available, though a 1996 pack brought the total up to 2,371 viruses.  Embarrassingly, the software though the Windows 95 installer file was a virus.

After the mixed reviews of Microsoft A-V, Microsoft left the business until 2005 when it released betas of Windows Live OneCare.  The suite combined antivirus software with a tune-up utility, a stronger firewall, and a file backup utility.  The bundle was made commercially available May 31, 2006.  Subsequent Live OneCare 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 have also hit the market since, with the 2.5 iteration debuting in July 3 of this year.

Arriving in the present, Microsoft has announced it is axing the subscription based antivirus software business and will offer its antivirus tools for free.  The new suite is codenamed "Morro" and will available in the second half of 2009.  Microsoft describes the software as a "streamlined solution" and states, "[Morro] will provide comprehensive protection from malware including viruses, spyware, rootkits and trojans. This new solution, to be offered at no charge to consumers, will be architected for a smaller footprint that will use fewer computing resources, making it ideal for low-bandwidth scenarios or less powerful PCs."

The latter portion appears to be a clear nod to Windows efforts to push for a leaner footprint from top-to-bottom, a major focus of Windows 7 (which has been subject to recent doubts).

Microsoft will discontinue the OneCare subscription service June 30, 2009, but customers should fret not -- they will soon receive virtually the same solution entirely for free.

Amy Barzdukas, senior director of product management for the Online Services and Windows Division at Microsoft states, "Customers around the world have told us that they need comprehensive, ongoing protection from new and existing threats, and we take that concern seriously.  This new, no-cost offering will give us the ability to protect an even greater number of consumers, especially in markets where the growth of new PC purchases is outpaced only by the growth of malware."

Microsoft has acknowledged that the suite may not contain some of the extra non-security utilities such as tune up and printer sharing available in some commercial antivirus solutions.  However, when it comes to its core AV product it brags that its malware engine has garnered many awards already, including the VB100 award from Virus Bulletin, Checkmark Certification from West Coast Labs and certification from the International Computer Security Association Labs.  Microsoft has made great strides in security, besting a Mac machine and tying a Linux box at a recent hacker conference.

The new software will be available for Windows XP, Windows Vista and Windows 7.  Microsoft plans to integrate it with the upcoming Internet Explorer 8 browser which features many security enhancements including the much talked about "Porn Mode".

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Thank god
By evident on 11/19/2008 9:49:44 AM , Rating: 5
now maybe mcafee and norton can finally go out of business. Their software is terrible!

RE: Thank god
By cochy on 11/19/2008 10:01:26 AM , Rating: 1
Well if it's as good as Windows Defender then it will be totally useless.

RE: Thank god
By dgingeri on 11/19/2008 10:56:43 AM , Rating: 2
Windows Defender has been as useful to me as Spybot and Adaware. It catches things Spybot and Adaware don't, and they catch things Defender doesn't, so I use all three in unison. (It's been a long while since I was actually infected with anything, so the prevention components of Spybot and Defender seem to be working quite well.)

Well, I also have adware/spyware prevention in my BitDefender suite as well.

I would not consider any of the 4 totally useless, but each one on its own wouldn't be as useful as all 4 at once.

If you want true protection, use multiple products.

RE: Thank god
By nosfe on 11/19/2008 11:02:35 AM , Rating: 3
got a virus a couple of months ago that got through every antivirus i threw at it(kaspersky, bit defender, nod32) after i reinstalled windows. i kept a copy of the virus on my system to see how long it'll take for them to realize that its a virus; after about a month kaspersky finally caught it. So yes, i'm not that thrilled about "quality" AV solutions as i was in the past

If you want true protection, use a virtual pc

RE: Thank god
By PrezWeezy on 11/19/2008 7:36:27 PM , Rating: 2
If you want true protection, don't use the internet ;)

Nothing is 100%, all you can do is try to eliminate as many holes as possible. That and making sure any porn site you visit is virus free. And someday a virus will get through and that's part of the risk of owning a computer.

We've had probably 20 cases of people getting the "AntiVirus 09" thing. Annoying as hell, luckily it's easy to clean up. And neither Trend, AVG, BitDefender, nor Norton has been able to stop that.

RE: Thank god
By erikejw on 11/24/2008 9:34:30 PM , Rating: 2
It would probably help too if not ad-aware and similar companies didn't take money for excluding some spyware and viruses.

Yes, it is true.

RE: Thank god
By kalak on 11/19/2008 1:16:22 PM , Rating: 2
If you want true protection, use multiple products.

Best,FREE, solution:

- Avast! anti-virus
- Comodo Firewall

I have used Norton, Kaspersky, Zone Alarm.... And the two above (avast + comodo) are really the best of available - including "not free" solutions!

RE: Thank god
By Samus on 11/19/2008 5:48:30 PM , Rating: 2

RE: Thank god
By Screwballl on 11/25/2008 3:40:22 PM , Rating: 2
Avast and most of them are crap, especially on Retrospective/ProActive testing.

Using real time scanners:

Avast = 97.3%
Avira = 99.2%
The only other one that is close is AVK (not AVG) at 99.1%.
AVG was at 94.3%, Norton and the rest ranged from 98% down to Microsoft and Mcafee at 84.4 and 84.6%.

Looking at the Retrospective testing:

Avira = 74%
Avast = 28%
Norton = 18%
Microsoft = 29%

My 3 suggestions:

Avira anti-virus
Threatfire for malware
Comodo for firewall

For more info, see:

RE: Thank god
By AlexWade on 11/19/2008 1:19:18 PM , Rating: 2
Malware Bytes right now seems to catch anything and everything, including rootkits. You should try that one. Then I use Microsoft Sysinternals Autoruns program ( to find all the start-up programs and HijackThis to find some other hidden stuff. Between the 3, there hasn't be a piece of malware yet to escape me.

RE: Thank god
By Murloc on 11/19/2008 5:06:01 PM , Rating: 2
I use that one, avast, and some brain.
I already don't need to pay, microsoft isn't doing anything new, just monopolizing by integrating these things in internet explorer. Use firefox XD

RE: Thank god
By borismkv on 11/19/2008 4:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
If you want true protection, learn what the tricks and traps are and learn how to tell when your computer is infected. All the anti-virus and spyware software in the world won't protect someone who is an idiot online.

RE: Thank god
By alphadog on 11/21/2008 2:08:56 PM , Rating: 2
That is some seriously BAD advice.

You don't need a doctor, just learn to recognize that you have a cancer before it become untreatable...

RE: Thank god
By Jack Ripoff on 11/27/2008 4:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
If you want true protection, use multiple products.

If you want true protection, use a decent OS.

Preferably one with execution permissions at filesystem level and some privilege separation...

RE: Thank god
By AnnihilatorX on 11/19/2008 10:18:14 AM , Rating: 2
Anyone tried the new Norton? Many reviewers actually gave thumbs up to their new memory footprint and scan speed.

I guess it's not much an incentive even so when being a happy user of free AVG 8

RE: Thank god
By blowfish on 11/19/2008 10:30:08 AM , Rating: 2
As a long time AVG user, I'm concerned about how much resources AVG8 seems to use, and I'm certainly prepared to give MS free a shot. I like their new emphasis on leaner and meaner....

RE: Thank god
By kensiko on 11/19/2008 9:15:04 PM , Rating: 2
You can try Avira, I just switched to it, it's painless.

RE: Thank god
By Chaser on 11/19/2008 10:42:44 AM , Rating: 2
Yes Norton finally has listened to its customers and its 2009 Internet Security is actually quite good. Symantec also "achitected" it with a very small resource footprint.

Its definitely a very simplified product that manages itself for the most part. It rarely asks for user input and it runs its processes during idle periods. When you walk away you simply get a little reminder that it had been scanning in the background and your computer is free of threats. If the firewall happens to detect anything it only tells you it resolved or prevented something and it quietly goes back to silence. Its a lean, clean, mostly silent product that takes care of itself.

RE: Thank god
By Ammohunt on 11/19/2008 2:35:49 PM , Rating: 3
the million dollar question(s) are can you un-install it or can you just install what you need like just av(i personally don't need all the other garbage that they bundle with it)

RE: Thank god
By tastyratz on 11/19/2008 4:54:24 PM , Rating: 2
I still have my reservations using a Norton product however. I have personally had several nightmare end results, and know several people who have as well. It will be a long time before I consider them again...

Everyone has an opinion on av software based on a handful of viruses they might have encountered personally. One thing that comes in handy when really looking at a solution is getting a review of the big picture. I like the test results from (or similar solutions) which point me in the right direction on a lot of the larger AV solutions.

RE: Thank god
By drebo on 11/19/08, Rating: -1
RE: Thank god
By blowfish on 11/19/2008 10:31:24 AM , Rating: 3
Hmm, you work for Symantec or something?

RE: Thank god
By drebo on 11/19/2008 10:45:53 AM , Rating: 2
Nope. I just show credit where credit is due when a product makes my own job 100% easier.

RE: Thank god
By nosfe on 11/19/2008 11:13:24 AM , Rating: 3
last i checked norton was a good av until symantec happened, then it just got bloated and more bloated with every version; also, they buy PowerQuest and then kill of Partition Magic, how brilliant! so Symantec should have kicked the bucket years ago, not now

RE: Thank god
By omnicronx on 11/19/2008 11:32:25 AM , Rating: 3
Until Symantec happened? Symantec has owned Norton since 1990, what on earth are you talking about. Anyone who thinks that Symantec is going anywhere is an idiot, they are in the top 10 in the worlds largest software companies (currently 6th) and their business does not rely totally on Antivirus products.

RE: Thank god
By nosfe on 11/19/2008 11:58:42 AM , Rating: 2
first point, yes it seems that i remember wrongly about symantec and norton, i remembered about something happening in around 2001 as that was when nav started getting bloated

I'm not saying that Symantec is going anywhere. I'm not saying that EA is going anywhere. I'm just saying that i want them gone. I don't care how big they are, they are crappy companies that did more damage then good

if NAV is so great as you say then why does it need a special program just to make sure that it uninstalls correctly?(Norton Removal Tool)

RE: Thank god
By omnicronx on 11/19/2008 12:55:15 PM , Rating: 2
if NAV is so great as you say then why does it need a special program just to make sure that it uninstalls correctly?(Norton Removal Tool)
I never said NAV is 'so great', but your question has a pretty obvious answer. Its so that the end user, especially in a workplace environment cannot merely uninstall the app. Same thing goes for any virus or intruder that tries to uninstall the app to get further access to the filesystem without interruption. And for the record, the new versions of norton especially the corp editions can be uninstalled. Sometimes there is a password, but the default is 'symantec'. Its more of a deterrent than anything.

RE: Thank god
By nosfe on 11/19/2008 1:08:13 PM , Rating: 3
i'm not talking about those kind of uninstall "problems", i'm talking about all the crap that gets installed with nav that doesn't go away when you uninstall nav. thats why symantec got hammered and why they subsequently made that uninstall tool. If you ask me, the only programs that need special programs just to be able to uninstall them are viruses and other malware in general, definitely not something i'm willing to put on my computer

RE: Thank god
By elessar1 on 11/19/2008 12:50:33 PM , Rating: 3
Working on a 2000+ people enterprise with Symantec on every PC and there hasnt been an infection in more than a year...

Anyway... i use AVG8 on mi own PCs...


RE: Thank god
By tech329 on 11/19/2008 11:30:10 AM , Rating: 2
Norton (Symantec) has really cleaned up their act in the last couple of years. The 2006 product was horrible. 2007 was better as was 2008 and now 2009. I too also only use the Antivirus product. I don't think more than that is required. Making an AV product isn't easy. Focusing on bells and whistles rather than core features was a mistake for those vendors (all of them) who tried the Swiss Army Knife approach. One other piece of advice is to buy the new version each year from a discounter or on sale. Not over the Interent as a download. Ever!!! For this category of software it is far better to have a real CD and a license key. Less hassle and for non-tech persons, way easier.

RE: Thank god
By xphile on 11/23/2008 8:19:24 PM , Rating: 2
Jolly good luck to you if you think in this day and age you dont need a capable firewall.

Your purchase advice is disasterous too - it cant be *better* to buy a cd - since 10 minutes after it's pressed Symantec will have updates you need to download anyway, either to the virus definitions or the program or both. And in reality when you install the programme at its earliest it is probably 4 to 6 weeks old up to 10 or 11 months old, and you could have to download about as much as you installed in the first place.

With an account you cant "lose" the software - if anything goes wrong you just download it again, and that version is always current.

I do agree it can be cheaper to find a cd package in some cases if you know where to look - but the whole thrust of your argument was that it was easier for the non-tech person - and trust me;

A) Non tech persons just bowl into a store and pay full retail 100% of the time - they do not know where to get discounts.


B) If you've ever seen the results of the majority of non-tech peoples attempts to install virus software from cds you'd know they somehow manage to get that wrong more often than not - the "click here, now bugger off", internet based installs are rapidly becoming the most user friendly.

RE: Thank god
By Krotchrot on 11/19/2008 1:02:47 PM , Rating: 2
Living in a whole what?

RE: Thank god
By kalak on 11/19/2008 2:03:07 PM , Rating: 2
he means "hole", not "whole"...

RE: Thank god
By HighWing on 11/19/2008 1:09:02 PM , Rating: 2
They need an enterprise class product that is centrally managed and provides them with a certain level of monitoring.

Ok maybe you missed the part where it said this will be offered by Microsoft themselves. I would be willing to stake a good deal of money on the fact that there will most likely be an update to Windows Server that will add such functionality. At the very least I'm sure there will be a whole slew of policy sets that will allow admins configure every aspect of how it runs.

RE: Thank god
By Nekrik on 11/19/2008 3:07:43 PM , Rating: 2
their corporate versions were never as bad as their commercial ones, but they burned too many bridges and I still would vote them off the island and into oblivion first, followed closely by McAfee. Their engineering practices, they're invasive installs, damage to computers in the past, crapy uninstallers that fail miserably, inability to learn how to make AV software that doesn't include dirty little kernel hacks...screw them completely.

RE: Thank god
By chick0n on 11/19/08, Rating: 0
RE: Thank god
By chris2618 on 11/19/2008 11:13:16 AM , Rating: 2
I don't have glue what you are talking about. i had McAfee antivirus and firewall for a few years had no problems and had 3 or 4 virus in total. tried free antivirus and firewall and they just don't do a good job.

RE: Thank god
By kalak on 11/19/2008 2:10:23 PM , Rating: 2
I don't have glue what you are talking about.

Funny, veeery funny !

@chris2618: correct is "I don't have a clue ..."

RE: Thank god
By chris2618 on 11/19/2008 2:30:25 PM , Rating: 2
Well at least i made someone laugh.
i would of used the excuse that the g is near the c on the keyboard if i hadn't of missed out the 'a' as well.

i see why they have that preview button lol

RE: Thank god
By Einy0 on 11/19/2008 5:24:12 PM , Rating: 2
Agreed 100%... Avast and AVG are solid free alternatives.

RE: Thank god
By cubby1223 on 11/19/2008 7:39:44 PM , Rating: 3
now maybe mcafee and norton can finally go out of business. Their software is terrible!

Who the F voted this post up?

If you don't like McAfee & Norton, you don't have to buy it. But with Microsoft giving it's product away for free, you may soon not have *any* alternatives. No Kaspersky. No Antivir. No NOD32. No AVG. No BitDefender. These companies *have* to charge because that is their source of income. They don't have the Windows monopoly to keep the cash-flow rolling in.

RE: Thank god
By mindless1 on 11/19/2008 10:11:50 PM , Rating: 2
MS can give it away for free but remember there were already very popular free alternatives.

One problem with MS gaining marketshare had to be that there is a general lack of confidence in a company making an AV product for infections of their own OS product. MS' answer has been pile on more security features instead of closing security holes. Enter bloat, the very thing so many people dislike about Norton and McAfee alternatives.

On the other hand, it is good this AV product is separate rather than more bloat integrated into windows by default, and since there are common indexes of AV performance MS will have an indication of which areas they need to improve upon to remain equal or better than the competition.

If they can keep the bloat down and remain equal or better, their product should fairly displace the marketshare of some of those AV developers you've listed, although there is still something to be said for not having all your eggs in one basket, one of the good things about so many AV companies is it makes it harder for a malware author to plan a common attack against the AV app that might intercept that malware.

RE: Thank god
By Nekrik on 11/19/2008 10:23:12 PM , Rating: 2
if I hadn't commented in this thread I would have voted it up if not made the comment myself.

It was a pointed comment at two of the most horrific mass accepted software apps ever seen (maybe NAV more than McAfee), the tech world would have been better off if they'd have died away years ago. As you mentioned, there are still many other alternatives to create competition, we don't 'need' either of these two. I see many posts that agree with my thoughts and a few that do not, I've never personally used either but have seen many systems get completely repaved after NAV completely fucked them up. Their entire organizations need banned from the tech world and repurposed into the service industry.

RE: Thank god
By ggordonliddy on 11/19/2008 9:22:04 PM , Rating: 2
You don't want them out of business. Competition is good. If they all went away, MS would no longer make it free.

By 306maxi on 11/19/2008 10:25:00 AM , Rating: 2
How soon till Microsoft gets their butts sued off for being anti-competitive in the US and in the EU?

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By rpsgc on 11/19/2008 10:42:06 AM , Rating: 4
Unless they bundle it with Windows I'm sure they'll be fine (hopefully).

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By sbrown23 on 11/19/08, Rating: 0
RE: Bwhahahahaha
By FITCamaro on 11/19/2008 10:46:55 AM , Rating: 2
He's right. The EU will sue them. Hell they sued Microsoft for locking down Vista's kernel to make it more secure for christ sakes.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By FITCamaro on 11/19/2008 10:48:53 AM , Rating: 2
I'll also make not that they'll likely sue them for integrating it with IE8 too.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By jonmcc33 on 11/19/2008 12:33:44 PM , Rating: 2
Apple integrates Safari with Mac OSX. I really don't know why Apple hasn't gotten sued for half the things they have included. I guess the reason is because they don't use modern terms. Airport for "wireless management" and TimeMachine for "backup utility". It's like a child comes up with names for Mac applications.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By TomZ on 11/19/2008 12:46:11 PM , Rating: 2
Apple can do what they want for now since they only have a small marketshare in the PC business. They don't have a monopoly like Microsoft does, and special rules apply to monopolies.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By MScrip on 11/19/2008 11:28:57 PM , Rating: 2
Why is Microsoft a monopoly? I can buy any OS or get one for free. I can buy any brand of computer. I can use any anti-virus or browser I want.

However, if I live in a small city, and there is only one phone company or power company... that's a monopoly.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By TomZ on 11/20/2008 8:52:18 AM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has a monopoly in desktop OSs because they have around 90% marketshare, plus or minus. Same for Internet browsers. And it is because of these monopolies that they are subject to anti-trust laws - somthing that other companies don't have to worry about.

One other related point I'd like to make is that with the new adminstration in the U.S., odds are that there will be greater scrutiny and analysis of anti-competitive practices. Bush was pretty laissez-faire in this area, but traditionally Democrats are more liberal in terms of applying and enforcing these types of laws.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By Fritzr on 11/21/2008 7:32:29 AM , Rating: 2
They do not have a monopoly in the sense that there is no alternative. Their monopoly comes from so many of the vendors selling programs not supporting nonMicroSoft OS.

You do have alternative OSes to choose from, just no alternative for most of the entertainment software and often a much smaller list of choices for productivity software. The OS is useless if the program you need does not exist...until DeCSS was introduced, illegally, you could only play DVDs on standalone players, MicroSoft or Apple. The alternative OS did not exist...

Check out the videogames some'll see a wide variety of current console games (last year's consoles seem to be forgotten quickly), Windows & a percentage (not all) offering Mac OSX (not older Mac) ... try finding AmigaOS, Linux, Unix, Solaris, VMS or other alternative to the MicroSoft and Apple.

Next try to find alternative OS support for your hardware. There was discussion elsewhere about Linux being dificult to setup. The consensus was with current distros it's easier than Windows unless you do not choose the correct hardware or the programs you want are not supported by your choice of distro. Crossover Office helps by allowing MicroSoft Windows programs to run on Unix compatible OSes...most of the time, but again the solution to limited software is by putting a translation layer in to run software native to the monopoly OS.

Even Mac OSX has Windows emulator to run MS Windows programs that do not have Mac equivalent or where the equivalent does not do the job adequately (IE specific webpages rendered by Mozilla, Opera or Safari for instance)

It's telling that there is little market for an emulator or adapter to run Linux or OSX software under Windows, but the reverse is considered a necessity.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By 306maxi on 11/19/2008 10:59:49 AM , Rating: 2
Oh noes! Someone has discovered my deep dark secret. My DT username is named after a female sanitary product! That or you could actually google my username and find out that it's actually a rally car.

Why would they? Well Microsoft get sued whenever they bundle anything free with an OS. Of course they won't bundle it but if the Eu could figure a way to sue them for it they would because it's always easy to hit Microsoft up for a fine when they are merely offering what customers want and expect from their product.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By Omega215D on 11/19/2008 8:03:21 PM , Rating: 2
It's a shame Peugot doesn't bring their cars over to the US. I personally liked the 206.

Average people expect their OS to come with things and the tech community frowns upon it, when the MS OS doesn't come with anything the average user wonders why Apple has so much when MS doesn't and the tech community will still find something wrong with it.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By 3DoubleD on 11/19/2008 10:44:42 AM , Rating: 2
It is a slippery slope and I completely disagree with the recent EU antitrust case against Microsoft for making Vista more secure and choking the AV market. Regardless, I feel Microsoft has been smart and will not force this product on anyone, thus making this no different then AVG Free. Since the price is right, more people will use AV products, creating a more secure user base. This is attractive to Microsoft since making malicious code more difficult to spread will benefit the image of their real product: Windows.

AV companies can whine and complain all they want, but Microsoft is doing nothing illegal (or even shady). I still feel they would be within their rights to incorporate AV directly into Windows, but unfortunately the EU feels differently. It is like saying car manufacturers cannot include a stereo in the car because if they did it would take away from the after-market car stereo business. Ridiculous. Such a market was born out of the poor product quality to begin with, so it shouldn't be surprising when that market disappears when product quality improves.

RE: Bwhahahahaha
By Aloonatic on 11/19/2008 10:46:08 AM , Rating: 2
Hopefully not.

I've always found it strange that they have only fairly recently included any kind of security software, first with windows firewall and now defender.

It only makes sense that a good antivirus and firewall are basics that are both needed and integral to the OS as a whole.

<no doubt bad analogy>

No one complains that car manufacturers sell you a car with their locks, immobilisers and alarms already fitted?

</no doubt bad analogy>

Best Picture
By wwwebsurfer on 11/19/2008 9:59:58 AM , Rating: 5
I'd like to give props to the picture, it's very creative!

RE: Best Picture
By Aquila76 on 11/19/2008 10:27:55 AM , Rating: 2
Even better - this was the tagline at the bottom of the article (for me anyway):

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn ." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins

RE: Best Picture
By SunAngel on 11/19/2008 10:39:35 AM , Rating: 2
Yes! The best picture ever, AND I MEAN EVER, that Dailytech has ever posted. GREAT! GREAT! GREAT!

RE: Best Picture
By FITCamaro on 11/19/2008 10:48:20 AM , Rating: 2

RE: Best Picture
By Aloonatic on 11/19/2008 10:49:12 AM , Rating: 2
Even better than the oft posted picture of the Fire Fox girl in the tight (shopped) T-shirt? :-O

Surly not?!

Then again, I'm more of a breast man, not a "finger" man, but, what ever floats your boat :D

RE: Best Picture
By FITCamaro on 11/19/2008 1:44:44 PM , Rating: 2
Pictures of chicks in tight shirts with big tits are a dime a dozen.

That picture was far more original.

RE: Best Picture
By Aloonatic on 11/20/2008 5:55:28 AM , Rating: 2
I did found the pic very amusing too :)

What I was alluding to was the way that many posters on here seem to get very excited by the Fire Fox girl, for some reason?

No matter how many times that we have seen that pic, let alone the many many pics that (as you point out) are hardly difficult to find on the internets.

RE: Best Picture
By FITCamaro on 11/20/2008 6:08:48 AM , Rating: 2
I did found?

RE: Best Picture
By Aloonatic on 11/20/2008 8:31:06 AM , Rating: 2

yeah, early morning posts can be like that sometimes.

My mistake though, I would have thought that people would be able to work it out for themselves whilst not be too bothered by such oversights and simple innocent mistakes on a site like this, rather than getting a hard-on whilst pointing these things out for reasons best known to themselves.

I should have known better with you however FITc.

This is incredible.
By arazok on 11/19/2008 10:27:27 AM , Rating: 2
I have been using OneCare since it’s inception and love it.

As the computer expert in the family, I was always getting dragged out to everyone house when they got a virus from running no anti-virus. For $20 a year, I could run OneCare on my PC, as well as every single family members. (You get 3 licenses, but I have been able to install 5 without complaint from Microsoft so far) This program ELIMINATED these trips for me. Now I get it for free?! AWSOME!

RE: This is incredible.
By 306maxi on 11/19/2008 10:35:40 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps rather foolishly I don't bother with an AV solution on my PC (Vista 64) at all. I've done so since XP SP2 came out and Norton didn't play to play ball with it. I've not had a single virus in that time. My wife runs AVG on her PC and it never seems to catch anything and only seems to slow her PC down at the most inconvenient of times. I do occasionally install AVG and run a full scan but it never finds anything of interest.

i'll give Onecare a go when it becomes free purely because of the level of integration it has with Vista but I doubt I'll use it for any length of time.

RE: This is incredible.
By Mitch101 on 11/19/2008 11:00:58 AM , Rating: 2
Its usually free after rebate and your allowed to install it on up to 3 machines. Its not only an AV solution but also does other things like backup and defrags.

My only complaints about OneCare is if I tell it to do a manual scan it doesn't report back it will just close when done and while I have told it to run a full scan it still says it hasn't done one in months. I suspect it might be bombing out but there doesn't seem to be any logged location to tell me much more. It really lacks good feedback that tells me its working.

My other complaint is that with other products I can tell what viruses my machine is protected from by looking up the virus on their site and comparing it to my engine/definition. When I get an alert about a new virus with one care I cant tell if one care will protect me against it.

It's the same problem with Antigen you cant tell what viruses you are protected from.

But at least it isnt resending e-mails multiple times like McCaffee does and isnt nearly as annoying as Symantec was at killing my FTP connections and calling it worm activity.

RE: This is incredible.
By Gage8 on 11/19/2008 11:06:19 AM , Rating: 2
Same here. I haven't run an AV program in years. Just scan with Malwarebyte's AntiMalware, Spybot once in a while and never have any problems in XP or Vista. Of course I'm not downloading free screen savers and junk either...

RE: This is incredible.
By arazok on 11/19/2008 11:11:19 AM , Rating: 2
I never used AV either, until I got one. This was before XP SP2, when it was easier to get a virus from just visiting a site, but I learned my lesson.

At this point, I view AV as a sanity application. For a while, I was rebuilding at least one computer a month because my friends/family seem to just install everything they come across.

Now, I install OneCare for my family and pay the renewal myself. For friends, I fix their computer for free ONCE, and tell them that if they don’t BUY software, then I won’t fix it the next time. I rarely find myself fixing computers anymore.

By n0nsense on 11/19/2008 11:31:19 AM , Rating: 2
I found comments on this page as "funny".
I use this, i use that, i use all of them in pack.

The simple truth is, that you don't really need any of them.
There are about 60 known viruses for Linux and about 60000 known for Windows.

Make your choice.

RE: <b>LOL<b/>
By wetwareinterface on 11/19/2008 12:26:42 PM , Rating: 2
unfortunately for your argument the same ratio holds true of usefull desktop apps and compelling games on linux vs. windows. so take your linux distro of choice and run photoshop on it, or Office 2007, or fallout 3, or spore, or the sims etc...

yeah they have gimp and inkscape and open office which gets you nowhere if you need to use em at work as they aren't photoshop, illustrator or office 2007 and your employer won't let you use em probably to do the company's work on.

as far as games linux has what? civ and quake 4? wow fun times for all.

and don't even try to bring up cedega, it costs as much as win xp pro for a legitimate license so why bother?

RE: <b>LOL<b/>
By Gzus666 on 11/19/2008 4:28:23 PM , Rating: 2
While you have many good points, the reason that is true would be the lack of market share. They make applications for the most used platform. If everyone happened to use Linux, we would be saying the things you say about the underdog platform for it's lack of programs. It is kind of fill in the blanks with names with this kind of statement.

RE: <b>LOL<b/>
By 3DoubleD on 11/19/2008 5:32:15 PM , Rating: 2
Also, if everyone used linux, there would be many more viruses for it as well. I'm not saying there would be more than for Windows as I understand the linux kernel is inherently more secure, but there would definitely be more. The argument goes both ways.

Also, Crossover is a great application for using windows programs in Linux. You don't need a copy of Windows either. You do have to pay for it though (unless you got one of the free copies that were offered almost a month ago). Personally, I use both linux and windows. Honestly, I don't prefer one over the other, they both work and let me get things done. The only difference is that linux allows my 4 year old laptop to run as smoothly as my 1 year old desktop with Vista. I ran (and still use) XP on my laptop for 3 years and was happy with it until I ran Vista on my new desktop and couldn't ever go back. I literally felt the need for speed!

Thank You EU Antitrust
By 3DoubleD on 11/19/2008 10:25:40 AM , Rating: 3
We all have to thank (or at least partially thank) the EU antitrust lawsuits against Microsoft and perhaps the negative public image of Windows security for this being free. Clearly Microsoft wants to beef up security across on all platforms and this is a great way to compliment the advances recent advances in Vista. Even though no one should have an excuse to not have antivirus as there are free products already, I think this free Microsoft AV will certainly boost coverage across the board.

RE: Thank You EU Antitrust
By bobcpg on 11/19/2008 10:33:49 AM , Rating: 1
Please tell me exactly how the EU antitrust lawsuits made MS release FREE anti-virus software? Seems to me this would be on the same line as MS releasing a FREE web browser.

Also, tell me how much more MS needs to sell the new OS's to cover the loss and expected losses from EU lawsuits.

RE: Thank You EU Antitrust
By 3DoubleD on 11/19/2008 10:56:40 AM , Rating: 2
You are right, that was poorly worded. I meant to say that since the (in my opinion, retarded) EU lawsuit prevented Vista from including more security features, forcing MS to release a product like this instead. It was meant more as a sarcastic thank you, since we could have had such a product already built into Vista already. It does give Microsoft better control of the AV security market beyond trying to patch holes in Windows. I may be overly optimistic, but Microsoft may be looking to improve the public perception of Windows security, something that has seen recent improvements but has seen set backs due to the EU antitrust garbage. Like I mentioned in a previous post, charging Microsoft for monopolistic practices by improving their product quality is just plain stupid.

RE: Thank You EU Antitrust
By bobcpg on 11/19/2008 11:49:27 AM , Rating: 1
I hear ya and agree. Thanks

By vilepolluter on 11/19/2008 8:50:59 PM , Rating: 2
As a couple people noted here, the best method of defense is to use multiple products. Personally, I haven't been infected in over 3 years, here is what I would recommend.

#1 - stay away from questionable websites. Online gambling, WAREZ, Porn,'Computer Security Scan' sites and their ilk.

#2 - Don't use a browser that supports Active X. I know many still need to use IE for business purposes, and that is unavoidable. But for the sake of God use something w/o Active X for day to day browsing. It's the main vector most of this crap takes to infect you. And if kids use your computer, keep in mind that they will likely click ANYTHING on the screen. Don't give them the option to do so while online.

#3 - If you use Windows or even now OS X, keep up to date. Turn on automatic updates, and scan for additional updates at least once a week. This does help.

#4 - Always use a hardware router w/a built in firewall. Never connect to the internet directly w/a public IP. Always connect to a router w/NAT and use a private IP.

#5 - DO use multiple products. Personally, I use AVG Antivirus, Spybot, MalwareBytes Anti-malware, SuperAntiSpyware, and Windows Defender. Keep them up to date and scan w/each once a week. You will stay clean, and all of these tools are free.

RE: Protection!
By NubWobble on 11/19/2008 10:10:08 PM , Rating: 2
I use Kaspersky and haven't been infected for a year. I used to use Avast but that didn't stop everything. I love Kaspersky and will continue to use them as long as they do an excellent job.

Now, thanks to you vilepolluter, I am also using SuperAntiSpyware and Spybot. I love coming to this site, I've learned loads.

By S3anister on 11/19/2008 2:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'd use it.

By cdrsft on 11/19/2008 4:33:25 PM , Rating: 2
i love the picture for this story. cracks me everytime.

Another good one:

it is a stripped-down.........
By crystal clear on 11/20/2008 2:43:52 AM , Rating: 2

BOSTON (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp's upcoming security software is not designed to take sales from Symantec Corp and McAfee Inc as it is a stripped-down, free product that focuses purely on anti-virus protection, a Microsoft executive said.

"This is really focused on the 50 to 60 percent (of PC users) who don't have, or won't pay for, anti-virus protection, anti-malware protection," Amy Barzdukas, senior director of product management for Microsoft's Online Services and Windows Division, told Reuters in an interview.

Microsoft's new product, code-named Morro after Brazil's Morro de Sao Paolo beach, only includes anti-malware software, whereas security suites from Symantec and McAfee include encryption, firewalls, password protection, parental controls and data backup programs.

Although Morro will be offered around the world, one focus will be on emerging markets such as Brazil where a large number of consumers cannot afford to buy anti-virus suites, Barzdukas said.

By zolo111 on 11/20/2008 11:34:29 AM , Rating: 2
So which AV company are they gonna buy now? Like they did when they wanted to offer anti spyware. Windows defender was giant antispyware or something before they bought it, it was one of the best back then as I recall, I don't trust it nowadays though, and one of the first services I disable after a fresh install ( can't find a way to uninstall it) Spyware doctor FTW.

A little irked.
By JonnyDough on 11/20/2008 3:47:41 PM , Rating: 2
I'm a little bothered by Microsoft...

Most widely distributed OS worldwide.
Free anti-virus, free anti-phishing, etc.
Included web browser.
Closed source code.
Cloud computing.
PCs for everyone initiatives.

If I didn't know better, I'd say Microsoft wants to be our new overlord.

"Can anyone tell me what MobileMe is supposed to do?... So why the f*** doesn't it do that?" -- Steve Jobs

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki