Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: McAfee admits proprietary process failure

  • Subject: Re: McAfee admits proprietary process failure
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2006 04:59:31 +0100
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / Manchester University
  • References: <1153238917.629893.222790@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <Jrbvg.103300$wl.50513@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [ 7 ] on Tuesday 18 July 2006 21:24 \__

> nessuno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
>> Quote:
>> -----------
>> Anti-virus vendor McAfee admits it is falling behind because virus
>> writers use open source methods.
>> ------------
>> End quote
>> 
>> http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/index.php?p=713
> 
> 
> May be we shouldn't buy McAfee$ products instead rely
> on open source products like ClamAV, Winpooch, Privoxy
> and firewalls built of PFSense that filters content dynamically.
> After all, its free, and does a better job than
> propriatory whinos and their products that can't keep up.

McAfee has no business in Open Source. It's only natural for
McAfee  to bash a threat to its revenues. Open Source  leads
to  malware? They are are merely demonising that they  fear.
Symantec,  on the other hand, are evolving to to accommodate
change  and  are now involved in some Linux and Open  Source
businesses.

Best wishes,

Roy

-- 
Roy S. Schestowitz      |    WARNING: /dev/null running out of space
http://Schestowitz.com  |  Open Prospects   ¦     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 128 total,   1 running, 125 sleeping,   0 stopped,   2 zombie
      http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index