__/ [ Richard Rasker ] on Monday 05 February 2007 21:03 \__
>
> This is so pathetic, it's almost cool:
>
> http://www.webroot.com/company/pressroom/pr/vista-weaknesses.html
>
> "Windows® Defender fails to block 84% of a testing sample-set that
> included 15 of the most common variations of existing spyware and
> malware."
>
> And to think that Microsoft not only bought several renowned anti-virus
> outfits in the past years, have more resources and money than any other
> software company, have had five years since Gates' hypocritical
> "Trustworthy Computing" memo to create something really good
> security-wise, but also have unlimited access to the sources of what
> they're trying to protect - and still *this* is what they come up with?
>
> This is unbelievable. I mean, having a "security application" that's only
> 16% effective isn't just bad. It's much, much worse than bad, because it
> conveys a false sense of security. "Yessir, our locks 'n bolts stop 15% of
> all burglars!" No-one in their right mind would want to use such crapware.
>
>
> Well mr. Funkenbusch, as I'm completely at a loss for words over this one,
> it's over to you, to explain more about this latest feat in computer
> security by those utterly incompetent morons in Redmond.
OneCare is equally bad, FWIW, so the last think we need is security that
becomes a monopoly. Just look at the state of IE a couple of years ago. The
Net was in a miserable state (to many, it still is).
--
~~ Best wishes
Roy S. Schestowitz | "Computers are useless. They only solve problems"
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 138 total, 1 running, 133 sleeping, 0 stopped, 4 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
