Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Vista security threats to rise in 2008: McAfee
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Microsoft’s Windows Vista operating system will face increasing security
> | threats, according to McAfee Avert Labs predictions for top 10 security
> | threats in 2008.
> `----
>
>
http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=304706&leftnm=8&subLeft=0&chkFlg=
>
We will get more of these, not necessarily because of Vista, but because the
anti-virus wars are hotting up. People getting cheesed off with the over
heavy Symantec and McAfee slowing down otherwise decent computers, as well
as being cheesed off with 'We take over your PC and darn well let you know
it with endless displays of popups'.
Then there is the price, have you seen how much Symantec charge these days?
I shall tell you, it's £60. When I came to renew the contract for here I
couldn't believe how much it had gone up over the two years since I last
did it.
Why £60 when they also have a product for £40? I shall tell you that too.
Because the split in versions is designed to ensure that the £40 version
will definately not protect you. It works like this:-
You have an anti-virus working. Remember heuristics? The greatest of all
anti-virus for the simple fact that it doesn't rely on patterns or
signatures, but to get heuristics you have to pay for the £60version. That
means that the £40 protects you from known virus's, but not against new
virus's that haven't yet got a signature file.
So with all of that users are moving to the likes of AVG, much lighter foot
print and just as effective. I was reluctant at first, you why, because we
have become so used to the fact that a heavy anti-virus is needed to
protect Windows that we tend to be reluctant to go for the lighter ones.
I have done that now, saved a fortune from my budget and my users are hapier
because they machines at back up to speed.
|
|
