Vista - what does Windows Defender really protects and scans for?

Straight Talk wrote:Have you tried many of these sort of programs ? I 've not been impressed with those that I've tried.
If you were going to run one which one would it be ?
Thanks.
..

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 20:13:29 -0000, "bomb#20" <darkstar@xxxxxx> wrote:
Yes.
Me neither.
There really isn't one I can recommend, since they seldom help you the
day you really need it. But if someone *forced* me to use one I would
go for one that wouldn't hook deeply into the system and that would
use as little resources as possible *g*

Em Sexta, 14 de Dezembro de 2007 21:15, Straight Talk escreveu:
That makes 3 of us...

i have a little virus collection (less than 50 infected files), and it's
enought to see that AVG and Kaspersky catches only 60% of them, letting 40%
of them pass away.
another thing i've found is AVG and Kaspersky do FUD on the users:
AVG and Kaspersy (specialy AVG) triger a lot of false alarms with cracks and
key generators... it's just FUD, i've seen AVG go "on" many times when
handling files there're game cracks or key generators.

"Tom Lake" <toml_12953@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news8E639F4-6DDB-4625-836C-04701042371A@xxxxxxThat makes no sense at all.

That means you freeze all your computer models and OS at one time to get
your license.

What about next year, and the one after that, and so on...
We have to keep many different OS and many different computer, for different
department, etc.

For example, we have to keep XP for many CAD programs.

Some still are in Windows 2000.

We found keeping all those free anti-virus program when we bought the
systems, seems to be the optimal choice at this time.

> I don't have any antivirus software. I haven't had a virus since XP preSame here. Two years continuously connected to the Internet via a NAT
router - the first year running XP SP2, the second year running Vista Home
Premium.

Not a single virus. I know this because three times a year I use
Kaspersky's online scanner (which they say is as good as their "real" one),
and every time it comes up blank.

I don't know what some people do to get virus infections, but I think the
case for anti-virus software is EXTREMELY weak. Too weak for me to want to
use it.

SteveT

LOL!

"Straight Talk" <b__nice@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0am2m39l0lnujl8k96bmaq8jjndnamodh7@xxxxxx

having antivirus software is not about how many viruses it can fine it is
about a first line of protection so to speak. because antivirus companies
have realtime scanning,you will be alerted to things that attempt to sneak
in.the same with anti spyware. not having these programs, means you are an
easy mark. anything can slip in. computer repair bills are not cheap,
especialy when it is something that could have been avoided by installing an
antivirus program.
--
Four Generations Of Trust And Betrayal...One Legacy

Skywolfe


"bomb#20" wrote:

"Rage Skywolfe" <RageSkywolfe@xxxxxx> wrote in
message news:FD087472-FA40-492E-AE5B-1E22EC090684@xxxxxxUsed to be first line, when it was a way to help users to avoid
executing malicious code attached to trusted code. It was most important
to be able to detect more viruses than your competitor. Simple rules
like only getting programs from trusted sources - and submitting them to
scanning (trust, yet verify) was as good a first line as you could get -
not much need for the all too common foistware removal applications.
Now, with "on-access" general malware scanning it is a last ditch effort
to intercede on the user's behalf while enabling the user to be
oblivious to safe practices. Many other kinds of antimalware are not
strictly preventative in nature, but require the malware be installed
(to identify it) and is geared toward removal. Users no longer feel any
need to refrain from executing random malware.

So, a last ditch effort on the one hand, and a post installation removal
on the other hand, I can't agree that it is a first line of defense
anymore.

Education is the *best* first line of defense - but the antimalware
industry may have given up on the pipedream that it is even possible.
The OS software developers have already started to *enforce* certain
good practices - much to the irritation of both the users and some of
the 'OS compatible software' developers.

true, but that is also why people have an antivirus scanner and a malware
scanner. whether the AV has malware scanning capabilities or not, I still use
both. no program is going to be 100% because there are new things that
develop all the time. I have run an antivirus program and ad aware for years.
ad aware catches what the AV doesn't.

Education is the *best* first line of defense - but the antimalwareTrue, but it all boils down to the user. anyone at any given time can land
on a malicious link somewhere, but without any line of protection at all.how
do you know when something has entered the system or not? it is just as
important to have that as it is to keep an operating system patched. I have
had viruses many times before. but my programs have tracked them before they
did any real damage.
--
Four Generations Of Trust And Betrayal...One Legacy

Skywolfe


"FromTheRafters" wrote:

In early December of 2008 Microsoft announced the development on an antivirus
product code named "Morro", officially titled Microsoft Security Essentials.

The Freeware program will replace both Windows Defender and Windows Live
OneCare.

OneCare will be discontinued by the end of June 2009 and Windows Defender
will be discontinued by the end of summer 2009.

Current users will continue to get the latest Malware definition files
until the end of the summer.


http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...r/default.mspx
-=-

http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/Win...48a151033.mspx
-=-


Ǝиçεl
◕‿◕
-=-

-=-