Kaspersky anti-virus for Mac
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Duncan Kennedy on 25 Apr 2010 07:59 J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk> wrote: > > > Gavin Lawrie <gavin.lawrie(a)2gc.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > It probably won't do any harm, but probably won't do any good either. > > > Not looked at the Kapersky mac software, > > > > I've used Kaspersky ful jternet suite (including 2-way firewall) for > > many years on many Windows boxes. The company support is excellent. I > > use Wirus Barrier on my Macs - OK I *know but I don't want to be the > > first to be screwed by the first Mac virus in the wild and that is > > coming one day soon. > > It doesn't work that way. > First *you must get screwed, > then all others will profit > from the anti-virus software > that is developed from the remains > of your screwed system. > > You are wasting money and time anyway, > I find it remarkable the length people will go to to justify over-priced Macs on the grounds that they are imune from viruses. I had a number of reasons for moving to Mac (OK I bought my first 12 years ago but haaven't used it much - and the other 2 last year) but being imune to viruses was not oneof the reasons. -- duncank
From: David Kennedy on 25 Apr 2010 08:54 Duncan Kennedy wrote: > I find it remarkable the length people will go to to justify over-priced > Macs on the grounds that they are imune from viruses. I had a number of Price doesn't come into the virus equation; as has been said, there are presently no virus attacks jeopardising any Macs and, until there is no anti virus software is worth buying. Regarding price, you get what you pay for, if you compare like for like then yes, you /can/ buy a windows machine slightly cheaper but it will not have the same build quality or the same resale value and will certainly require more maintenance - something rarely factored into these price comparisons... > reasons for moving to Mac (OK I bought my first 12 years ago but > haaven't used it much - and the other 2 last year) but being imune to > viruses was not oneof the reasons. -- David Kennedy http://www.anindianinexile.com
From: J. J. Lodder on 25 Apr 2010 09:31 Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk> wrote: > J. J. Lodder <nospam(a)de-ster.demon.nl> wrote: > > > Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk> wrote: > > > > > Gavin Lawrie <gavin.lawrie(a)2gc.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > > It probably won't do any harm, but probably won't do any good either. > > > > Not looked at the Kapersky mac software, > > > > > > I've used Kaspersky ful jternet suite (including 2-way firewall) for > > > many years on many Windows boxes. The company support is excellent. I > > > use Wirus Barrier on my Macs - OK I *know but I don't want to be the > > > first to be screwed by the first Mac virus in the wild and that is > > > coming one day soon. > > > > It doesn't work that way. > > First *you must get screwed, > > then all others will profit > > from the anti-virus software > > that is developed from the remains > > of your screwed system. > > > > You are wasting money and time anyway, > > > I find it remarkable the length people will go to to justify over-priced > Macs on the grounds that they are imune from viruses. Do you ever read before you react? > I had a number of > reasons for moving to Mac (OK I bought my first 12 years ago but > haaven't used it much - and the other 2 last year) but being imune to > viruses was not oneof the reasons. Also irrelevant to the point discussed above, Jan
From: Duncan Kennedy on 26 Apr 2010 05:02 David Kennedy <davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote: > Duncan Kennedy wrote: > > I find it remarkable the length people will go to to justify over-priced > > Macs on the grounds that they are imune from viruses. I had a number of > > Price doesn't come into the virus equation; as has been said, there are > presently no virus attacks jeopardising any Macs and, until there is no > anti virus software is worth buying. Regarding price, you get what you > pay for, if you compare like for like then yes, you /can/ buy a windows > machine slightly cheaper but it will not have the same build quality or > the same resale value and will certainly require more maintenance - > something rarely factored into these price comparisons... Honestly, I dfon't want to stir up another war. I did believe what you say until I started to see all the reports in this group of failed hardware - some of it very new. And all the problems with the 27in iMac too. I have 9 Windows systems bought in 1990 right up to last year and one had a failed CD drive after 3 years (and several hundred CD Business Card writes.) All are still working. So far my Macs have been good after 9 and 5 months but time will tell. It doesn't look like there is much difference in build quality (I admit I buy from manufacturers with a decent reputation at the time.) Certainly Apple wins on eye-candy but I can get the hard drives and RAM out and in Wndows boxes without resort to suckers and tools to prise them open. And I have no plans to go back to using Windows boxes as the main work machines. duncank
From: Ben Shimmin on 26 Apr 2010 05:21
Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospamottersonbg.couk>: [...] > Honestly, I dfon't want to stir up another war. I did believe what you > say until I started to see all the reports in this group of failed > hardware - some of it very new. And all the problems with the 27in iMac > too. People are more likely to post when they have a problem. (Admittedly it seems like there were widespread problems with the 27" iMac.) b. -- <bas(a)bas.me.uk> <URL:http://bas.me.uk/> `Zombies are defined by behavior and can be "explained" by many handy shortcuts: the supernatural, radiation, a virus, space visitors, secret weapons, a Harvard education and so on.' -- Roger Ebert |