| Author |
Is Vista a virus? |
Dups!
Joined: Sep 24, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: GMT +2
PM |
@Paul101
Thanks, I'll look into that.
@QVGA
I had a look at Symantec but I would still prefer Kaspersky between the two.
Anything different or better about Symantec in relation to Kaspersky?
Thanks.
_________________
 GH688, MC 6000 DeskTop Charger, R320s, R600s.  P910i.
Motorola v8.
[ This Message was edited by: EMS06 on 2008-05-07 14:48 ] |
|
|
sadeghi85
Joined: Oct 13, 2007
Posts: 341
PM |
IMO KIS is the best, a good Firewall and a good Antivirus in one product. |
arien617
Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Posts: > 500
PM |
On 2008-05-07 09:57:40, QVGA wrote:
If MAC was so much better people would use it, but they dont.
Because they don't make cheap machines... people who can afford to go Mac, do so. Unless they're hardcore Windoze fans...
|
QVGA
Joined: May 23, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: Pakistan
PM, WWW
|
On 2008-05-07 16:58:56, arien617 wrote:
On 2008-05-07 09:57:40, QVGA wrote:
If MAC was so much better people would use it, but they dont.
Because they don't make cheap machines... people who can afford to go Mac, do so. Unless they're hardcore Windoze fans...
There are more PCs over 2000$ than there are MACS. I dont have the figures to support that, but i know that its a fact.
|
whizkidd
Joined: May 14, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: India
PM, WWW
|
Well, its still open for debate on which is the better Os of the two. One of the reasons Windows is so popular is because people had "choice". Its simple: To use Mac, you ought to purchase a Mac! At the same time, with windows, you can assembla 100 dollar system and still install Windows. MAC buffs will say "Hey, we can still dual boot with XP on a Mac!" but hell, you still need to purchase a Mac! Its like purchasing a million dollar home just to enjoy the 10000 dollar swimming pool! If you give the consumers a choice, even an inferior product will do better. That by no means imply that Windows is inferior. Vista is a quite capable OS IMHO!
T230 >> T610 >> Ngage QD >> N73 >> N85 >> Omnia HD >> And countless other review units |
kenoby
Joined: Dec 17, 2007
Posts: 407
From: 404
PM |
On 2008-05-07 15:46:52, EMS06 wrote:
@Paul101
Thanks, I'll look into that.
@QVGA
I had a look at Symantec but I would still prefer Kaspersky between the two.
Anything different or better about Symantec in relation to Kaspersky?
Thanks.
_________________
GH688, MC 6000 DeskTop Charger, R320s, R600s. P910i.
Motorola v8.
[ This Message was edited by: EMS06 on 2008-05-07 14:48 ]
You could give it a try for a month, NOD32. It is an 100% protection.
As far as it goes for KAV and SYM, they are both good but system hoggers. With NOD you get 1st line defense for less money and without slowing down the system.
Look here for some better arguments:
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=vendors
|
Dups!
Joined: Sep 24, 2006
Posts: > 500
From: GMT +2
PM |
@kenoby
Thanks so much for that link. Very useful, appreciated. |
NightBlade
Joined: Jul 29, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: Nessebar, Bulgaria
PM |
yeah, NOD32 is really great. |
Trev1982
Joined: Mar 07, 2007
Posts: > 500
From: 192.168.0.6
PM |
i cant believe this is still ongoing, and secondly i cant believe how much you rip windoze to pieces paul and now your wanting vista lol
BB 8120 |
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
Open Office is fine as apps go, but the compatibility between Open Office and MS Office is over rated. If you need to regularly view word documents as they were meant to be viewed, Open Office doesn't cut it.
In business I come up against this a lot. Home users who have convinced their boss of the advantages of open source, have put Open Office on all the computers in the office, then for the next 6 months users complain bitterly about not being able to view MS Office documents properly. One by one the machines get converted back to MS Office, as users demand something that allows them to exchange documents with customers and business associates from other businesses who use MS Office.
In one case I inherited a customer whose previous tech had installed the whole office with new machines pre-installed with Open Office. In the end the customer had to replace all the Open Office with MS Office. They had to pay full retail cost of MS Office, since they had missed the opportunity to pay OEM pricing when they bought the machines with Open Office instead of MS Office. It ended up costing them about $4000 more than it would have had they purchased the machines with MS Office pre-installed.
I know that it sucks that MS Office has become a proxy Office Suite standard, but in lieu of any real Office Document industry standards, business has to rely on the most used Office suite, which happens to be MS Office.
|
kenoby
Joined: Dec 17, 2007
Posts: 407
From: 404
PM |
On 2008-05-07 22:42:07, EMS06 wrote:
@kenoby
Thanks so much for that link. Very useful, appreciated.
Glad you found it useful. Cheers!
|
max_wedge
Joined: Aug 29, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: Australia
PM, WWW
|
I'll say this, if Vista IS a virus, it's not a very effective one. Going by the ongoing business use of Windows XP, Vista isn't speading that fast 
I think once another year or two has passed the compatibility issues will have mostly been addressed and businesses will start taking up Vista with gusto.
tbh there is nothing wrong with vista running on a domain other than if you need to run some business software that is incompatible. If you have no such software in the organisation and aren't expecting any, it's feasible to use Vista.
|
|
|
Posted: 2008-05-07 15:46
