News Symantec says API is not enough

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Da Dego, 18 Oct 2006.

  1. Da Dego

    Da Dego Brett Thomas

    Joined:
    17 Aug 2004
    Posts:
    3,913
    Likes Received:
    1
  2. DougEdey

    DougEdey I pwn all your storage

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2005
    Posts:
    13,933
    Likes Received:
    33
    So its not the API which isn't enough, its just coming too late.

    So they're bitching that they can't hack into Vista to apply the patches? Thats good news to me.
     
  3. Darkedge

    Darkedge Minimodder

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    363
    Likes Received:
    0
    symantec bitching? well hopefully that'll mean they won't release yet another bloated, resource hungry, buggy and inefectual security suite.
    The amount of machines I've actually fixed by removing this software and installing other products is ridiculous
     
  4. r4tch3t

    r4tch3t hmmmm....

    Joined:
    17 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    3,166
    Likes Received:
    48
    I agree, MS has tried to make it easy for the consumer by inclueding everything to make thier OS work properly, Symantec says no you can't do that, we won't have anything to fix. Let the hackers in so we can clean up after you sloppy coding.
     
  5. Laitainion

    Laitainion What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    16 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    Absolutely, I also find it ironic that the 2 companies complaining (ie. mcafee and norton) are also a) the 2 with the biggest mind share amongst the general public and b) is most ridiculed by people that actually know what they're doing. Kaspersky, who seem to be pretty popular with techies around the world although I've never used it, iirc have actually backed Microsoft up on this one and bang on I think. No software should require the ability to modify the kernel to run. So let Symantec bitch all they want, I will definitely never buy one of their products ever again (the problems I've had with IS 2006, jesus...).
     
  6. Tyinsar

    Tyinsar 6 screens 1 card since Nov 17 2007

    Joined:
    26 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    2,287
    Likes Received:
    28
    I think they mean: "we will have been unable to charge customers"

    True :thumb:

    [Off Topic]
    I see no need to bring him into it. If you are not a believer then you are simply being offensive. Please stop it.
    [/Off Topic]
     
  7. Lazarus Dark

    Lazarus Dark Minimodder

    Joined:
    14 Apr 2006
    Posts:
    360
    Likes Received:
    0
    "If our idiots can break it, it's just plain not safe."
    lol

    Yep. My mom bought a walmart computer and I never looked at it untill a year later when she was having a problem. The main fix: remove the factory included norton and install avast. viola! instantly faster and more responsive, less crashes. I didn't even notice much improvement after defrag and spyware removal.
     
  8. Firehed

    Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match.

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    12,574
    Likes Received:
    16
    Okay, so Symantec is taking the RIAA tactic of taking legal action instead of fixing their business model. Goooooood. Idiots.

    "Ignore security on your upcoming, long-overdue OS so we can keep our crapp^H^H^H^H^Hexcellent company in business, dammit!"
     
  9. Warrior_Rocker

    Warrior_Rocker Holder of the sacred iron

    Joined:
    26 Jun 2005
    Posts:
    938
    Likes Received:
    1
    Quickly becoming another "I believe the Antivirus I use is better so all the others suck" thread. In all truth each have their own niche or what they are better at. If you have found out one works better for you great. Although the free and open source community is an impressive one it is clear that Symantec and McAffee are a large market share.

    Question really is, are any other companies reporting the same problems with interfacing the virus protection into vista, or is it that symantec and mcaffee are finding the problems first. Truthfully until we see the success and/or failure of other vendors it will not be quite as clear.

    What is more important is microsoft's alleged creation of proprietary software to allow only the protection the operating system and/or future upgrades and other software packages licensed by microsoft to run properly. Microsoft pushed the security center software on the world with the sp2 update for XP. If anyone did not see microsoft building their own antivirus and spyware protection then you must have lived under a rock, or owned a mac. Microsoft not too long ago released their own anti-spyware software not too long ago. Anti-virus is one of the few markets microsoft has no part in. Although microsoft chose to just buy out another company and its software to produce theirs (funny how that works)

    Lets face it. Microsoft wants you to believe you will never need to install other products to patch/modifiy/control the os to make it run properly. With vista and the new API's Microsoft is moving one step closer.
     
  10. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    Hi,

    Once again, once again... early adopters beware.

    It's reasonable to suppose that XP will be supported for years to come. Only recently did 98 cease to be really viable. If you're one of those desperate, gasping, panting fashion-followers who'll put up with all this irksomeness to have the latest thing for the sake of having the latest thing, you deserve everything you get.

    I suspect saner individuals will take the long view and relax for eighteen months or so until they get it sorted.

    You never, ever, ever buy version one of software.

    Phil
     
  11. Cthippo

    Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

    Joined:
    7 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    102
    THis has all the makings of a potential disaster for MS. First off, Vista is going to have holes, that's a given. MS will try to patch those holes, as it does now, but they have a reputation for being really slow about it and creating more havok with their patches than the original holes caused. Now, instead of having security partners working to fix those holes, those same partners are going to be standing back yelling "THis never would have happened if MS had given us what we wanted".

    The reality is that not much will have changed from a security standpoint, but perception drives reality and the perception amongst the in-duh-viduals out there will be that MS has totally dropped the ball on security.
     
  12. Grinch123456

    Grinch123456 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    9 Aug 2006
    Posts:
    99
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, sort of, but the biggest companies have the worst AV. That's the fact here. The small ones are generally the best, because they're the ones virus makers and so on don't expect to encounter. It's for this reason (and the terrible resource hogging) that McAfee and Norton are bad.
     
  13. seanblee

    seanblee What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    229
    Likes Received:
    1
    What intrigues me is, how come if AVG 7.5 Workstation is working fine here on Vista x64, Symantec and McAffee can't make theirs work without proprietory API access and kernel patching?
     
  14. seanblee

    seanblee What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    229
    Likes Received:
    1
    And if you're daft enough to have been running a 9x OS rather than an NT kernel up until recently, you deserve everything you get!
     
  15. Cthippo

    Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

    Joined:
    7 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    102
    Well, let's see, most of my boxes run ME and none of them have EVER had a problem, so thank you, I think i do deserve what I've gotten; Specifically, years of trouble free operation without the headaches associated with XP.
     
  16. seanblee

    seanblee What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    229
    Likes Received:
    1
    LOL and are any of them actually connected to the Internet?
     
  17. Cthippo

    Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

    Joined:
    7 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    6,783
    Likes Received:
    102
    All of them are. At the moment that's the fileserver and printserver, both of which are on the network and can access the net 24/7.

    The only reason I'm still up at this hour is that I'm sheparding a 2.5 GB transfer over a wireless network (not my own, I'm wired all the way at home) and MS has picked today for their updates so every 10 minutes iI have to tell it NOT to restart so I can finish this stupid file transfer. Right now I'm really hating XP and automatic updates.
     
  18. seanblee

    seanblee What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    17 Jun 2001
    Posts:
    229
    Likes Received:
    1
    A fileserver running ME? Are you serious? You mean you're storing (presumably important) data on FAT32 partitions, and transferring it using an ancient 16bit/32bit TCP/IP stack? Meh, your choice I guess, I just hope you don't get any unexpected power interruptions or anything!

    FWIW, you can reconfigure Automatic Updates via System Properties so that it prompts you before it installs with an 'Updates are ready...' balloon so as not to interrupt your workflow.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page