Anti-malware is Anti-M$

Even if M$ lightened its software to the point where it ran well on any hardware, the burden of having to also run anti-malware on the machine sniffing every file transfer and access prevents that other OS from M$ from being competitive with GNU/Linux. Users are switching off anti-malware to improve the performance of their PCs temporarily until the malware takes over. Perhaps they have figured out how to backup and restore their file-systems.

About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Anti-malware is Anti-M$

  1. A firewall, while useful, is actually of limited value–and avoiding going to “bad” sites does no good if the bad sites come to you. Recently, a friend of mine who has decent security (a well-known, fully-up-to-date commercial anti-virus/anti-spyware software suite) left the room. When he came back, he was infected. It turns out that the high-profile commercial website he had been viewing had picked up a fake banner ad–when the site displayed that ad in rotation, it injected a Trojan into his system and his goose was cooked, on the spot. Microsoft Windows is an insecure mess and always will be.

  2. Richard Chapman says:

    I skipped the power intensive hardware and went straight to running my Linux in a regular machine. That decision also set me up nicely to completely forgo Outlook and IE. My culture tells me to buy a new computer every 3 to 4 years. Why? Certainly not for my benefit. I’m still productive and happy using the same one I bought back in 2003. I’m what you’d call a “sophisticated” user. I pay attention to what works and what doesn’t work. I avoid software that doesn’t work.

  3. Ray says:

    “99% blockage of malware is not nearly good enough. There are millions of malwares out there and many do not require any action on the part of users.”

    Well, if you use a firewall, you can block 99.9% of malware, as most of them would try to enter using a random port.

  4. oldman says:

    “99% blockage of malware is not nearly good enough. There are millions of malwares out there and many do not require any action on the part of users.”

    And yet neither I nor anyone who I have instructed has gotten an infection, and this was with windows xp. with windows 7 it is even easier to do. Perhaps we are unique, but the fact that we can be successful, proved that the risk can be reduced significantly, to the point where the forklift upgrade to a FOSS/Linux desktop does not even need to be considered.

  5. 99% blockage of malware is not nearly good enough. There are millions of malwares out there and many do not require any action on the part of users.

  6. oldman says:

    “Perhaps they have figured out how to backup and restore their file-systems.”

    Check your premises Pog.

    Perhaps they have figured out how to avoid 99% of malware. It really isn’t that hard you know.

    – Replace IE and Outlook with Firefox and Thunderbird.
    – Stay aware from Warez porn and gambling sites as well as file sharing clients.

    – Learn not to open any emails that you don’t recognize.

    And

    For the more sophisticated users with a bit more power (Core 2 duo with 2Gb RAM) who want to go to these places, keep around a Linux virtual machine to browse with when you walk on the wild side of the internet.

    None of my desktops ran anti malwars software, and none of there had any infections (I checked periodically with special disks) Until recently when I was mandated to add antivirus software, So I know that it can be done.

Leave a Reply