Vista = Titanic?

[Grasshopper]

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2058010,00.asp

[hkspike]

Given history, usually a good teacher, why would an MS exec make such a rash comment, even if he qualified it?

[Gary]

Vista doesn't need anti-viral software? That's what Jim Allchin, co-president of Microsoft's platforms and services division, said in a recent phone conference on Vista's release to manufacturing (RTM).

How soon will MS be removing all Anti-Virus Programs from their PC's?Allchin's statement is one of the most idiotic I have ever read!

[DeafBug]

Vista doesn't need anti-viral software? That's what Jim Allchin, co-president of Microsoft's platforms and services division, said in a recent phone conference on Vista's release to manufacturing (RTM).

Excuse me? Why did MS then open up the Vista kernal for Symantec and others? Just how long before he puts his foot in his mouth.

[Gary]

He has already backed off and spun his statement.Source

[Guest LilBambi]

Yeah, I know what you mean. I just read Stephen Vaughn Nichols' article after reading both of the articles from BetaNews when they came out originally.Of course the headline was a bit misleading since he was only really talking about his son's computer that was locked down pretty darn tight. But the implication was certainly there.Even so, it was a reckless thing to even imply. There is no proof that in everyday experiences of adults or teens that this would be the least bit advisable, especially in light of the websites that have been infected, the emails that come into people's inboxes, Instant Messaging programs and other GreyNet programs that can lead to danger, and other programs that one could download and install that could also open unknown and undesired doors.And since Windows will continue to be a target, zero day problems would not be caught as they are now without AV (particularly the heuristic checking) and Antispyware protection.That may come someday, but it's certainly not here, nor will it be for some time to come. There have been enough flaws in Vista already found (albeit supposedly fixed) to prove that.

[ThunderRiver]

Security is a big focus of Windows Vista. By having users running as standard user, it already slashes a large amount of attack. The fact that UAC is in place, it certainly makes it harder for malicious codes to execute.In Vista, it is also much harder to run into buffer over-run becuase the likely chance of hitting the same memory address of buffer is next to none. AntiVirus software is still needed. In fact, if you don't install one, Vista will bug you till you do. Perhaps, you guys need to read the actual words from Jimhttp://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsv...e-in-depth.aspx

Edited November 14, 2006 by ThunderRiver

[Gary]

Security is a big focus of Windows Vista. By having users running as standard user, it already slashes a large amount of attack. The fact that UAC is in place, it certainly makes it harder for malicious codes to execute.In Vista, it is also much harder to run into buffer over-run becuase the likely chance of hitting the same memory address of buffer is next to none. AntiVirus software is still needed. In fact, if you don't install one, Vista will bug you till you do. Perhaps, you guys need to read the actual words from Jimhttp://windowsvistablog.com/blogs/windowsv...e-in-depth.aspx

Thanks but I read the actual words before I posted.

[patio]

He must not know his seven year old son 1/2 as much as he knows the OS.

[Marsden11]

Seriously, who cares what one MS employee says? EDIT: Flame bait removed.

Edited November 14, 2006 by LilBambi

[Marsden11]

And he is leaving Microsoft...

[Marsden11]

I don't use any Antivirus products... and haven't for the last 8 years... I make it work!How can that be? If I can do it with Win2K and XP I'll bet I can do it with Vista...

[Guitar Man]

I don't use any Antivirus products... and haven't for the last 8 years... I make it work!

Howzabout letting us know how you accomplish this ? You certainly piqued MY curiosity !

[Marsden11]

I believe Antivirus software attracts all the nasties...I use Outlook 2007 with Exchange Server which strips out all executables from emails.I don't click on links from unknown sources.I don't use any freeware or shareware software programs.I only use MS Defender for any malware based attacks.I can't explain it any more than it just works.Your millage may very...

[ThunderRiver]

And always stay current on Windows Update..

[Peachy]

I actually think Allchin makes sense. Considering that the default setting for Vista will be a completely locked down mode, adding anti-virus software would be redundant and steal system resources. Look at it this way: running Vista in full lockdown mode without anti-virus is probably safer than running Vista/XP in administrator mode with anti-virus software. And with all new Intel-based desktop computers since mid-2005 having XD (eXecute Disable) and AMD even earlier, buffer overflows from malware are stopped dead in their tracks with XP SP2 and Vista.

[Gary]

Well it looks like Vista will be putting Symantec, McAfee and an entire industry out of business. And the band played on.

[Marsden11]

What happened to the 400 million XP desktops still out there?

[mvent2]

I don't use any freeware or shareware software programs.

Are you SERIOUSLY that concerned? All you have to do is get it from a mass download site like CNet's Download.com, that's what I do. The only piece of software I've paid for on my machine is Windows, and I hardly use that anymore. I run a freeware antivirus called Avast, but haven't had a single alert yet.Back on topic, regarding the quote. This isn't the first time such questionable quotations were heard from Microsoft. Haven't Microsoft staff ever heard of humility?"We have no intention of shipping another bloated OS and shoving it down the throats of our users.""The Internet? We are not interested in it.""Microsoft Products are Generally Bug Free.""640 K ought to be enough for anybody.""The Linux environment is more insecure than Microsoft. This is an issue the industry needs to be aware of""Linux is not in the public domain. Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches.""We are going to cut off their [Netscape's] air supply. Everything they're selling, we're going to give away for free."And my favourite from Mister Billy G:"There are people who don't like capitalism, and there are people who don't like PCs, but there's no one who likes the PC who doesn't like Microsoft." Microsoft staff need to think before they speak, especially given their status. Edited November 15, 2006 by mvent2

[Gary]

What happened to the 400 million XP desktops still out there?

The majority of them are using some sort of Virus Programs. And If they upgrade to Vista, most of them will continue using a Virus program. Edited November 15, 2006 by Gary

[James M. Fisher]

The computing public has been so ingrained with the need for a good (and updated) AV program that it might almost feel 'naked' not to have one installed in Vista as well.

[Gary]

The computing public has been so ingrained with the need for a good (and updated) AV program that it might almost feel 'naked' not to have one installed in Vista as well.

Well if MS placed a disclaimer in their EULA stating that NO Virus Protection or Firewall required or MS will be responsible maybe then no one would need a virus program.

[ross549]

That, of course, assumes that normal users are reading the EULA. I would be worried (to say the least) if someone I knew ran any flavor of windows without anti-virus. ;)Adam

[Peachy]

I wouldn't advocate not running AV software if you don't have a firewall, and definitely not running one while in Administrator mode is risky. However, there is one flaw with running AV software in admin mode that people don't often think about. If the AV software has an unpatched vulnerability, it is possible for the system to be compromised because, heck, it's now given the exploited code Admin rights. If you run AV software, it's imperative to not just update the definitions, but the program itself.If you don't want to run AV software, then I would recommend you stick an AV gateway on the network. Just as Marsden11 channels all his email through an Exchange Server, you can easily do the same with a Linux box setup with sendmail/postfix/Scalix and a Spamassassin and AV gateway. This approach is probably the safest because it means you have a dedicated spam/malware/AV filter and only one machine to worry about updating. This is the perfect role for a virtual machine appliance and you can find a number of VMware appliances that do just that. This is also a neat way to reuse an old Pentium that you have lying around. And it can be a headless (no monitor, keyboard, mouse) setup once configured properly. All you need is an ssh login to administer the box.While this solution is not for Joe Sixpack, for computer-savvy Highlanders this could be a cool project, right?

[Guest LilBambi]

Yes, especially uninformed users who are more likely to go places that more informed users would avoid because they would know any better or opening emails that they shouldn't for curiosity's sake rather than just deleting them. They are much more likely to fall prey to the various types of attacks (Phishing, website hacks, clicking on ads, etc.)That kind of knowledge comes with experience, and that takes time.I know some folks that run Windows safely without AV and some without even a firewall, but generally they would never suggest a novice or average user do so. They know the ins and outs where newer users wouldn't.I personally think that with WinXP and previous, this would not be advisable for any user, but particularly for a novice or average user.As far as Vista goes, that remains to be seen. After a year or two of millions of users using Vista, that would likely be a much better time to assess the topic of whether or not Vista truly would make not using an AV viable.Who knows, they may have got it right this time, and it may turn out to be an option for at least some users that use the fully implemented security features.The proof will be whether those security features get in the way so much as to make users feel they need to turn them off to stop being constantly nagged to death in the process, and whether those nags are worth it to users.I have a feeling that many users will be turning off at least some of those features and putting themselves at greater risk by not using an AV software. But again, only time will tell. And consumers won't generally have access to making that assessment for themselves until they start buying new computers with Vista after the first of the year.

I wouldn't advocate not running AV software if you don't have a firewall, and definitely not running one while in Administrator mode is risky. However, there is one flaw with running AV software in admin mode that people don't often think about. If the AV software has an unpatched vulnerability, it is possible for the system to be compromised because, heck, it's now given the exploited code Admin rights. If you run AV software, it's imperative to not just update the definitions, but the program itself.If you don't want to run AV software, then I would recommend you stick an AV gateway on the network. Just as Marsden11 channels all his email through an Exchange Server, you can easily do the same with a Linux box setup with sendmail/postfix/Scalix and a Spamassassin and AV gateway. This approach is probably the safest because it means you have a dedicated spam/malware/AV filter and only one machine to worry about updating. This is the perfect role for a virtual machine appliance and you can find a number of VMware appliances that do just that. This is also a neat way to reuse an old Pentium that you have lying around. And it can be a headless (no monitor, keyboard, mouse) setup once configured properly. All you need is an ssh login to administer the box.While this solution is not for Joe Sixpack, for computer-savvy Highlanders this could be a cool project, right?

Yes, those things would make a difference to be sure.

[Gary]

That, of course, assumes that normal users are reading the EULA. I would be worried (to say the least) if someone I knew ran any flavor of windows without anti-virus. ;)Adam

I would not go online without a Virus Program. To do so would not be prudent. Maybe the next Version of Windows in 2012 will have built-in virus protection.Users that run without it are just adding to the problem.

[Scot]

Folks, I was on the call that BetaNews and SJVN wrote about. Nothing has been more over-trumpeted than this comment by Allchin. It was a comment he made in passing. He wasn't saying everyone should do this.At the end of the call, he also returned to the point and said that between the fact that he uses restrictive parental controls, his child is not using email at all (the main point missing from many of these stories, and the fact that Vista comes with built-in anti-spyware, basically, this is not really a wrong configuration for this very limited way of using Windows.Really, this is all a big ado about nothing.-- Scot

[RandomBox]

... and the fact that Vista comes with built-in anti-spyware... -- Scot

JUST THAT statement along would be enough to scare the daylights out of me >> FULLY knowing that MicroSoft will NEVER be allowed to snuff out the competition (Symantec, et al) in one fell swoop with such a FREEbie. Thus, I can only surmise that their AV offering will be either a hobbled AV or one that is riddled in some new profit scheme, while staying clear from the peering eyes of EU watchdogs (et al)!Maybe the following is a simpleton's version of an analogy but this appears like the hobbled firewall that MicroSoft provides (as another FREEbie) with the current WinXP. I am certain that the WinVista AV business model will be more watered down effort of the present WinXP firefall!MicroSoft opening up the kernel to the AV manufacturers is like the proverbial carrot dangling in front of the horse but only time will tell! If MicroSoft made their built-in WinVista AV better than the current manufacturers' offerings, then I can hear a bunch of ambulance chasers taking MicroSoft to the challenge but post mortem (of Symantec, et al)!This is not to start a flame of MicroSoft or to bash them. Unfortunately, history always appears to have a way of repeating itself... even in the PC market, Poor MicroSoft is wedged between a rock and a hard place in such issues and I am surprised that they have pursued an AV FREEbie this far! They have probably performed their Return-On-Investment trade-offs and figured out a way to rake in some profit, without greatly irking either the competitors or EU/FTC.

[Gary]

Well I have had enough of it. I wiped it off my machine. After is comes out I may upgrade to it but I will not dual boot with it.Edit for spelling

Edited November 23, 2006 by Gary

[DeafBug]

RandomBox,I am sorry but I am getting confused. First you quote Scot on the Anti-Spyware which is called Windows Defender. Originally purchased from a company called Giant. MS integrated that into Vista. But your post seems to focus on ANTI-VIRUS software. MS doesn't do those. Those are two different things.