Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Jul 2007 14:38 UTC, submitted by mikemuch
Windows "Way back in November 2006, when Windows Vista went from beta to RTM, Microsoft's Jim Allchin suggested that users might not need an antivirus program, thanks to the new OS's stronger security features. While the statement was subsequently clarified until it lost all its meaning, the question remains: Do Vista users really need an antivirus program running in the background at all times?"
Permalink for comment 256025
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Sensible Computing
by Bink on Tue 17th Jul 2007 15:18 UTC
Member since:

I’ve been using Vista for a few months without any AV software. Then again, prior to Vista I ran Windows 2003 on my desktop with AV software, but I kept the software disabled. Even before Vista I always used a normal user account for everyday tasks, and used Run as to do Administrative functions, so, as the article states, sensible computing goes a very long way here.

Microsoft didn’t invent the concept of using a normal user to perform everyday tasks—UNIX has been doing this for quite a long time—but they might have invented the concept of using an Administrative or equivalent account to perform everyday tasks (and I wonder if they’ve patented this). The “nice” thing about all of this that the “monopoly OS of today” finally respects normal user accounts; I’ve always felt computers and the Internet were too dangerous for the average person to use and Vista might, finally, make some inroads here.

I’ve been virus free for many years now, but I do agree that I’m taking a bit of a risk here and might reconsider. Then again, my BSD box has never had an AV software on it…

Edited 2007-07-17 15:19

Reply Score: 5