Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 10th Nov 2009 09:31 UTC
Windows Last week, security vendor Sophos published a blog post in which it said that Windows 7 was vulnerable to 8 our of 10 of the most common viruses. Microsoft has responded to these test results, which are a classic case of "scare 'm and they'll fall in line".
Thread beginning with comment 393855
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Sophos is eating shit
by twitterfire on Tue 10th Nov 2009 15:20 UTC
Member since:

I used Windows 7 for almost 6 months now. And you know what? I've seen no virus, no worm, niente, nada.

Sophos is pushing "the panic". They ought to. After all, if everybody is thinking there aren't so much malware treats any more, why are they going to buy Sophos antivirus?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Sophos is eating shit - sophos
by jabbotts on Tue 10th Nov 2009 16:10 in reply to "Sophos is eating shit"
jabbotts Member since:

Sophos sells AV so I'd expect the marketing message "win7 needs AV; and it should be our AV you use".

At the same time, I also don't think six months uninfected somehow disproves the need for AV. I've been running winXP for years without a virus hit; does that mean winXP does not need protective measures too?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Sophos is eating shit
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Tue 10th Nov 2009 18:29 in reply to "Sophos is eating shit"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:

You're kidding right? You. One person has not been infected with any viruses with windows 7. Therefore, it is impossible to get a virus on windows 7? Is that really the conclusion you are drawing?

Uhm... I suppose most viruses are hoaxes because you haven't been infected with them. So how many viruses aren't hoaxes? Just the ones you've been infected with?

There was once upon a time that smart users didn't need anti-virus software. That was before malware writers stepped up their game and found silent vulnerabilities in microsoft products that required no explicit user interaction.

Reply Parent Score: 2