Allchin says Vista won't need antivirus
Great news, everybody! Windows Vista is so secure it makes antivirus programs obsolete! Er.. well, not exactly. According to BetaNews, Microsoft co-president Jim Allchin told reporters on Wednesday that "[Vista's] new lockdown features are so capable and thorough that he was comfortable with his own seven-year-old son using Vista without antivirus software installed." "My son, seven years old, runs Windows Vista, and, honestly, he doesn't have an antivirus system on his machine," said Allchin. "His machine is locked down with parental controls, he can't download things unless it's to the places that I've said that he could do, and I'm feeling totally confident about that." He did make a concession to hackers, however, saying, "The hackers are getting smarter, there's more at stake, and so there's just no way for us to say that some perfection has been achieved. But I can say, knowing what I know now, I feel very confident." He also said he believes Vista is "the most secure system available."I don't even know where to start, so I leave it to you, faithful readers, to pick it up in the comments.












Comments
19
Subscribe to commentsTushNov 10th 2006 3:39PM
Oh, secure like the Xbox360... right?
WoodwaterNov 10th 2006 3:42PM
"It's hard for a man to understand something if his salary depends on him not understanding it."
:D
Gardiner WestboundNov 10th 2006 3:59PM
Like I believe that with Microsoft's track record for buggy software!
ScottieNov 10th 2006 7:41PM
OS X is definitely more secure than Vista. I'd never trust a 7-year-old with a Microsoft product.
Michael CicconiNov 10th 2006 4:45PM
I believe that anti-virus programs aren't a necessity anyway. I roll without one. And that's just because I'm comfortable with the risk of roaming around - but I'm also smart enough not to install untrusted software and I know how to repair any attacks I do run into.
I find it a little odd and irking that Symantec and the other anti-virus companies have hijacked our minds and made us fear everything that's out there. And how effectively it works ... people pay every year for coverage, when they have relatively little to protect. Backup your documents on a second hard drive, and be prepared to reinstall Windows in the very worst case. That would save you 50 to 100 bucks every year.
(that said - major corporations such as banks and insurance companies have to pay for top-notch protection, but the average person doesn't need his photo albums covered.)
ZurditoNov 11th 2006 11:32AM
That's hilarious... really
Erik BirksNov 10th 2006 8:35PM
Ummmmm, most secure system available? I don't think so! Mac OS X is more secure then Windows could ever dream of being! I know, I use both.
Mosh JahanNov 12th 2006 3:52PM
I too have never installed an anti-virus or spyware tool. If you know the risks and can manage them, then you don't need these tools.
Kevin M.Nov 10th 2006 7:42PM
Defender will help.
But folks:
NO OS IS EVER COMPLETELY SAFE.
Not Windows, not Mac, not Linux. (Linux is my personal fave.)
While using anti-virus on a Mac or Linux setup may be excessive, you should always keep your data safeguarded.
MidnightPlatinumNov 11th 2006 12:07AM
Ha, if you think about it the concept here is SO trivial. OF COURSE the OS is safe if you lock it down so your kid can only go to a few select sites and download virtually nothing. I bet it is safe as hell in the hands of a 7 year old when he can't access anything.
That is, until he finds out daddy's password.
It never takes more than 2 weeks at the absolute most to get a family members/friends password to anything. I know, I was a kid once.
It's funny how much he had to dance and limit comments on it's safety even when full parental controls are on. Makes me feel real "comfortable" too. ;-)
janeyNov 11th 2006 1:07AM
Ha! Not. I will always have my antispyware programs, I will never be that trusting. I hope many aren't.
NigelNov 11th 2006 3:35AM
For those people who do not have the knowledge to put right the harm done when attacked security software is a must.
There are enough completely free options that cost is not an issue.
Try these for starters.
http://wiki.castlecops.com/Roll_your_own_Free_Security_Suite
BobNov 11th 2006 6:59AM
Yes, and the Titanic was unsinkable, too!
stevNov 11th 2006 12:15PM
i think a big reason why OS X doesn't get many viruses is
a.) you can't wreak mass havoc when not as many people use macs
and
b.)virus writers probably feel that owning a mac is punishment enough
ozNov 11th 2006 9:27AM
Bill Gates is a fascist sofware squid and extortionist that hogs or buys out every small time software genius and charges you an abusive amount of money to support his own domination. Vista is now packed with restrictions! it has a multitude of anti pyracy mesures for mp3 and movies that will block your every move, you cant even install it on more than one computer! You have an obligatory online registration and activation form to fill as long as a marriage contract, plus Bill even charges you license fees for running 4 cpus in parralel! the guy is a communist fanatic and extortionist who plots and pays other software companies and vice versa to create incompatibilities and lack of support for other OS and software products to force you into using microsoft software and even force people out of paralel computing! Microsoft has been to court many times for this abusive domination in the sofware world.
Bill Gates is a live one people!! my advice is dont be an assclown! dont feed the rich!
RocketMBANov 11th 2006 9:51AM
Is it just me, or did oz's post reek of gay?
JamesNov 11th 2006 7:23PM
If I may be permitted to wax political here for a moment, I find it pretty rich to see #13 rant on about communists, then bash "the rich" in the same breath. Guess what, "the rich" are those who figure out how the CAPITALIST system works and milk it -- you get rich being either a *good capitalist* or a *bad communist*. This kid is an excellent representative of the caliber of the average MS-basher.
That said, I think: a.) the skeptics have a point -- every designer thinks their product is good because if they could think of a way to compromise it themselves, they'd fix the problem; b.) MS has a point, in that each new version (starting with 2000) makes it easier to created captive-user accounts (which is what almost everybody should be using most of the time anyway), which should really help MS's virus problem; c.) MS *should* be rolling an XP-embedded build to sell (maybe teamed up with eMachines or some other ultra-low-end manufacturer) that boots from read-only media (CD or a write-protected SD-type flash card), can't run code from its hard drive (data/media storage only, sort of doable if everything runs in a .NET sandbox), and has IE, Office Lite (Word and Excel only), and Media Player ONLY installed, and maybe a way to update the OS by burning a new CD from a digitally-signed ISO or something. Give it a Media Center interface, if you like. Make it what WebTV should have been, and can be now that so many people have HDTV. They have everything they need already developed in-house, they just have to market it. It would be unbreakable -- any virus could only last until reboot. My parents and the other several million people who just want a web browser that opens Word documents would eat that kind of thing up with a spoon.
upnorthmanNov 13th 2006 4:29PM
I thought Bill Gates stepped down as chair of microsoft?
He is no longer running it right?
Jim KnottsNov 16th 2006 7:09PM
This guy is an idiot!!!