Rory Reid

Comments on this post

I totally Agree with your Comment, although i work for a bit of a money grabbing company part time. Many people ask me what is more effective againt viruses, why do i have to keep on spending money on antivirus programs when i can use free ones. My answer is pretty simple, the reason you have to pay for it is becasue there are hundreds of developers working around the clock to make sure you dont get viruses. All those free antivirus programs aren't made by people with lots of money and do this for fun, they are just tight fisted and when they can be bother will try and send out updates to your PC.

Posted by James Hogg on Thu 13 December, 2007 11:07 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Mmmm... cheesecake...

Posted by Rich on Fri 14 December, 2007 12:30 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Hahaha! Please... How can anyone take this seriously?

Posted by Pete on Sun 30 December, 2007 11:43 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Some of the most expensive and respected security appliances base their anti-virus protection on open source applications.

Posted by tim jones on Thu 3 January, 2008 5:06 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Why not make critical arguments rather than use obscure or stereotypical metaphors. Oh well, it's your blog.

Posted by Anonymous on Thu 10 January, 2008 5:59 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I'm all for open source and freeness but when it comes to security I agree I can't afford to experiment and take a risk on someone's goodwill in sending updates. Saying that however - do you know what Anti-virus software Virus writers and hackers usually use? None! They are not dumb enough to be duped into opening an email called "i love you" from a total stranger or go to "paypal.fake.com" etc. So if we are tech savvy enough we shouldn't need to rely on our anti-virus everytime we go online and make an ass of ourselves by downloading "britney's unseen video" or whatever nonsense people get duped into downloading. I still have a commercial anti-virus app but only because I was in the beta and then they practically gave me a years subscription when the beta ended.

Posted by David on Thu 17 January, 2008 9:13 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

"Linux versions of commercial anti-virus applications do exist, but I'm guessing nobody really uses them." Indeed, why let ignorance be a bar to commenting on something? FYI, the last place I worked used Sophos on a Linux mail gateway. Where I work now we host mail across 30 domains for customers on a pair of Linux MXes running Trend.

Posted by alex dekker on Fri 18 January, 2008 4:28 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

"abstinence" from dodgy-looking sites is no way to stay safe. Your computer is open to attack the MINUTE it's connected to the Internet. If you're running windows You NEED an Internet security package.

Posted by Rory Reid (CNET.co.uk) on Thu 24 January, 2008 1:12 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Get a clue dude. Maybe talk to some real security experts. You will find that your opinion on open-source security is not in favor.

Posted by Thor on Sat 2 February, 2008 9:14 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

"chastising hapless consumers for swallowing the industry's lies" Quite... Did you get paid by M$ to write this?

Posted by Anonymous on Sun 27 April, 2008 11:49 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Spot On Rory! - If you're in business (the real world); pay for it. For those who are somewhere else, stick with your open source; you got nothing of any significance on your computers to loose anyway:-)

Posted by John H on Mon 28 April, 2008 11:03 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Ya-ya-ya, you're almost right, there's no comparative between a "pro-bono" and a well-paid person (there's a lot of anger inside of you) ... but, it's impossible a huge company develops a Linux anti virus just to not support it ... I mean, Linux users do exist (loooots) and represents a considerable part of a company's earns.

Posted by Fernando on Tue 27 May, 2008 2:45 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

There are plenty of free non open source anti virus providers. That and if pc format guys say dont visit dubious sites dont get viruses then ill believe them because they have much more expensive equipment and computers to guard.

Posted by John on Wed 16 July, 2008 11:25 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I find it amusing that you can tag comments as offensive or inappropriate, but not the article itself. Whatever the validity of the author's predictions, the delivery is unnecessarily caustic. Cheap shots, each and every one.

Posted by Matt on Mon 25 August, 2008 6:11 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

why do you insist on categorising all the members of the open source community with such stupid meaningless stereotypes? should i be suggesting that you are more likely to steal cars because you're black? no... grow up

Posted by mike on Thu 4 September, 2008 2:33 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

You folks are all stuck inside the box with the lid glued shut. Those of us that can think outside the box can tell you the problem lies in the OS. Apple/Mac didn't need a virus scanner for years while Microjunk was being eaten alive by every snot-nosed punk that thought it was cool to break things that belong to someone else. And no, I am not an apple fan although their OS is far surerior to the Microgarbage I run on my Inhell processor based box. And if the conspiracy theorists have any credibility, then a lot of the viruses are being made by the "engineers" writing the anti-virus software programs. After all, it is easy for them to create their own job security. BTW Rory, the Open Source community may have its fair share of doughnut eating nose-pickers but why would you put more trust in the thieves that are creating the need for their own product.

Posted by Stephenopolus on Tue 9 September, 2008 5:02 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Uh oh, bad, bad, bad... You don´t really understand it so i´ll explain this to you graphically, you see, in my normal computer (laptop) i use ubuntu/debian, i have iptables well configured and, as extra-security i have installed clamav... It haven´t detected any virus yet so i´m happy :) But, my dad's computer is a bit different, it runs windows XP and (the most damagin thing) my 10 years old sister uses it. So you can already see what´s coming, i administer the computer software and all the security stuff. I have installed there comodo firewall (free version) and clamwin, and my father installed norton because he still thinks that it´s usefull (instead of using kaspersky or nod32 which are better). So far clamwin have detected 10 trojans and some other malware and Norton still haven´t found any of them. Oh yeah, you can say: clamwin is just generating false reports. Well, last night i used it and detected one malware, then i went to kaspersky site and made the online scan, just to confirm it. Guess what, kaspersky detected it too, while norton was just saying that there wasn't any viruses. So, you now know what´s the true, clamwin rules, and norton sucks. Clamwin doesn´t rules as much as kaspersky which says you about patches and all that, but still rules >.<, maybe as much as nod32 (or a little less).

Posted by debianusr on Wed 17 September, 2008 7:09 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This is the most unprofessional article I have ever seen written on CNET. I found this article on Google while researching whether the open-source model is ideal for antivirus. I believe in the open-source model (for evidence, see Unix). I did not get one bit of worthwhile information from this article. No specifics, just immature generalizations and pathetic attempts at witless humor. This may be a blog, but being on CNET it should still have at least a certain degree of professionalism and practical value. This is little more than an angry diatribe. I get the impression that the author of this article is beyond shame to have written this in the first place. So I believe the people who should truly be ashamed is CNET, for hiring this idiot in the first place. I'm now going to continue my Google search, having wasted the last 10 minutes of my time on this sorry excuse for an article.

Posted by Kris on Wed 17 September, 2008 10:55 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

The person who wrote this article calls himself a computer expert. Maybe more a geek wanna be I'd say! Let me guess....probably owns a games PC and can't wait for the latest graphics card to come out. Proprietary software is inovative in many ocasions, but it has a major disadvantage. It is not flexible!!!! Some big brains work behind both proprietary and open source software, but the real difference is done by the numbers in this case!!! The amound of brains behind open source software is unlimited, and that makes massive difference!!! I'm not talking about useless burned brain-cells who cannot think....these people have a functional brain who can think in computer code!!! In my experience there is nothing like a well developed open source application, and I use a lot of them instead of paid software. Now as this article base its arguent in anti-virus...I will have to agree that there are some good software you have to pay for. Open source software usually is created when there is need....and by having the AGV free-edition the need is satisfied. And people do not forget the spyware......all the effective anti-spyware software is open source!!!

Posted by George on Tue 23 September, 2008 7:57 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

"Linux users are so deeply oblivious to the dangers of the common virus, and so averse to the concept of actually paying for software, that many simply won't bother." Nonsense, Linux users are far more computer savvy than Windows users. Linux users are also far more educated about computer security as well. Ask almost any typical Windows user what a digital signature is and how to check if a file is digitally signed (or if it's been tampered with) and they will have no clue (or what it means to view/compare/scan a file from outside the OS, ie: with a Kanotix disk). A linux user is far more likely to know. Heck, I can ask just about any computer security question to a Linux vs Windows user (ie: what are ports and how does a firewall block them) and the Linux user is far more likely to know. This computer (and many others) has WinXP with no memory resident antivirus and I've been using Win9X a long time ago for a very long time with no memory resident antivirus. Many techs I've talked to don't have antivirus programs (ie: my MIS teacher and Steve Gibson doesn't use them either) and we simply don't get viruses. I've also used linux with no memory resident antivirus and I never got viruses. The main thing is to keep your operating system patched and updated (be it windows or linux), keep your software patched and updated, be careful what you download and what websites you visit and make sure you are behind hardware firewalls (ie: router and modem). Heck, a Linux user is far more likely to know when his system is acting strange (ie: slow or buggy/crash happy), know when it's time re - format and re - install and have backups so that they don't have to worry about losing data. Don't give me this nonsense that Linux users know nothing about this stuff, they are far more educated about it than Windows users and it's because of their education that they don't need antiviruses so much. Sure, I do have Clamwin on this computer (more of a formality because I hardly ever user it, but just in case I need to scan something) and I do agree that, for a typical Windows user, a commercial antivirus is better (especially if it's for business purposes), but don't tell me that linux users are more ignorant about this stuff than Windows users.

Posted by Bettawrekonize on Thu 25 September, 2008 5:18 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Interesting ... Linux (open source) servers practically run the Internet. Kinda risky for an "open source" product, don't you think??? Imagine an Internet primarily based on Windows servers ...

Posted by tcare on Thu 16 October, 2008 7:35 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Well, I was actually looking for a good open source virus software when I saw this...and I will continue to search for open source virus software for a Mac. This author has used very very poorly by the way, stereotypes of a normal computer "nerd". I wonder how much he got paid by a propietary company to say this crap? A lot of opensource developers do have jobs as software, computer, or electrical engineers. And yes some are high schoolers or college students. Though they normally end up as engineers. When people start do something themselves they normally start to do it better than companies with deadlines, because in the opensource world, its done when its done. Not done when it mostly woks. Plus open source hackers usually tell you what the issues(if any) exist within their program and tell you how to work around them. There are also varius mailing lists (especially for large projects) that you can subscribe to and see actually what is going on with the project, that is if you understand it (doubt this article's author could actually understand anything, as he probably is just a dumb journalist)

Posted by CompE major at CWRU on Fri 17 October, 2008 12:55 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Hey CNET - If I start trolling around saying stupid crap and generally being prejudiced against a group of people can I have a job, too?

Posted by TyphoidHippo on Thu 23 October, 2008 3:28 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Sorry. In my opinion, the Open Source is here to stay. Free applications are getting better and are widely used. As you can see, Apache and PHP are better than Windows/ASP for example. If open source antivirus aren't the best, they can offer a good solution for people who can't afford more expensive software.

Posted by Ed on Thu 23 October, 2008 9:04 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This guy doesn't do his reading assignment.

Posted by Perkin on Sun 16 November, 2008 3:35 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This post is purposefully inflammatory and deragotry. Really? Nose picking jokes? This post's author also pretends to not be aware of the ways that the gnu-linux operating systems are simply superior in security to Winows. Most importantly, the Linux OSes manage to not run programs at administrator levels without annoying UAC.

Posted by elmox on Sun 23 November, 2008 5:30 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This is the most unprofessional article I have seen on CNET. Very bad.

Posted by Roy on Sat 29 November, 2008 5:09 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I was searching for Open Source Antivirus to research them when I came across this ridiculous blog post. The excrement spewed from Rory Reid just took 5 minutes of my life and gave me nothing in return. This is a diatribe of childish name calling and nothing more. If nothing else, Mr. Reid has proven to all who view this post that he is such a poor writer that he offered not one single FACT in the entire post. Mr. Reid you are either extremely ignorant, or you were paid by a for-fee A/V company, wonder which it was? I should be compensated for wasting my time and you should get an education in journalism.

Posted by icantbelieveitsnotbutter on Wed 3 December, 2008 12:17 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I would be glad to explain to you more about Linux and the Open Source community but what could be said to such a pompous fool.

Posted by Shawn on Thu 4 December, 2008 8:24 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Ahh Rory, Rory, Rory.... As you can see by reading all the comments, your article is a piece of crap. By reading it, I actually thought "My mum probably knows more about IT than this guy". You should consider yourself very lucky to have a job at cnet.

Posted by TTcircus on Wed 10 December, 2008 11:11 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Wow, I'm surprise to see CNet put their name on something so inflammatory. You are certainly free to have your opinion, and even if you were right (meaning if I agreed) you most assuredly loose credibility when you stoop to such levels as you have in this blog. Shame on you for categorizing people in such a way. It seems every time we make strides in equality, some neanderthal makes public comments like yours. Remember also, developers who decide to work on software for free have two avenues, writing for the betterment of the world (open source) and writing viruses. Personally I cherish those who choose the high road…a choice I don’t see you making.

Posted by SteveB05 on Thu 11 December, 2008 6:57 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

uh... you're retarded. I doubt you even understand how virus scanners work. and stop being so degrading to people who use linux. rot in hell. oh, and don't worry... be happy =D

Posted by Anonymous on Wed 24 December, 2008 7:12 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

What a TOOL!

Posted by derkaderka on Sun 4 January, 2009 11:42 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Rory, you are a retard. Good luck keeping your job if you haven't been let go already.

Posted by Eric Bechtel on Wed 7 January, 2009 6:33 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Good comments to most. You can see when someone lacks the knowledge of not only IA, but also a clear understanding of proper research techniques. If CNET really pays this guy I am sorry for them. Rory I first would say you should really start your research with no concern of offending a vendor. You have the job. Take a good look the effrots of Metasploit and its community, than look at various commercial vendors that use that research/platform for their products. You may also want to look at the amount of AV vendors that use the OpenSource communities to accomplish their definition updates in conjunction with their own staff. Have fun.

Posted by Anonymous on Mon 12 January, 2009 5:45 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I can only say I'm stunned by this article , I deal every day with virused pc's laptops , each with BIG name virus packages on the , Norton and Mcafee to boot. Still the pc's run slow and fail to do something or other , I have used free software including AVG , Clam ,Antivir etc and would you beleive it they really do catch viri others don't or can't for one update or another bug . Are you not aware that most viruses are written to firstly shutdown all the big gun applications first to then wreak havoc on any pc's . Im no idiot as you are trying to portray the idiots are the folk who pay£50-£100 for software to protect your pc only to find its next to useless in actually catching anything. It was only 4 years ago I tackled Mcafee for the amount of viri our mail servers were being infected after many fiery emails they admitted the bug was that the email scanner only worked with outlook clients !!!! . Needless to say mcafee issue more patches and fixes every week for something broken in the software the have the cheek to call enterprise version ?? Get in the real world

Posted by ritchie rennie on Thu 22 January, 2009 1:22 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Well, I had fun for some time reading this article where 95% (I did not really count) of the posts (including the article) lack any proof or real point. How bad is M$, how heavenly OSS development is, or how irresponsible might be an OSS developer and professional the COTS production lines, how safe Linux is vs Windows and so on... Guys get your brains together! All these are crap. The truth is in the middle and for those who did not notice it, neither the Internet is run by Linux, nor OSS software is "fun" stuff... I can consider though all this talk, as a "discussion for fun", so I will contribute with a saying that I paraphrased quite a long ago: Virus inside, Idiot outside ;-)

Posted by gkakas on Tue 3 February, 2009 12:35 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

"abstinence" from dodgy-looking sites is no way to stay safe. Your computer is open to attack the MINUTE it's connected to the Internet. If you're running windows You NEED an Internet security package. Posted by Rory Reid Rory, I must say I felt like vomiting the MINUTE I started reading your ridiculous article. You NEED to do real research before you bash the technological capacity of an Open Source community you obviously do not belong to, or have the knowledge to understand. 1. I have run Windows boxes w/ 98/2000/XP/Vista for years with no security software and have managed to not have issues with malicious code 2. I have run Centos/Fedora/Ubuntu/DSL/Knoppix boxes with no security & have not had issues with malicious code. These machines have all been on the Internet. Am I just lucky? No, maybe the people you despise know how to use a network's hardware and software properly to prevent problems from happening. Go back to removing radio covers like a fumbling child. That's certainly how you represent yourself in your article.

Posted by Andrew Lilleg on Thu 19 February, 2009 3:56 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

and 3, 2, ........you're cancelled.

Posted by JoeBot the Robot on Sun 1 March, 2009 12:42 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I was researching free anti virus programs when it dawned on me to search if there was an open source program available. I came across this article and read it. Rory seems to have a point then totally blows it with his self righteous article. After reading Rory I feel like I HAVE to download an open source anti virus program out of spite. Call me dumb will ya?? And so thats what Im off to do right now. Im surprised Cnet let this guy affiliate himself with them. Totally unprofessional. Clamwin here I come! Your pic doesnt exactly scream James Bond. If there was a city called Nerdopolis and it had a mayor, that person would look exactly like the dude in your picture.

Posted by Larry on Mon 16 March, 2009 2:38 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Commercial software developers have to create software in order to recieve a paycheck, whilst opern-source developers create software out of their own personal dedication to the open-source model, and their own love of creating software, their own sense of pride in creating it and seeing it being used by as many people as possible. For this reason, and this reason alone, I would have to trust my computer's security to an open source anti-virus created by acts of love and dedication than rather just something slapped together by a bunch of hacks just trying to make a buck. Oh, and btw, clamwin is an excellent program., easily as good as McAfee Kapersky.

Posted by mulberry on Thu 19 March, 2009 3:50 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This sounds like the result of a PEBKAC error: "Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair."

Posted by Angelicus_Malus on Fri 20 March, 2009 2:42 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Good sir, you seem to have a great hate for programmers in general--who, I would note, wrote every bit of the software you used to write and post this article. Some articles are, of course, written simply to express an opinion. But surely an opinion can be couched in a way that does not make its writer look like an idiot?

Posted by Piper on Tue 7 April, 2009 1:39 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Wow, look at that! The article was written in December 2007 and the discussion is still active. I think this was a very smart thing for CNet to let such controversial story through to their reviews site. This guy Rory might not even exist. But people can go on and on for another five years about the open source Vs. not open source dispute, even if the current situation has greatly changed compared to what it was in the end of 2007. But even for 2007, I think, you, Rory, used a few descriptions which every open source programmer would find very offensive. You definitely own an apology to them.

Posted by Peter on Tue 7 April, 2009 2:57 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

I am astonished to hear such blatant ignorance and let's see, how many years have you been using open source operating systems? Listen, I have been using open source OS'es since 2005, I use Mac OS X, Windows and FreeBSD. Every single one of them have antivirus, antimalware, antispam such as spamassassin and so on. I have used AVG for Linux, Clam but I agree that I don't like clam but that is my preference. BitDefender for Unices is probably the best choice if you want an anti virus solution for Linux and I believe they extend that service to the BSDs as well for mail servers. Not only is Open source software not a bunch of tennagers and dirty old guys with over grown facial hair and nose pickers but there are a few Vendors whom take this stuff very seriously and actually put quite a bit of money into it, like Mark Shuttlesworth of Ubuntu for example. He is well to do, well groomed, educated and so on. Where in God's name did you get that information from anyhow, a MS Windows over zealous convention. Easy to sit and pick at people when you don't have a clue but you go do something you love for free all day everyday and see how it is pal. It isn't all fun and game and remember, these people do this without pay and with little reward sometimes. I can say effectively that I have had more than20 infections in the past 9 years and not because I am stupid but because there are pathetic people with coding skills and nothing to do with their lives so they infect people to get a sick kind of notoriety. I have bneen infected using AVG, McAfee, Norton, Symantec Endpoint Protection, and some others too and at no fault of my own so keep that open source bashing to yourself and buy a clue. Who cares if they have coders who are paid. TrendMicro is a big client of iXSystems of California and they are a vendor of open source servers installed with either Linux or FreeBSD based solutions like PCBSD. Hmmm, one of the largest anti virus vendors using non windows computers, lol you crack me up with this man. It's pretty pathetic to listen to peeople like you spout off about this stuff when all you really have is own little outside of the box opinion and next to no real experience with this stuff. Have you ever used these open source solutions to prevent virus and malware infections? Do you even use Linux or one of the BSDs? We can sit around and bash each other to we are blue in the face or better yety, we can shut up, help and teach each other and therefore make things in this world better and stronger. Sorry I disagree with your outlook and keep your infectious Windows box. Soon enough it will be a web based bunch of apps anyhow with a yearly fee or some bs. Good luck with that!

Posted by Anonymous on Fri 17 April, 2009 7:07 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

As long as people are willing to pay for anti-virus and anti-malware software, there will always be an incentive to make viruses and malware.

Posted by Robert on Tue 21 April, 2009 9:37 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Your the idiot if you really think those paid "engineers" (most of whom are in an out source place in India or the like making less an hour then the kid making your big mac) do any better or faster then the actual programmer who's job was shipped to that out source place. Now he has nothing to do but create the virus and then the def for it a few hours later while waiting for the unemployment check to hit the bank. Not to mention you can simply steal the so called better virus defs to use in an open source scanner. BTW do you have a real girlfriend? I'm married and all my open source cohorts have partners to. The reason I ask is you seem to have some sort of block or frustration, maybe you just need to get laid.

Posted by Anonymous on Sat 25 April, 2009 2:12 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

oh - dear... how to loose potential fans. You had me ear for a short while - I had to comment because you need to reflect on your view of the world. From where I am it seems that view is restricted - it is not possible to have such curtailed view and have the ears of the well informed.

Posted by Gwyn on Sat 25 April, 2009 9:46 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Well, the article is from 2007, I give you that. So that means, it is sort of 20 computer years behind. The way the author thinks is so 1990 though. Good luck with finding back your integrity.

Posted by Exa on Fri 8 May, 2009 10:59 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Do not get me wrong, there is no way that I agree with the actual comments that Rory made but, it seems to me that he might have had his tongue pressed firmly into his cheek because, I have to say, that nobody bites like a Linux user. You guys really get out of your tree when someone rattles your branches. It's quite amusing really. What you should really have done is shown some class and just ignored the whole thing which would have been giving it the attention it deserved. There's an old axiom (which I just made up) and it applies here ... 'If you want to fill up a blog, say something nasty about Linux' It never fails.

Posted by Gary O'Connor on Sat 9 May, 2009 1:16 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Every antivirus fails when a new virus reaches the PC. Both Commercial and free... I have been using my PC winth Windows XP/98/Hacintosh multiboot for the past 2 years with out any antivirus. I have never been affected. If you follow some steps, you can hand pick viruses and see with your eyes and you wont need a scanner. You can install an open source one if you want and disable auto scan and use manual when in doubt. Its experience that all it takes.

Posted by Nikhil Mathew on Sat 9 May, 2009 11:30 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Yes that's true even with Com/OS, I have been facing the similar problem since started using my computer back from 2000. Its not that all are rich, 20% of Big companies and rest all fall in SMB segment. Out of which small fishes occupied the current market, do you think those can afford doing justice for both shelling/selling? definitely not. There are freetools, ST, OS tools like Clamwin (notch up for clamav), but if you watch closely the commercial tools offerings for free are only for home users and not for commercial purposes. Not that am against commercial, but look at the open source developers doing good for the SMB's. We need to appraise them by using and providing our feedback....As Robert said, I believe in that too, always there are incentives for viruses.....:)

Posted by Arun S Komandoor on Fri 15 May, 2009 7:29 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Oh, you're just scare-mongering! I just checked openantivirus.org and their most recent signature was 5/30/2004. Have there been any significant viruses since then?

Posted by Loren on Thu 21 May, 2009 3:10 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

How can i reach to u.

Posted by Shahid on Fri 22 May, 2009 3:08 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

who is this dude and who's the idiot that hired him?

Posted by pior on Mon 25 May, 2009 12:10 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Um, does anyone else see the inherent fault in "open source" antivirus? Here's our code! Go write a better virus!

Posted by Anonymous on Thu 28 May, 2009 7:31 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Typical, sooo typical....

Posted by GettinARope on Tue 2 June, 2009 3:03 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Another piece of cracking tech comedy from CNET. Oh, how I love you gibbons. Disclaimer: By reading this, you agree that you, your house, your views, and your property (both real and "intellectual") all now belong to localoptimum. You further agree that electronic disclaimers are a heap of crap, but not before you revoke your own disclaimer that all submitted content becomes the property of CBS whilst simultaneously not accepting any responsibility for the contents of said submission. Terms and conditions apply to interactions with localoptimum. Available on request.

Posted by localoptimum on Sat 6 June, 2009 4:29 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

All antivirus software, commercial and open source, are equally bad, because they have all failed to detect the biggest and most obvious virus of them all - Microsoft Windows!

Posted by dig_this on Wed 17 June, 2009 8:34 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

This is one of the most ridiculous pieces of writing I have ever read. CNet... fire this man.

Posted by Jonathan Puddle on Mon 17 August, 2009 1:18 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Rory, you should be fired immediately. If you are so naive as to think that Linux developers are all archetypal nerds, you have no place writing articles about something as "nerdy" as anti-virus programs. You sound as if your open-source experience stopped when you ejected the Ubuntu live CD in preparation for writing this terrible "article" using Internet Explorer 6 on Windows XP. You're exactly the kind of idiot that perpetuates the virus nonsense in the first place. Did you ever end up getting that 15 million from the prince in Africa? Idiot.

Posted by Jason Miller on Wed 26 August, 2009 7:19 PM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment

Right. The guys who stop viruses are acne-free and moved out long ago. God bless 'em. Who's writing the stuff that these fine upstanding citizens need to react to? More fine upstanding citizens? So acne laden basement dwellers with virtual girlfriends make the code that finds the vulnerabilities in AV programs that sends these guys scrambling, but don't trust anyone that looks like them to figure out how to patch same? Your cheap shot cliches may entertain rubes, but the truth is not as simple as you make it out to be and you do a disservice to your readers claiming it is.

Posted by williamjacobs on Tue 22 September, 2009 1:43 AM

Offensive? Inappropriate? Report this comment