The One Care is a member service, so it has your credentials and your account identifier. One Car was made to avoid installing new software as it has a software upate service similar to the windows update. Also, there is a member identifier that should allow you to use the product with Vista if you upgrade your windows XP to Vista. I could not find the marketing materials for the Vista version or if it pre-deployed with Vista or not.
My laptop is Vista capable, so I may upgrade after the proverbial first service pack is released. Teddy On 11/30/06, John C. Bland II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That's not bad for One Care. Think about it...other than geeks, how often > do > people buy new virus software? My mom had Norton's 2001 or 2002 until she > brought her PC down on her last trip. Her virus definitions weren't > updated > because she didn't understand what they were trying to make her pay. So, > old > software and no updated definitions. One Care gets you the updated > software > and definitions all under 1 umbrella fee, right? Not bad. I wonder how > they'll handle One Care v2 costs (have to pay again or auto-update). > > On 11/30/06, Teddy Payne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > One Care has a 90-day free trial and after the trial, the service is > > marketed at $49/year, so about $4 per month. Considering that Symantec > et > > all charge for the live update service after 18 months, you can probably > > break about even. > > > > You can avoid the liveupdate cost by upgrading your software every 18 > > months > > which is not uncommon as you want the most current methodologies to try > at > > least counteract the known viruses available. > > > > One Care as been pretty lightweight thus far. I disliked Symantec in > the > > past as it kept thinking Java was a virus. The notifications for > > applications requesting access to the internet have been non-evasive > > unlike > > Symantec which injects a graphic window to prompt you. If you are in a > > full > > screen application, you can get a rude awakening. > > > > Teddy > > > > > > On 11/30/06, John C. Bland II <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Ahh...my bad Jacob. Vista is more secure though so I understand what > > Dave > > > and them are saying. If the (virus) app can't do something crazy (edit > > the > > > registry, delete files, etc) without user approval, then the virus is > > dead > > > WITHOUT the users input (which is the biggest problem but at least > they > > > will > > > be notified of potential issues now). > > > > > > No, One Care is separate and costs. > > > > > > On 11/30/06, Munson, Jacob <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > One last thing (Jacob Munson), Vista can't be compared to a > > > > > virus protection > > > > > application (Norton's, etc). That is what they do...manage virus > > > > > definitions. Vista is the OS. If Vista has a hole, MSFT will > > > > > fix it. If a > > > > > new virus comes out, MSFT will update One Care's virus > > > > > definitions (a virus > > > > > protecting program). > > > > > > > > I think you got confused, John. I was NOT comparing Vista to Virus > > > > protection, but that is what Microsoft and Dave were doing, but > > stating > > > > that you DON'T need virus protection with Vista. Their argument was > > > > that Vista is strong enough to protect against ALL future virus > > attacks, > > > > and therefore antivirus software is redundant and unnecessary. I > > > > strongly disagree, and from what you said, I think you and I are on > > the > > > > same page here. Now, was Microsoft including One Care in their > > blanket > > > > statement that Vista won't need virus protection? I don't > > know. Maybe > > > > not, and their whole point was that you don't need /3rd party/ virus > > > > protection. But I thought I heard somewhere that Microsoft is not > > going > > > > to include their virus scanner with Vista by default? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > This transmission may contain information that is privileged, > > > confidential > > > > and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not > the > > > > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, > > > copying, > > > > distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including > > any > > > > reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this > > > transmission > > > > in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the > > material > > > in > > > > its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ============================================================================== > > > > "EMF <idahopower.com>" made the previous annotations. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Introducing the Fusion Authority Quarterly Update. 80 pages of hard-hitting, up-to-date ColdFusion information by your peers, delivered to your door four times a year. http://www.fusionauthority.com/quarterly Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/message.cfm/messageid:262293 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Talk/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4
