I didn't and would not suggest waiting either. I was only making a comment on the fact there are issues within certain context that I would hope are fixed in the next version. Thanks though for letting me know about the push backs on the the releases.
Jon On Thu, Apr 9, 2009 at 6:38 AM, Steve Burkett <[email protected]>wrote: > Don’t wait on the next version coming out, they pushed the Client > Security 2.0 back to first half of 2010 the other day, and the Forefront > Server Security for Exchange back to the fourth quarter of 2009. > > > > > http://blogs.technet.com/forefront/archive/2009/04/03/schedule-update-for-forefront-stirling.aspx > > > > Quite like how the ForeFront for Exchange and Sharepoint packages can run > anti-virus engines from Kaspersky Labs, CA and Sophos so you could be quite > covered by the different definitions from various manufacturers. > > > > Microsoft OneCare was the consumer product they’re ditching. > > > > > > *From:* Jon Harris [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* 09 April 2009 10:11 > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: Forefront? > > > > Some if the things you need to watch out for are whether you are putting it > on Windows 2008 or 2003, do you own SQL 2005 or 2008, are you using any of > the System Center products. Like John the EDU discount just about kills any > price competition. I use it here for that reason. I have had to touch it > rarely, it works, it does seem to catch bugs, but it is not simple to setup > if you have any of the mixture I mentioned to watch out for. There is a new > version coming out that I hope will remove many of the issues I had. It > does need a full SQL to install and function correctly but it can be > installed without the management portion but why do that. Considering how > hard NOD32 was to set up and get running Forefront could be done by a > teenager. Considering just the install of the management portion NOD beat > on the install but getting the configuration correct was much easier to do > on Forefront. > > > > If you have any specific questions I will try to help but there are others > using it that I know have more experience than me on the llist. > > > > Jon > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 8:40 PM, John Hornbuckle < > [email protected]> wrote: > > We use it, but I’m hardly an expert on it. To be honest, I don’t mess with > it much. Which I guess could be viewed as a good thing! J > > > > I like that it’s integrated with AD and WSUS—pushing it down to clients and > keeping it updated is simple. > > > > I don’t really know how to judge its efficacy. We’ve not had any known > malware infections while using it, but we also keep our workstations locked > pretty tight (e.g., users don’t have admin rights and with many accounts we > restrict executables using GPO). > > > > We like the pricing; as an educational entity, we get deep discounts from > Microsoft. > > > > > > > > > > John Hornbuckle > > MIS Department > > Taylor County School District > > www.taylor.k12.fl.us > > > > > > > > *From:* Bill Lambert [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 08, 2009 7:12 PM > > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > > *Subject:* Forefront? > > > > Hello all… > > > > I’m tired of using multiple products to protect desktops and email from > spam, viruses and spyware. I’ve taken a look at the MS Forefront product > line and it looks like a pretty good solution. I have Exchange 2003 and XP > clients. > > > > Can anyone comment on its effectiveness, installation, management and use > both at the admin and user levels? > > > > Any other recommendations are welcome as well. > > > > Thanks. > > > > *Bill Lambert* > > *Windows System Administrator* > > *Concuity* > > *A healthcare division of Trintech, Inc. * > > *Phone 847-941-9206* > > *Fax 847-465-9147* > > ** > > *NASDAQ: TTPA* > > *The information contained in this e-mail message, including any attached > files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the > recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or > authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby notified > that you have received this communication in error and that any review, > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact > the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. Thank you. > * > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > === > STEMCOR CONFIDENTIALITY AND DISCLAIMER NOTICE > This e-mail is intended only for the addressees named in it. The contents > should not be disclosed to any other person nor copies taken. Any views or > opinions presented are solely those of the sender and do not necessarily > represent those of Stemcor unless otherwise specifically stated. Stemcor > does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message nor > responsibility for any change made to it after it was sent by the original > sender. You are advised to carry out a virus check before opening any > attachment as Stemcor does not accept liability for any damage sustained as > a result of any software viruses. You should be aware that Stemcor reserves > the right to read incoming and outgoing emails. > === > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
<<image001.gif>>
