It's called backwards compatibility. No one is suggesting that their previous security model was fine, but old sins die hard.
That's a major lesson in trying to do things right the first time. -ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker Sent from my Motorola Droid On Apr 28, 2010 11:28 AM, "John Aldrich" <[email protected]> wrote: While it's a nice debate, there's really no way to prove which is better. However, let me ask you this, Steven: If the Microsoft security model is so good, why did it take them so long to make it harder to run as a local admin by default? -----Original Message----- From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:20 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV I'm not sure how you draw the conclusion that it probably wouldn't be as bad. I'd also suggest that... > From: Carl Houseman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:13 AM > To:... > I started to reply to that remark too, then I had a little debate with myself > whether I could ma... > -----Original Message----- > From: Steven M. Caesare [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 11:00 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: RE: WTF? Fake AV ... ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
