Hello Mica again & everyone else 05-Nov-2004 21:54, you wrote:
>>> One of such ones is AntiVir (Personal Edition, which is free) I use >> ...OTOH it is very "heavy" on the online updates (I never saw an update > What is "heavy" for a broadband user? I just downloaded newest version > of ~4,5 MB, for some 25 minutes on *dial-up*. Well, if you don't mind - its OK. I wouldn't like it, even though I'm on a DSL. :) The whole update process is a bit uncomfortable. You download the complete installation archive at least twice a month. My AV does all that in the background without my interaction. But it isn't free, so thats the deal maybe. :-) > If I would try to update it "online" it would disconnect me countless > times, or connection will drop in coma, the equal number of times, > without possibility of resuming so I'd probably have to bequeath this > "online" update to my progeny, using such a "method". Yes, their update servers are overloaded very often... which is perfectly understandable because they preserve their bandwidth for their paying home & business users. > And above all, I would have firstly to *provide* some progeny. You must > admit, therefore, that what you subtly foreshadow has no all pros and > cons modestly equilibrated. (Today, we are string walkers.) My expectations are different that yours, thats all. I want easy & slim automatic updates without wading into the depths of the program, activating some scheduler & adding an event to it to get them automatically first place, and all that... it must be easy for the end user. You're an experienced end-user and you don't care to be bothered by long downloads and manual updates. Thats OK, but there's others who don't think like you. >>> There are plenty of good AV programs >> Actually, there are not. :) Usually less than 50% of tested AV software >> reach 100% detection rate... > I wholelungsly suspect that even ONE AV on this beautiful world in this > part of galaxy can do that. What we read in newspapers mainly does not > exist. So you rely on vague statements like "there are plenty of good AV programs" made on some mailing list? I prefer programs to be tested in an equal environment... that environment may be different with each test, but it shows performers and non-performers. > "Encrypted channels"? What's that? Teach me. Please. (: Using an SSL-encrypted POP3 or IMAP connection to your mailserver for security and/or privacy reasons. > Btw, once a single message is in a message base (files TBB) no AV will be > able to recognize any virus, since all of them (if attachments are > stored in same file) are then in plain text format. (-; Catch-22. Actually, it would be pretty bad for a virus scanner to not recognize base64 or uu-encoded inline attachments in a message(base). Most do. -- Best regards, Alexander (http://www.neurowerx.de - ICQ 238153981) using TB! v3.0.2.4 Rush on Windows XP Pro Service Pack 2 Deliplayer2 is playing: "Impossible Lands" by Entheogenic from the album '3D Vision Relax Module 01' ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
