Products that aren't designed for Windows XP or Windows 2000

Anti-Windows Catalog

We practice what we preach at Pan-Am Internet Services

Search Products By:


No Vista-Certified Viruses?

Written by Gordon Fecyk, 3/2/2009

Vista was "not really ready" according to F-Secure's Mikko Hypponen.

It was a "dangerous conflict of interest" according to Symantec's John Thompson.

It was "completely unrealistic" according to McAfee's George Samenuk.

Two years after the fact, their comparable silence is deafening.

I MADE A BOLD CLAIM IN JANUARY that you could not find a list of viruses for Windows Vista since Vista's release in January 2007. One month later, and so far no one refuted that claim.

And no, Downadup, Conficker, etc don't count because they did not target Vista specifically. But I digress.

I was so certain that someone out there would produce a list of Vista viruses, and make me look like an idiot. Desperate for that list, I went to a renowned anti-virus critic. I believed if anyone would have an honest list of viruses targeted at Windows Vista, Rob Rosenberger at Vmyths would have it.

Alas, not even my instructor-messiah enlightened me. Or did he?


WE ONLY SEE WHAT THE VENDORS WANT US TO SEE, my teacher reminds me.

Anti-virus firms spouted claims of "nine million Downadup infections" while they gave away laptop stickers and enlisted beta testers, but they are strangely silent about the security threats targeted at Vista as of late.

Compare this silence toward Vista in 2009 to their noise in 2007:

Symantec's chief executive has lambasted Microsoft for a dangerous conflict of interest as both the provider of an operating system and seller of software designed to secure its users. John Thompson effectively blamed Microsoft for damaging consumers' confidence in the internet by going it alone and providing its own security for Windows Vista.

Anyone really in the know in PC security would tell Symantec's Thompson is scared of Microsoft. He blames them for damaging consumers' confidence in Symantec. Think about that for a moment.


MICROSOFT URGED CUSTOMERS FOR YEARS to use anti-virus software to protect their PCs, but the computer security industry's focus on profit over protection forced Microsoft's hand. Customers wanted a secure Microsoft operating system, and when Microsoft delivered, computer security firms got uppity.

I don't make the claim of profit over protection lightly. The Addictive Update Model is the mainstay of the anti-virus industry. Computer security firms could easily sell us before-the-fact products, but for various reasons they choose not to.

But that was 2007. Vista was "not really ready" according to F-Secure's Mikko Hypponen. It was a "dangerous conflict of interest" according to Symantec's John Thompson. It was "completely unrealistic" according to McAfee's George Samenuk. Two years after the fact, their comparable silence is deafening.

Any one of these gentlemen could produce the list I wanted to see, and make me look like an idiot. After two years, they don't have it.

Either that, or they're all too scared to admit it.

Related Links:

Editor Log On:
Sign up to get an editor account.

Username:

Password:

[Catalog Home]


Resources:

Links

Downloads

Product Roundups

What is the Anti-Windows Catalog?

Help for New Editors

Frequently Asked Questions


Recently Edited Categories:

Media, Video

Game, Role Play

Scanner, ID Cards

Hospitality

Network Support

Browse All Categories


Recent Commentaries:

The devil you know, versus the Adobe you don't

Paying for things we get for free?

Jump! Jump! Jump! Jump! Or, Windows 8: Get Over It

Don't Fear the Start Screen

Choose Safe Computing or have it chosen for you

Browse All Commentaries


Pan-Am Home Page Valid HTML 4.01! All trademarks are property of their respective owners.