Conspiricy Theory ..

[steve-o]

I was just thinking the other day .. how much those anti-virus providers (McAff, Nort etc) must love those virus-inventors. I mean.. without all of those kids out there with too much time on their hands making all that malware and those trojans to attack our computers, they would be out of business, right? And, if there was a lull, what then? Would they have to hire their own virus-makers to invent new viruses to attack our PCs so that they would be able to stay in business? I mean, really.. are there that many bored kids out there just trying to ruin other peoples lives day after day.. day and night?? I think better of human nature than that. I don't think the same of big business. How is it that large corporations can buy anti-virus software that can "scan" and predict which sites are safe in milliseconds unless they pre-purchase inside information? Just a thought. .
Maybe this is old news to upper-echelon IT people , i dunno..
Or, I could be crazy
-edit- misspelled "conspiracy' .. oh well ..

[dnar]

I have always thought this to be at least partly true.

It's a self licking icecream.

[Internatlaser]

The perfect business model for such companies

Create the Problem
Sell the Solution

Somewhat like Politics

[Jem]

Hi Steve

I think you're on the right lines, and you're not alone in thinking this. In fact, i've thought for many years that what you're suggesting is in some respects true. Sometimes the anti-virus companies are just too quick to come up with a solution...

[Splplus]

Don't forget that when you hit that little scan button you give full permission to scan your entire computer and send all the info on your hard drives they need right to them and no one thinks anything of it. Just gives them a little more info on what you do with your computers.
I haven't used virus scanners for years and my computers stay much more stable. I just keep a clone of my main drive on the shelf with everything set up so if I get a crash I just clone it back to a new drive, All my important files are left on external drives anyway.

[Eidetic]

I believe 100% that it's a scam, and it's why I am now on an Apple computer. None of the downsides to Apple are anywhere near the frustration and constant "pay-to-play" associated with Microsoft products.

[steve-o]

Some good ideas there you guys, thanx! "A self licking icecream" LOL !!! That's a good one Dnar!

[flecom]

I believe 100% that it's a scam, and it's why I am now on an Apple computer. None of the downsides to Apple are anywhere near the frustration and constant "pay-to-play" associated with Microsoft products.

ya ok, good luck with that... get a virus on your apple and then apple's response will just be "what virus? move along.. move along"

I have a mac and they are prone to viruses, they just have not had a large enough footprint for anyone to bother...

i would agree that the AV companies are probably behind a lot of the whole virus problem but then again the best AV right now is Microsoft Security Essentials which is free

[james]

It is a scam. Plain and simple. These days, there are very few infections that literally jump onto your PC while you are doing something that you might think is safe. In almost all cases, malware gets on your PC in the form of a Trojan Horse. That is, it is hidden within some other application that YOU choose to install on your system. There is no software in the world that will tell you that you should not do that.

I fix computers on a regular basis. I'm pretty well known for it and I have repeat customers going back to the mid 90s. When I get a PC that is all buggered up, the first thing I do is remove all of the anti-virus crap. That should tell you just how effective it is.

The root of the problem goes back the the actual meaning of the term "Personal Computer".

Way back when, a computer took up the entire third floor of a building and took a team of 20 people to keep it working. It had many terminals. Anyone who used the computer had to pass some security clearance and had to have a user name and password to log into a terminal. These computers were often referred to as "Main Frames". They had operating systems that either were UNIX or operated much like UNIX. There are two major components that make an operating system; the kernel and the file system. In a UNIX like system the kernel knows how to differentiate everything it does by and for the user. It can multitask with multiple users so that many different people can use the computer all at the same time and each one has the experience that he has his own computer. The file system is designed with ownership and permissions. Everything recorded in the file system; files, directories, links, pipes, etc... is owned by one of the users and each of those things has permissions that designate who can read, write or execute these things based on ownership, membership in a named group, and everyone else on the system.

When 8 bit microprocessors and tiny amounts of RAM became available to "the masses" a thing called the "Personal Computer" came to be. It is basically a computer designed for ONE user. It has no ability to differentiate one user from another or to understand the ownership of anything. All of that was stripped away and the only thing left (simple enough to fit into a tiny box) was the raw ability to execute simple application code. Security was entirely a matter of keeping your PC behind a locked door. Putting a system like this on a network is a total 100% risk.

Think about the number one PC OS. That would be Microsoft DOS. Since they took over the market of the PC OS, Intel and others have done a lot to improve the capabilities of the PC hardware. In 1993, the Intel i386 came out. It had two things that its predecessor did not have. It introduced direct 32-bit memory addressing and task switching! With this CPU, it was possible to create an OS that could provide all of the necessary features of security to qualify as a UNIX-like OS. That is when Linux came into being. There were other commercial systems as well.

To make a long story short. MS has never restructured the core elements of any of their operating systems to comply with the security found on a UNIX system. Every OS they have ever sold is still for the "Personal Computer" concept.

The closest they ever came was with OS/2. Yes. Microsoft created OS/2. IBM bought it from them. Shortly after it was sold, Microsoft rushed Windows 95 to market to crush it. OS/2 is pretty awesome stuff. It can fit right in with all of the other UNIX like systems. Microsft learned a lot from the development of that system. They could see their own undoing within it.

That's the point.

Microsoft has found that the only way they can maintain their place at the top is to be different and not-quite-compatible with the rest of the entire world of computer science.

If they would restructure their way of doing things to be UNIX like, then no one would be stuck using them, because there are so many better UNIX like computer systems out there.

James.

[steve-o]

Great info, James! Thx.
Is it even possible to have a UNIX personal machine, and if so, would email, talking (typing) on this forum (for example) web browsing, hooking your digital camera up and editing photos and everything else we take for granted still work? You know, when you buy a piece of equipment, like an external harddrive or camera, it lists minimum computer requirements, and usually they refer to miscrosoft's operating systems, unfortunately. They will need USB ports too.

Does UNIX or OS/2 support all of this, or is UNIX just for commercial/industrial applications? I would love to get away from microshaft but unfortunately things like ms excel spreadsheets are what is used at my workplace and home and can't be ignored or worked-around.
Is Unix or OS/2 invulnerable to trojan delivery malware, or am I misunderstanding? My level of computer knowlege is just average, so please forgive all the questions. Thanks!