Hello and Welcome to the Internet. May I introduce you to sarcasm. It's the thing that passed over your head when you wrote this. Have a good day.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best AntiVirus for Leopard?
- Thread starter legaleye3000
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hello and Welcome to the Internet. May I introduce you to sarcasm. It's the thing that passed over your head when you wrote this. Have a good day.
Obviously what the first person who posted could have been, and probably was sarcasm. The second post which purported to to defend the theory had no sarcastic overtones.
The only indicator of sarcasm was the ridiculousness of the theory. Anyone who has spent more than 3 minutes in the iPhone forums knows not to presume that the poster is being sarcastic because of the extreme level of stupidity that place seems to harbor. Perhaps it has caused me to lower my guard for these sorts of things.
Obviously what the first person who posted could have been, and probably was sarcasm. The second post which purported to to defend the theory had no sarcastic overtones.
The only indicator of sarcasm was the ridiculousness of the theory. Anyone who has spent more than 3 minutes in the iPhone forums knows not to presume that the poster is being sarcastic because of the extreme level of stupidity that place seems to harbor. Perhaps it has caused me to lower my guard for these sorts of things.
Other then the fact I don't have an iPhone, there are many other reasons I don't visit the iPhone forums. Mainly the reason you just mentioned.
I was being serious.Obviously what the first person who posted could have been, and probably was sarcasm. The second post which purported to to defend the theory had no sarcastic overtones.
The only indicator of sarcasm was the ridiculousness of the theory. Anyone who has spent more than 3 minutes in the iPhone forums knows not to presume that the poster is being sarcastic because of the extreme level of stupidity that place seems to harbor. Perhaps it has caused me to lower my guard for these sorts of things.
http://www.google.com/search?q=dual core run antivirus
Being able to run an antivirus in the background while doing other work is touted as a benefit of going dual core.
*shrug*
I'd like to see a list of all known viruses that affect 10.4 and 10.5 before I decide whether AV is necessary. If all that exists is this OSX.RSPlug.A Trojan then I'm not worried.
CERTAINLY having a dual core machine is beneficial in that it provides more processing power for the virus scanner. No one would argue that.
The original proponent of the theory, assuming he wasn't being sarcastic, seemed to suggest that accommodating virus scanners was the reason that Intel continues to innovate. In other words, in a world without viruses, Intel wouldn't be innovating as fast. That's specifically what I was taking objection to.
I don't think that was his implication at all... but maybe I am just inferring it differently. I took him to be saying "As a selling point for Dual Core CPUs, they are touting the ability to run the AV on a separate core!" not "Intel is making Dual Core CPUs so people can run AV on a separate core"
But that is just my understanding.
ok here you go
honestly, there is no need for an anti virus, the leopard so called "virus" was much hyped, like was said it required you to enter your admin password. that is like giving me physical access to your computer, and giving me your username and password. Then hoping an AV will protect you from me.
You will be fine without an AV...
Dude... he was kidding.
That is easily the most dense response I've seen on a forum. Congratulations.
Heh... except that if you had read past that post you'd realize that he (admitted) that he wasn't kidding.
Then there was some clarification as to what we all meant.
Nice job not reading the full thread before responding, though.
it's a trick question. the best AV for Leopard is no AV. Less resources tied up by useless programs.
Please tell me you are kidding me and do not believe this. It is fairly easy for a computer to get infected and not leave any signed that it has a problem. The worm runs in the back ground sucking so little system resources that it will go un noticed. Just quietly sending out data make sure there are no outward effects.
Running windows with out a Virus is like having unprotected sex. Sure you can do things to help reduced the chances of dealing getting some one pregnant beyond that.
An example is some one I knew said the exact same thing that you did about how it easy to advoid viruses and problem with windows by knowing how to not get them. He had no really sign his computer had a problem and the only reason he installed AV software was to prove a point. Well needless to say he had quite a few little "viruses" on his computer.
On my windows computer I am running Symantec Antivirus 10.1 corporate edition (one of the best one AV softwares out there) yeah I have it do 1 weekly scan at like 4am or so and then it will scan all files I download.
On a mac we already seen the first trojan and a few modified version of it hit the web. Most things out there are trojans even for windows AV software is great at catching them. Mostly just make sure all files you download get automatically scanned and it should never be an issue.
You do not need anti-virus software. I have been on a Mac since my first one purchased in 1984. I have used AOL (can't remember original name), Compuserve, the internet when Al Gore was getting things going originally, and many other online services. Used HotLine, Carracho, LimeWire, and Azureus. I have visited tens of thousand of sites and downloaded just as many files.
I have never had a virus on my computers, save your money, you don't need it.
I have never had a virus on my computers, save your money, you don't need it.