How many here, who have XP with SP2, use its builtin firewall? I've tested it at a couple of sites, which are run for that purpose, and it seems to protect my system quite well, well enough for me that is.

Wow, someone likes SP2's firewall--you're not alone, it works fine for me too.

For those of you who think XP's built-in firewall "seems to work well for me"... well, let's just say you might want to learn a little more about software firewalls before you feel too comfortable settling for less. The truth is, XP's built-in firewall is just a step above pathetic. Yes, it will stealth your ports on incoming probes, but it does nothing towards patrolling outgoing connections on any protocol, its logging feature sucks and it has no other added features such as ad blocking, spyware blocking or pop-up blocking, too name but a few. Freeware fw's such as Kerio and Sygate do a far better job than XP's fw, and if you want an outstanding paid fw, try Agnitum's Outpost, ver 2.5. BTW don't waste your money on the unpredictable and highly bloated Symantec pfw.

McAfee is a good product, despite others' remarks, and this feature has been part of their product for quite a while now. I'm glad they finally got a patent, as it's a very useful feature.

This is bulls***. McCrapafee is pulling this stunt because they know their software is total crap and have to find ways to scam more dollars. If they go after Zone Alarm which I prefer, I will be one unhappy consumer (yeah, I know...who cares). The patent office should know better, because all this does is lead to unnecessary lawsuits and limits choices for consumers. Bad move...very bad move

I've used Mcafee for YEARS with no problems. When I had norton installed, my computer took 1 1/2 minutes to load up, and the firewall every 5 seconds told me "someone was breaking in" to my computer... Did a trace... it was MY IP address...

The only "crap" software is Norton. Mcafee works just fine (and is cheaper than Norton where I buy it) There is no reason to act the way you are.

The whole antivirus-software
industry exists because of the
poor quality of the MS operating
systems.
A *real* computer, that is, some
sort of UNIX (Linux, BSD, etc) plus
a computer literate admin needs NO
ANTIVIRUS whatsoever.

Because they can kill their competitors this way without actually competing. Means higher prices for us and kills open source :(.

This patent office wouldn't know a patent from a fat ant! Any corporation can walk in, file a completely ridiculous patent, pay off the right idiot, and walk out with a patent for air. It's a joke!

That's kind of hard to compare correctly actually. Windows is a consumer OS, the dominant OS, so it's more likely that you will face malware, because that's the only way it will spread. For instance, let's say there is a virus for something like OSX. How would you get it to them? Unless someone actually hacks the Apple website, and puts a link to the virus as an official patch, there is no way to target them. Anything that can run code can run malware. Though I think you outlined another aspect of the problem: "competent admin." I am pretty sure competence would help a whole lot regardless of OS. Could Windows be more secure? Absolutely. Is it Microsoft's entire fault? No.

Its pretty amusing to see people do a Microsoft banging these days for anything and everything.
Viking blade is absolutely right in his argument.
notavirushere... You are talking about Linux and computer literate, but it doesnt seem you even understand the difference between Firewall and Antivirus lol. Its just that Mc Afee comes bundled with both.
I for example used to use ZoneAlarm as Firewall with NortonAV till a few days back till I s***ed to Avast Home which takes less resource and seems to be better.

ogman is sooo right about the patent office. I mean by doing this I just hope Open Source is not affected. To patent such a thing is bad for consumers like us and anyway I was never impressed with any of Mc Affee products. As a firewall for me Zone Alarm works way better, though nothing like a hardware firewall on a router.

I'm acting the way I am just to annoy you, didn't you know? Seriously tho...this is a comments forum and people make comments. I don't like McCrapafee, you don't like Norton. Great, we have diversity in our celebration of the First Amendment. However, you don't see me plugging another A/V or forcing my choice on you or anyone else, so take a Valium and chill out.

What a load of horsecrap.....
If Linux/Unix were the dominant OS, most viruses would target them as easily as Windows.....
there is NO way to write a "bulletproof" OS, at least not as long as users demand an interactive
internet experience.

Actually, I find them both to be quite annoying, Norton because it bogs down your system, Mcafee because if you update it "wrongfully", modify the installation, or God forbid attempt to uninstall it, it corrupts your Winsocks. Quite frustrating--why the heck does it need so many BHO's anyway? Does that mean it does not work with browsers other than IE? (if you have xp sp2, click Tools... and "manage components" withen Internet Explorer and you'll see what I mean.) Again, no hard feelings, just my personal opinion.

What a load of horsecrap... Linux is more secure by default, and windows is NOT.

Here is how a Windows machine gets infected by a virus:
-----------
User goes to http://www.xyz.com
Website redirects to http://www.gaynetsearch.com
Yet another ActiveX bug in IE installs the virus
User is confused, computer is running slow
Lather, rinse, repeat

Here is how a Linux machine gets infected by a virus:
-----------
User goes to http://www.abc.com
Website redirects to http://www.queernetsearch.com
Website asks the user to download a random .bin file
Website then asks the user to make the .bin file executable by running 'chmod +x arbitrary.bin'
Website then asks the user to open xterm and run ./arbitrary.bin
DAMN! Infected with a linux virus!!! My 6 pr0n files i had in my home directory are gone! oh well, log out and try again.

Regarless of how popular Linux is, it will never get the amount of viruses Windows does.

Speaking of crap, I've had nothing but trouble out of Zone Alarm. It gives me nothing but BSODs and this was from several different versions of Windows and commputers as well. I wouldn't use it even if they paid me to.

sorry about your experience--prior to XP SP2 I used it and had no problems...

Perhaps you could build a better OS yourself? For all its glitches, NT 4.0 is stable and secure enough--it was written in 1996 before the internet was even a source of security problems. Ever noticed windows 2000 is "built on NT technology" and XP is built "on the Windows 2000 Kernel"? What really needs to be done is Windows needs to be completely re-written. The problem is 90% of the universe would complain that now they are forced to upgrade for new software to work and their old software doesn't work right. C'mon people, at least try to look at that from Microsoft's perspective. Also--there are many viruses written for Linux already...but this board is getting completely off the subject of the new Mcafee patent altogether.

and while users have to do all of that to install flash or something as mundane as that, *nix will never gain the user base it needs to send Winblows packing......You know how hard it is to get some ppl to understand anything on a winblows box? Try putting a 60 year old woman on a *nix box and see how far she gets....she'll go to the library and use winblows....The reason it would be hard to get a virus is the same reason it's hard to get ppl to use the OS!

One release would work and the very next one would cause nothing but BSODs and it went like that for many years. I had liked the interface when it showed you on the Taskbar what was accessing the net and all, but they removed that feature and just made it bloatware and buggy.

Dude, for the record I agree with you. MS needs to stop building ontop of old code and rewrite Windows from the ground up...use developers who know what the hell they are doing as opposed to snapping up just any old coder. Problem is, MS is still overshadowed by The Bill who has to have things his way or no way. If MS was run a little more like the Mozilla Foundation, I think Windows would be a lot better and much more secure. Oh well, one can hope.

"If Linux/Unix were the dominant OS, most viruses would target them as easily as Windows....."

Seriously... Linux/Unix are a lot less likely to get viruses as the fact that they are open-source, and it's a fact that open-source has less bugs in it for maleficent users to take advantage of, because those that do use it either send in the bugs they find or fix them and send in the fixes. Microsoft has ADMITTED that they can't release their source code for open source because it has so many bugs in it.

Wake up linux lover. Im sure its a fine operating system, but get real and ask yourself one question. Why does Bill Gates seem to be hell bent on destroying his software empire due to security leaks if all he needs to do is hire people who can design a great OS like linux? God, he must be nuts!! What a dope! I cant beleive that people like you and I see the solution and he dosnt!! Why Bill?!? Why!? Why do you not hire linux programmers and build the perfect OS!? I just cant figure it out! Unless linux has problems of its own.

Ahhh! THe truth comes out. I guess what you are saying is; "build an OS that the public likes, and its going to have leaks" As a matter of fact I agree. Its inevitable. Linux may be more iherintly secure, but lets stop the crap about being the better OS, security isnt the be all and end all as far as quality goes. If that was the case everyone would drive a Volvo, and they dont, and only a jackass would suggest that a Volvo is the best car made because it is the safest. I, and most people have neither the time or energy to use linux to the same dgree I use windows and when linux can keep up with windows, it can stop b****ing about not being able to catch up.

Actually you are right. Mc Afee patent is a firewall related patent and the board has gone into virus talk and Microsoft vs Linux talk.

The word gay is used to refer to a particular cheerful subject. In our modern world it has been adapted to also refer to a homosexual. However, no where in the definition of the word will you find that it is synonymous with "really bad." This was developed as an attack against homosexuals so that a homosexual person was a "really bad" person. Please note this and act accordingly in the future.

That being said, I agree with you that it actually takes work to get a virus in *nix while with ms you are more exposed. However, to avoid viruses that come in with activex on ms one has but to slap on a firewall and restrict IE access to the internet while making the switch to the opera browser. In fact this move will protect against more than just activex viruses.

It's all about being what is convenient for who you are. If you have the patience and ability to take up linux then have fun with the ultimate defence. However, if this is not an option than there is nothing wrong with ms if you act in an intelligent manner. Sure it is because of ms vulnerabilities that companies can make money but I fail to see the problem of having more jobs out there. Also if you do not want to pay pick up zone alarm, AVG, opera web browser, and your choice out of a host of spyware protection (I recommend HijackThis with a backup of ad-aware) and your good to go. That being said I believe you mean real OSs not real computers, and I beg to differ. Clearly ms is real.