Metropol

Martin wrote:Comes completely free as part of the software package for the first
year, thereafter it works out at £13.81 (based on 2003 edition)

If you completely uninstall then reinstall it after 12 months, you get another year's worth of free updates . . .

DJGM wrote:

Martin wrote:Comes completely free as part of the software package for the first
year, thereafter it works out at £13.81 (based on 2003 edition)

If you completely uninstall then reinstall it after 12 months, you get another year's worth of free updates . . .

lol good point.

It's kept me going the past 2 years anyway.

Norton a go before what you say comes across as arrogance. Frankly I would rather be unsophisticatedly common and use antivirus than waste that hour of my time fixing the computer.

If you want to use Norton, then use 2001. Anything above that shows signs of serious bloat which increases by the year!

cdd wrote:If you don't do anything which goes against the grain of "common sense" you won't get a virus. I say this from experience: I have not got one virus despite the fact I've never had any virus software installed.

Do you ever download computer programs from the Internet? If you do, how do you know that they do not contain viruses?

cdd wrote:

rts wrote:Sorry, Chris. You couldn't get off your high horse could you? Having trouble hearing you all the way up there.

If you wish to provide evidence to contradict my argument go ahead, but flippant remarks like that mean nothing.

Excuse, you're calling my remarks flippant? If anyone needs to justify anything, it would be you justifying your counter argument to my comments, thank you very much.

God cdd, anyone would've thought you were a 45 year old man.

You can't just say "I'm too smart to get a virus" because it'll be something we all come across. I've only ever had one virus, and that was from downloading what I thought was an Emulator from Kazaa. The file size is what you have to watch when downloading things.

Most viruses have to be downloaded and opened now-a-days. We always get viruses through email, and just ignore them. They only do stuff if your stupid enough to realise "Documents.pif" isnt a virus.


Anyone remember the lame MSN virus, "Choke.exe" ? Maybe this will tickle your memory:







User would like to send you Kill George Bush.exe

No

User would like to send you Choke.exe

Most morons have hotmail or yahoo, both of which have server side virus scanning. I think the main problem now is people without firewalls as most of us know now that you should be careful of email attachments (due to "media hype").

Course if MS had actually turned on ICF when they made windows XP that might have helped, but no, only in SP2 do they bother to turn the firewall on let alone make it half decent.

If you have never once used an anti-virus program then how do know you do not have a virus?

How do I know? Because my computer runs blissfully fast, and always has done. However, just to prove this, I did a quick virus scan and it found - just as I thought - no viruses.

let's not confuse that with being able to deal with them

If you don't get a virus, why would you need to deal with it?

Oh and two tea's in attachment, no coffee.

If I may quote you...

viruses

.

Any virus that makes it to mainstream news programmes is usually worthy of being noted

You're forgetting that newspapers are out to make money, and since people get into a frenzy about viruses, putting "EASY TO FOLLOW TUTORIAL TO AVOID REALLY DANGEROUS VIRUS" really does sell, there's no doubt about it.

If you completely uninstall then reinstall it after 12 months, you get another year's worth of free updates

Doesn't the very fact you can do this show the kind of market they're aiming at?

Do you ever download computer programs from the Internet? If you do, how do you know that they do not contain viruses?

Because I get all my programs from trusted sources. Also, doesn't the word "common sense" just cry out here?

Excuse, you're calling my remarks flippant?

Well, yes, because you haven't given any reasons as to why I'm on a "high horse". I've tried to reason my arguments everywhere possible.

The file size is what you have to watch when downloading things

Indeed, common sense.

They only do stuff if your stupid enough to realise "Documents.pif" isnt a virus.

It's common sense.

cdd wrote:

Excuse, you're calling my remarks flippant?

Well, yes, because you haven't given any reasons as to why I'm on a "high horse". I've tried to reason my arguments everywhere possible.

Chris, this is not a dig, but you have come across as rude, arrogant, and extremely condescending. Whether you agree with me or not on this, this is how me and many other members have perceived your posts. It is up to you what you do about this.

rts wrote:

cdd wrote:

Excuse, you're calling my remarks flippant?

Well, yes, because you haven't given any reasons as to why I'm on a "high horse". I've tried to reason my arguments everywhere possible.

Chris, this is not a dig, but you have come across as rude, arrogant, and extremely condescending. Whether you agree with me or not on this, this is how me and many other members have perceived your posts. It is up to you what you do about this.

I'm sorry, cdd, but I do agree with rts here. I believe that some of the points you have made are indeed true, but the way in which you have "reasoned your arguments" does come across as "rude, arrogant and extremely condescending".

I also have to agree with rod on all accounts about your posts in here.