• tyler@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    Were they arguing that extra antivirus wasn’t necessary? Cause windows built in has been better than alternatives for years now (well, idk about 11, but 7, 8, and 10 all had good antivirus).

    • Kanda@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      When I was a strapping young lad, I would rather just reinstall the system in case of viruses than living with the antivirus software

    • Sciaphobia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s been long enough I don’t think I could faithfully remember the details of their argument. I think they were insisting that no AV was needed at all though, not that Windows’ built in protections are sufficient, which has indeed been true for a while.

      • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        That could have been me… I once had a virus in the 90s. I didn’t know I had it until I took a floppy into the university to print something, and it alerted me. So I installed McAfee, it found and took care of this virus. Then a month later my PC wouldn’t boot. Long story short, I had to remove McAfee to fix it. The experience stuck with me- antivirus has caused me more problems than any virus ever did. I have lived dangerously ever since. (Though before I run anything even slightly questionable, I will fire up a disposable VM)