Print

Add to Reputation:  

What do you think of this post?

I agree I disagree  
Comment:

[Kratos]

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Acquisitions-Law-Malware-Spyware-antivirus,11118.html


Way to go fucking Intel, you just bought the shittiest company that exists on planet earth.

I think they should have bought Nvidia, that would rock our socks off.

But seriously, 7.6billion? why? WHY? Isn't 1 billion enough for that shit company? Heck if I was an Intel CEO, I would buy that for $0.01

Its a good thing it didn't happen the opposite way Mcaffe buys Intel, then the whole world would just fall of bridges.

[VC]

Despite Macafee being shit, it is the established name.  Every old fart with an email television has Macafee on it if anything because to them, Macafee = antivirus.  All Intel needs to do is make a non-shit antivirus, and they'll sell billions of licences just because it has the Macafee name on it.

[mbsurfer]

It's all about the name. People would buy shoes made out of newspaper as long as there was a Nike swoop on it.

[terps4life90]

McAfee Honestly sucks in my opinion, has done nothing but create nonsense pop ups on my computer.

[coolDisguise]

Don't forget about the SiteAdvisor service and software - it's als from McAfee, free and not that bad if you want to get a general idea of whether a site is safe or not.
I mean: have you tried to find a site providing song lyrics recently?
If you have no idea which site to trust and you're not lucky enough to find that particular song on youtube /w lyrics or as some guitar tab/chord sheet /w lyrics, even picking a lyrics site is like walking in a mine field blindfolded and that even if you happen to have good security settings.

[WNxEuphonic]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20014175-245.html?tag=TOCmoreStories.0

There's an interesting article from CNET about the possibility of built-in security in the future.

[Mangley]

At least it wasn't Norton.

[killermonkey]

"Today if a hacker wants to come into a system it almost always is done through software. But Intel and McAfee are capable of adding even another level of security, which would make a hacker have to break the hardware code as well as the software code."

This reminds me of that thing.... oh yah thats right.... the United States Government trying to solve beurocracy problems with yet more beurocracy. In the end it is a big waste of money, bloats your end product, and is easily defeated the first time someone finds the weak spot (in the case of government, their wallets).

Why in gods name would anyone think that implementing STATIC ON-CHIP security would be a good idea at all? Once the weakness is found it is exploited, and unless this is a programmable chip (read SOFTWARE again) the hackers will have free reign over your system again anyway. Useless.

[VC]

It doesn't matter if it doesn't work, it can be a bullet point on a slideshow, and that's enough to sell units.

[jjmusicnotes]

It's all about the name. People would buy shoes made out of newspaper as long as there was a Nike swoop on it.

Wait, you mean they're not made out of newspaper?