Avira has rolled out a patch that makes its popular freebie anti-virus software more compatible with Windows 8. Earlier this month the German firm admitted its products were not yet compatible with Windows 8 after users complained that attempting to run Avira's software on Microsoft's latest operating system results in the …
How have MS' own security tools (Firewall and MSE) fared in W8/2012? Presumably they also needed rewriting?
Has been rolled into Windows. It comes with it. By default.
Yes I know. It was part of W7 too. But that wasn't my question - on W7 MSE is pretty good but is that still the case in W8?
MSE has been rolled into Windows Defender and is now included out of the box with Windows 8. If you used MSE before, there now no need to download a separate AV product on the new platform.
No AV vendor has guts to say it
If there are such radical changes, why nobody questions the lack of a proper, documented security sdk& API which will stop the need to code horrible hacks?
Like defrag API coded after similar nightmare happening in windows 98. They designed (actually another company) something that will cover all needs by defragmenters, everyone plugged in.
Actually, EU can ask them. Why compete instead of provide something that is expected from a vendor?
Even Apple provides something close, fsevents takes most of the need to inject self to kernel.
Re: No AV vendor has guts to say it
IIRC, MS tried to force the A/V vendors to go via the APIs in 7, cutting off the ability to dive onto the metal, shove in their own low-level I/O drivers and subvert the O/S completely.
The A/V types threatened legal action and they were forced to back down.
Swings and roundabouts. If they were to do it, on the plus side an A/V fuckup wouldn't bluescreen the O/S. On the minus side, pwning the O/S could easily foil A/V scanning and checks by merely being a bit choosy about what the APIs present....
I've seen this happen before.
A rather well liked (by customers) anti-virus firm did this with Windows 7 SP1.
Any ESET product didn't work with SP1 (at all, as in total crash), and there were loads of customers, both companies and individuals, trying to file support requests and bug reports from the first preview. Eset's response was "we don't support pre-release software". Everyone had to wait for the thing to hit general availability before Eset would open a bug (and everyone who tried to install SP1 going mental). Cue a heck of a lot of scrambling around by them to get a fix out - took them two weeks and then they had to improve that later.
So, I'm guessing this was another "we refuse to test against anything that hasn't hit general availability yet" policy.
Re: I've seen this happen before.
If windows were open source rather than some mysterious black box then software vendors would be able to fully test what is going on rather than having to rely on MS's scant API details.
Or, you know... they could get off their lazy arses and test their products against the early builds of new OSes. One of hte main reasons Microsoft releases early versions. Then if it doesn't work or causes major crashes, they could block their products from being installed onto those OSes until they were ready. Instead of keeping quiet, letting customers try the software, and then have angry customers with dead machines.
> Independent testing lab AV-Test.org reports that the vast majority of anti-virus vendors in the market already offer Windows 8-compatible products to consumers.
If Avira's products gave a BSOD on Windows 8, then why didn't Avira's installation program prevent install on Windows 8?
According to Avira's forum, Avira's quality has declined after Avira 2010. Starting with Avira 2012 serving pop-up ads to the desktop (this is the PAID version) and config panel options not working, Instead of features, they provide excuses.
- +Comment Trips to Mars may be OFF: The SUN has changed in a way we've NEVER SEEN
- Vid Google opens Inbox – email for people too stupid to use email
- Back to the ... drawing board: 'Hoverboard' will disappoint Marty McFly wannabes
- Pic Forget the $2499 5K iMac – today we reveal Apple's most expensive computer to date
- Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ...