4 ms·

I've meaning to ask HN this. I remember an article a while ago where somebody recommended not using anti-virus software. His recommendations was to have a separ

by huherto 18y ago

I've meaning to ask HN this. I remember an article a while ago where somebody recommended not using anti-virus software. His recommendations was to have a separate administrative user that you only use when you install something. That is the standard practice in Unix. I recently asked my friends and they told me that you wouldn't be able to run a lot of software without the administrative privileges. It does make a lot of sense, we are basically running our PC and everything is run as root. What do you guys think?

eru 18y ago
Virtualization may help - even on Windows.
- mrtron 18y ago
  Vista was originally scheduled to provide an individual virtual environment for each process.
  - eru 18y ago
    What went wrong?
swilliams 18y ago
That might have been Jeff Atwood. http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000803.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000803.html I haven't run an AV on the computers I use the most in a couple of years, and have had no infections. I don't download warez, surf "questionable" sites, and don't open email attachments unless I'm expecting them (and these days most attachments can be viewed in google docs first). I only use IE to view my employer's Exchange based webmail and to test HTML I'm writing. I do run Vista with UAC on. If I do encounter a file that I need to open that may be questionable, I fire up a VM with AVG and test it out. For me, the performance penalty for an always on Anti Virus is too much for what it provides. For my parents, I make sure they have the latest updates to their AV software 24/7.
martin 18y ago
I'd question just how much of a problem this is, even on Windows XP. I've worked with lots of firms where end users don't have admin rights and still use dozens of apps without any issue. It's really inexcusable for a Windows app to require admin rights in 2008 (unless it's actually doing system-level stuff), but even if you've got one that does, there are still options for a reasonably savvy user to work around it.
chaostheory 18y ago
"I recently asked my friends and they told me that you wouldn't be able to run a lot of software without the administrative privileges." (on a mac) that's not true. I've been using this approach for years now (both on Tiger and Leopard) and most mac software recognize this (ones that don't eventually come around very quickly - it's been 3 years since I've seen one that didn't) The only thing you'll run into is the minor inconvenience of having to login seamingly all the time (though eventually you'll get used to it)
- aston 18y ago
  Sounds like Vista + UAC.

by huherto 18y ago

eru 18y ago

Virtualization may help - even on Windows.

mrtron 18y ago
Vista was originally scheduled to provide an individual virtual environment for each process.
- eru 18y ago
  What went wrong?

swilliams 18y ago

That might have been Jeff Atwood. http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000803.html http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/000803.html I haven't run an AV on the computers I use the most in a couple of years, and have had no infections. I don't download warez, surf "questionable" sites, and don't open email attachments unless I'm expecting them (and these days most attachments can be viewed in google docs first). I only use IE to view my employer's Exchange based webmail and to test HTML I'm writing. I do run Vista with UAC on. If I do encounter a file that I need to open that may be questionable, I fire up a VM with AVG and test it out. For me, the performance penalty for an always on Anti Virus is too much for what it provides. For my parents, I make sure they have the latest updates to their AV software 24/7.

martin 18y ago

I'd question just how much of a problem this is, even on Windows XP. I've worked with lots of firms where end users don't have admin rights and still use dozens of apps without any issue. It's really inexcusable for a Windows app to require admin rights in 2008 (unless it's actually doing system-level stuff), but even if you've got one that does, there are still options for a reasonably savvy user to work around it.

chaostheory 18y ago

"I recently asked my friends and they told me that you wouldn't be able to run a lot of software without the administrative privileges." (on a mac) that's not true. I've been using this approach for years now (both on Tiger and Leopard) and most mac software recognize this (ones that don't eventually come around very quickly - it's been 3 years since I've seen one that didn't) The only thing you'll run into is the minor inconvenience of having to login seamingly all the time (though eventually you'll get used to it)

aston 18y ago
Sounds like Vista + UAC.