<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_18_1831246</id>
	<title>What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1268937780000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Techman83 writes <i>"After years of changing between AVG Free + Avast, it's coming time to find a new free alternative for friends/relatives who run Windows. AVG and Avast have been quite good, but are starting to bloat out in size, and also becoming very misleading. Avast recently auto updated from 4.8 to 5 and now requires you to register (even for the free version) and both are making it harder to actually find the free version. Is this the end of reasonable free antivirus, or is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Techman83 writes " After years of changing between AVG Free + Avast , it 's coming time to find a new free alternative for friends/relatives who run Windows .
AVG and Avast have been quite good , but are starting to bloat out in size , and also becoming very misleading .
Avast recently auto updated from 4.8 to 5 and now requires you to register ( even for the free version ) and both are making it harder to actually find the free version .
Is this the end of reasonable free antivirus , or is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer 's doing weird things ' calls to a minimum ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Techman83 writes "After years of changing between AVG Free + Avast, it's coming time to find a new free alternative for friends/relatives who run Windows.
AVG and Avast have been quite good, but are starting to bloat out in size, and also becoming very misleading.
Avast recently auto updated from 4.8 to 5 and now requires you to register (even for the free version) and both are making it harder to actually find the free version.
Is this the end of reasonable free antivirus, or is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542682</id>
	<title>Not Avast!  MSE!</title>
	<author>bwcbwc</author>
	<datestamp>1269031800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And Malwarebytes free for that extra on-demand scan when something acts a little funny and you want to make sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And Malwarebytes free for that extra on-demand scan when something acts a little funny and you want to make sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And Malwarebytes free for that extra on-demand scan when something acts a little funny and you want to make sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541092</id>
	<title>Antivirus 2009</title>
	<author>CyBrett</author>
	<datestamp>1269024780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Antivirus 2009 is the best!!!!  Just kidding.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)  Security Essentials (home) or Client Forefront (business) highly recommended.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Antivirus 2009 is the best ! ! ! !
Just kidding .
: - ) Security Essentials ( home ) or Client Forefront ( business ) highly recommended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Antivirus 2009 is the best!!!!
Just kidding.
:-)  Security Essentials (home) or Client Forefront (business) highly recommended.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528326</id>
	<title>2 Comments!</title>
	<author>Froppy</author>
	<datestamp>1268904840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>2 comments.. the first one will respond to your post.  The 2nd comment will get all sorts of flames.

1. Panda Cloud Anti-Virus is pretty nice.  It's pretty lightweight, kinda does its own thing and doesn't get in the way.  I've had relatively good success with it.  It has cause the internet to stop working one computer.. but a restart fixed it.

2. No Anti-Virus.  Here's the deal.. these days most things aren't even stopped by a great, full featured anti-virus prior to get infected.  Sure.. it'll catch some things or some parts of a virus, but in the end you'll still be infected and still need to have the computer cleaned off.  They aren't worth the hassle any more in my opinion.  They slow stuff down, don't catch 90\% of what's out there and if you're not stupid.. you don't need one.  I've been running about 10 PCs around my house for a good 10 years and have never once been infected with anything (and.. just for fun I've ran full scans with stuff before.. never once found anything).

Anti-Virus is overrated.  No matter if your'e talking your 90 year old grandma or yourself.. in the end, if someone gives a virus/spyware access/allow it to be installed.. it's going to bypass an AV anyway and the PC will be infected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>2 comments.. the first one will respond to your post .
The 2nd comment will get all sorts of flames .
1. Panda Cloud Anti-Virus is pretty nice .
It 's pretty lightweight , kinda does its own thing and does n't get in the way .
I 've had relatively good success with it .
It has cause the internet to stop working one computer.. but a restart fixed it .
2. No Anti-Virus .
Here 's the deal.. these days most things are n't even stopped by a great , full featured anti-virus prior to get infected .
Sure.. it 'll catch some things or some parts of a virus , but in the end you 'll still be infected and still need to have the computer cleaned off .
They are n't worth the hassle any more in my opinion .
They slow stuff down , do n't catch 90 \ % of what 's out there and if you 're not stupid.. you do n't need one .
I 've been running about 10 PCs around my house for a good 10 years and have never once been infected with anything ( and.. just for fun I 've ran full scans with stuff before.. never once found anything ) .
Anti-Virus is overrated .
No matter if your'e talking your 90 year old grandma or yourself.. in the end , if someone gives a virus/spyware access/allow it to be installed.. it 's going to bypass an AV anyway and the PC will be infected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 comments.. the first one will respond to your post.
The 2nd comment will get all sorts of flames.
1. Panda Cloud Anti-Virus is pretty nice.
It's pretty lightweight, kinda does its own thing and doesn't get in the way.
I've had relatively good success with it.
It has cause the internet to stop working one computer.. but a restart fixed it.
2. No Anti-Virus.
Here's the deal.. these days most things aren't even stopped by a great, full featured anti-virus prior to get infected.
Sure.. it'll catch some things or some parts of a virus, but in the end you'll still be infected and still need to have the computer cleaned off.
They aren't worth the hassle any more in my opinion.
They slow stuff down, don't catch 90\% of what's out there and if you're not stupid.. you don't need one.
I've been running about 10 PCs around my house for a good 10 years and have never once been infected with anything (and.. just for fun I've ran full scans with stuff before.. never once found anything).
Anti-Virus is overrated.
No matter if your'e talking your 90 year old grandma or yourself.. in the end, if someone gives a virus/spyware access/allow it to be installed.. it's going to bypass an AV anyway and the PC will be infected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527426</id>
	<title>Immunet (also a cloud based)</title>
	<author>penguin\_dance</author>
	<datestamp>1268945580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm trying another cloud based protection: Immunet <a href="http://www.immunet.com/" title="immunet.com">http://www.immunet.com/</a> [immunet.com]. This probably one of the best uses I've heard for cloud computing. If a new virus is found, the signature is instantly loaded to the cloud so it can <a href="http://www.immunet.com/collectiveimmunity" title="immunet.com">protect everyone else</a> [immunet.com] using Immunet immediately. You don't have to download signatures.</p><p>You can also run this WITH another checker like AVG.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm trying another cloud based protection : Immunet http : //www.immunet.com/ [ immunet.com ] .
This probably one of the best uses I 've heard for cloud computing .
If a new virus is found , the signature is instantly loaded to the cloud so it can protect everyone else [ immunet.com ] using Immunet immediately .
You do n't have to download signatures.You can also run this WITH another checker like AVG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm trying another cloud based protection: Immunet http://www.immunet.com/ [immunet.com].
This probably one of the best uses I've heard for cloud computing.
If a new virus is found, the signature is instantly loaded to the cloud so it can protect everyone else [immunet.com] using Immunet immediately.
You don't have to download signatures.You can also run this WITH another checker like AVG.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534626</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269002520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>which is still quite a lot. switching to clamav left me with 200MB more RAM.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>which is still quite a lot .
switching to clamav left me with 200MB more RAM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>which is still quite a lot.
switching to clamav left me with 200MB more RAM.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527810</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1268903400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If thats your attitude, may I ask why (if?) you use a MS operating system?  Neither the newest IE nor the newest windows are the weakest link in the chain anymore...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If thats your attitude , may I ask why ( if ?
) you use a MS operating system ?
Neither the newest IE nor the newest windows are the weakest link in the chain anymore.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If thats your attitude, may I ask why (if?
) you use a MS operating system?
Neither the newest IE nor the newest windows are the weakest link in the chain anymore...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530376</id>
	<title>FortiClient</title>
	<author>azahar31</author>
	<datestamp>1268913420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am surprise that no-one here has mentioned the excellent FortiClient software that is free of charge and includes not just AV, but also a firewall and IPSec and SSL VPN clients. I have found it to be very lightweight and uses little resources.


<a href="http://www.fortinet.com/products/endpoint/forticlient.html" title="fortinet.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.fortinet.com/products/endpoint/forticlient.html</a> [fortinet.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am surprise that no-one here has mentioned the excellent FortiClient software that is free of charge and includes not just AV , but also a firewall and IPSec and SSL VPN clients .
I have found it to be very lightweight and uses little resources .
http : //www.fortinet.com/products/endpoint/forticlient.html [ fortinet.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am surprise that no-one here has mentioned the excellent FortiClient software that is free of charge and includes not just AV, but also a firewall and IPSec and SSL VPN clients.
I have found it to be very lightweight and uses little resources.
http://www.fortinet.com/products/endpoint/forticlient.html [fortinet.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542444</id>
	<title>ClamWin</title>
	<author>Baloo Uriza</author>
	<datestamp>1269030660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As usual, this is a problem that can be solved with open source.  See <a href="http://www.clamwin.com/" title="clamwin.com" rel="nofollow">ClamWin</a> [clamwin.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>As usual , this is a problem that can be solved with open source .
See ClamWin [ clamwin.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As usual, this is a problem that can be solved with open source.
See ClamWin [clamwin.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526808</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>chill182</author>
	<datestamp>1268943840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This anti virus program also keeps tigers away. You don't see any tigers around do you?

<a href="http://bitsmack.com/" title="bitsmack.com">Bitsmack.com</a> [bitsmack.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This anti virus program also keeps tigers away .
You do n't see any tigers around do you ?
Bitsmack.com [ bitsmack.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This anti virus program also keeps tigers away.
You don't see any tigers around do you?
Bitsmack.com [bitsmack.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537138</id>
	<title>The irritatingly obvious answer</title>
	<author>jandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1269012780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?</p></div><p>Linux?</p><p>More to the point, what I do is absurdly enough a bit simpler: Run linux at the actual HW, install something like VMware or VirtualBox, install Windows and other essential SW in a virtual machine, configure, and then immediately make a snapshot. Whenever the Windows systems screws up because of malware, restore the snapshot. Keep essential data on a filesystem shared from the linux system or something similar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer 's doing weird things ' calls to a minimum ? Linux ? More to the point , what I do is absurdly enough a bit simpler : Run linux at the actual HW , install something like VMware or VirtualBox , install Windows and other essential SW in a virtual machine , configure , and then immediately make a snapshot .
Whenever the Windows systems screws up because of malware , restore the snapshot .
Keep essential data on a filesystem shared from the linux system or something similar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?Linux?More to the point, what I do is absurdly enough a bit simpler: Run linux at the actual HW, install something like VMware or VirtualBox, install Windows and other essential SW in a virtual machine, configure, and then immediately make a snapshot.
Whenever the Windows systems screws up because of malware, restore the snapshot.
Keep essential data on a filesystem shared from the linux system or something similar.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526244</id>
	<title>RE: What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's actually so bad about registering? Don't companies like Avast deserve to know how many actual users they have? Tracking downloads is not good enough information, as i myself have downloaded Avast at least 2 dozen times, if they only tracked downloads, then they'd think i was over 2 dozen people, and their numbers would be completely wrong, as i know for a fact i'm not the only one who re-downloads things from time to time.</p><p>The registration process was simple and clean, took place in a simple popup, with NO email verification. I don't see why it's an issue, but if it is, why aren't you looking for an alternative for windows? It has required activation since windows xp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's actually so bad about registering ?
Do n't companies like Avast deserve to know how many actual users they have ?
Tracking downloads is not good enough information , as i myself have downloaded Avast at least 2 dozen times , if they only tracked downloads , then they 'd think i was over 2 dozen people , and their numbers would be completely wrong , as i know for a fact i 'm not the only one who re-downloads things from time to time.The registration process was simple and clean , took place in a simple popup , with NO email verification .
I do n't see why it 's an issue , but if it is , why are n't you looking for an alternative for windows ?
It has required activation since windows xp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's actually so bad about registering?
Don't companies like Avast deserve to know how many actual users they have?
Tracking downloads is not good enough information, as i myself have downloaded Avast at least 2 dozen times, if they only tracked downloads, then they'd think i was over 2 dozen people, and their numbers would be completely wrong, as i know for a fact i'm not the only one who re-downloads things from time to time.The registration process was simple and clean, took place in a simple popup, with NO email verification.
I don't see why it's an issue, but if it is, why aren't you looking for an alternative for windows?
It has required activation since windows xp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526386</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>and I have gotten a virus in ages.</i> <br> <br>

That you know of.</htmltext>
<tokenext>and I have gotten a virus in ages .
That you know of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and I have gotten a virus in ages.
That you know of.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528194</id>
	<title>NONE!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Run Linux then use VirtualBox or VMware Player (both free) to run Windows in an enclosed environment that is easy to manipulate and protect.  No need for stupid virus bullshit.  If you want to run something suspicious then just create a virtual machine snapshot that can be easily reverted.  Simple, powerful, nice.</p><p>That's what I do anyway.  In fact I have been doing it for the last 11 years or so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Run Linux then use VirtualBox or VMware Player ( both free ) to run Windows in an enclosed environment that is easy to manipulate and protect .
No need for stupid virus bullshit .
If you want to run something suspicious then just create a virtual machine snapshot that can be easily reverted .
Simple , powerful , nice.That 's what I do anyway .
In fact I have been doing it for the last 11 years or so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Run Linux then use VirtualBox or VMware Player (both free) to run Windows in an enclosed environment that is easy to manipulate and protect.
No need for stupid virus bullshit.
If you want to run something suspicious then just create a virtual machine snapshot that can be easily reverted.
Simple, powerful, nice.That's what I do anyway.
In fact I have been doing it for the last 11 years or so.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526652</id>
	<title>Avira Antivir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I suggest Avira.  It's free, a lot lighter than AVG, and has passable rootkit detection.  The only tiny downside is that it brings up a large window to get the paid version once daily when it updates.  Still my favorite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I suggest Avira .
It 's free , a lot lighter than AVG , and has passable rootkit detection .
The only tiny downside is that it brings up a large window to get the paid version once daily when it updates .
Still my favorite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I suggest Avira.
It's free, a lot lighter than AVG, and has passable rootkit detection.
The only tiny downside is that it brings up a large window to get the paid version once daily when it updates.
Still my favorite.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526474</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>wtfbill</author>
	<datestamp>1268942820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I gotta agree with the Captain on Clam here, but with a twist. I run a v-lited vista install without IE and a lot of the other junk. Other than a hardware firewall and the vista firewall, I don't have any protective stuff on my system and never get an infection. How do I know? From time to time, I boot from my Ubuntu thumb drive, update clam, and scan the system from outside windows (I don't trust a scan from within the os, but that's just me). So far, system's stayed clean, but I'm careful about where I browse (no porn or warez). I also turn off flash and/or javascript on many sites--I put buttons for that on my toolbar in Opera. It's funny, I've found about half or three quarters of the microsoft updates don'd apply to my system, since they're for systems I've removed and replaced with other options--Opera and FOSS stuff.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I got ta agree with the Captain on Clam here , but with a twist .
I run a v-lited vista install without IE and a lot of the other junk .
Other than a hardware firewall and the vista firewall , I do n't have any protective stuff on my system and never get an infection .
How do I know ?
From time to time , I boot from my Ubuntu thumb drive , update clam , and scan the system from outside windows ( I do n't trust a scan from within the os , but that 's just me ) .
So far , system 's stayed clean , but I 'm careful about where I browse ( no porn or warez ) .
I also turn off flash and/or javascript on many sites--I put buttons for that on my toolbar in Opera .
It 's funny , I 've found about half or three quarters of the microsoft updates don 'd apply to my system , since they 're for systems I 've removed and replaced with other options--Opera and FOSS stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I gotta agree with the Captain on Clam here, but with a twist.
I run a v-lited vista install without IE and a lot of the other junk.
Other than a hardware firewall and the vista firewall, I don't have any protective stuff on my system and never get an infection.
How do I know?
From time to time, I boot from my Ubuntu thumb drive, update clam, and scan the system from outside windows (I don't trust a scan from within the os, but that's just me).
So far, system's stayed clean, but I'm careful about where I browse (no porn or warez).
I also turn off flash and/or javascript on many sites--I put buttons for that on my toolbar in Opera.
It's funny, I've found about half or three quarters of the microsoft updates don'd apply to my system, since they're for systems I've removed and replaced with other options--Opera and FOSS stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527122</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's another vote for NOD32, it's not free, but it's good (and very reasonably priced). I've installed it on everything from old junkboxes to my win7 machine, it stays out of the way, uses few resources, and does a good job.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's another vote for NOD32 , it 's not free , but it 's good ( and very reasonably priced ) .
I 've installed it on everything from old junkboxes to my win7 machine , it stays out of the way , uses few resources , and does a good job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's another vote for NOD32, it's not free, but it's good (and very reasonably priced).
I've installed it on everything from old junkboxes to my win7 machine, it stays out of the way, uses few resources, and does a good job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533606</id>
	<title>Re:MSSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269029400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sir, I beg to differ.<br>First Microsoft is the one that got us in this mess, second, if they are so smart, they should have changed it by now. Third, Microsoft also sold you something (obviously), not once, but several times, and it always attracted malware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sir , I beg to differ.First Microsoft is the one that got us in this mess , second , if they are so smart , they should have changed it by now .
Third , Microsoft also sold you something ( obviously ) , not once , but several times , and it always attracted malware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sir, I beg to differ.First Microsoft is the one that got us in this mess, second, if they are so smart, they should have changed it by now.
Third, Microsoft also sold you something (obviously), not once, but several times, and it always attracted malware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527312</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>CoolHnd30</author>
	<datestamp>1268945280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use clamwin in some vm's.  I create a folder with a small txt file inside, schedule clamwin to scan that folder every minute, and include a memory scan....
Close enough to on access scanning for the purposes for which I use it.  Maybe not on my main desktop, though.  Of course, my main desktop is Linux...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use clamwin in some vm 's .
I create a folder with a small txt file inside , schedule clamwin to scan that folder every minute , and include a memory scan... . Close enough to on access scanning for the purposes for which I use it .
Maybe not on my main desktop , though .
Of course , my main desktop is Linux.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use clamwin in some vm's.
I create a folder with a small txt file inside, schedule clamwin to scan that folder every minute, and include a memory scan....
Close enough to on access scanning for the purposes for which I use it.
Maybe not on my main desktop, though.
Of course, my main desktop is Linux...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529316</id>
	<title>Avira,Iobit 360/Advanced System Care,Malwarebytes</title>
	<author>relaxinparadise</author>
	<datestamp>1268908380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avira rates consistently high on the AV-Comparatives.org site and even with high heuristics set, the overhead on the system is far lower than AVG or Avast. I use Iobit 360 with Advanced System Care to take care of threats other than virii, Peerblock and Windows Firewall behind a NAT router to keep things away and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, a Kaspersky and Avira BootCD to clean anything if anything gets past the other layers. Just like when it gets cold outside, nothing protects better than layering.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira rates consistently high on the AV-Comparatives.org site and even with high heuristics set , the overhead on the system is far lower than AVG or Avast .
I use Iobit 360 with Advanced System Care to take care of threats other than virii , Peerblock and Windows Firewall behind a NAT router to keep things away and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware , a Kaspersky and Avira BootCD to clean anything if anything gets past the other layers .
Just like when it gets cold outside , nothing protects better than layering .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira rates consistently high on the AV-Comparatives.org site and even with high heuristics set, the overhead on the system is far lower than AVG or Avast.
I use Iobit 360 with Advanced System Care to take care of threats other than virii, Peerblock and Windows Firewall behind a NAT router to keep things away and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware, a Kaspersky and Avira BootCD to clean anything if anything gets past the other layers.
Just like when it gets cold outside, nothing protects better than layering.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526066</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Fallen Kell</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I put this on my latest Win7 build. I use Avast! on a vista laptop and ClamAV on another.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I put this on my latest Win7 build .
I use Avast !
on a vista laptop and ClamAV on another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I put this on my latest Win7 build.
I use Avast!
on a vista laptop and ClamAV on another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530710</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Trogre</author>
	<datestamp>1268915460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next question?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next question ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next question?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527014</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>C0L0PH0N</author>
	<datestamp>1268944380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Totally agree, I used AVG free for years, but a couple of years ago, it became too annoying and as mentioned a resource hog, so I switched to AntiVir, and it is just right.  Does a good job, and isn't annoying or a hog.  Just what an antivirus program should be. Other AV programs could learn something from AntiVir.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Totally agree , I used AVG free for years , but a couple of years ago , it became too annoying and as mentioned a resource hog , so I switched to AntiVir , and it is just right .
Does a good job , and is n't annoying or a hog .
Just what an antivirus program should be .
Other AV programs could learn something from AntiVir .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Totally agree, I used AVG free for years, but a couple of years ago, it became too annoying and as mentioned a resource hog, so I switched to AntiVir, and it is just right.
Does a good job, and isn't annoying or a hog.
Just what an antivirus program should be.
Other AV programs could learn something from AntiVir.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526500</id>
	<title>Avira...</title>
	<author>guppz</author>
	<datestamp>1268942880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always found Avira Antivir personal edition very very good for detections. relatively lightweight but it does come with a nag window every once in a blue moon which can easily be turned off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always found Avira Antivir personal edition very very good for detections .
relatively lightweight but it does come with a nag window every once in a blue moon which can easily be turned off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always found Avira Antivir personal edition very very good for detections.
relatively lightweight but it does come with a nag window every once in a blue moon which can easily be turned off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528430</id>
	<title>I use this</title>
	<author>Stenchwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1268905140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Use this <a href="http://blog.hanloncreative.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/too\_many\_toolbars.jpg" title="hanloncreative.com" rel="nofollow">Screenshot</a> [hanloncreative.com] of my web browser as a reference for programs to install and I personally guarantee you'll never have another virus again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Use this Screenshot [ hanloncreative.com ] of my web browser as a reference for programs to install and I personally guarantee you 'll never have another virus again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use this Screenshot [hanloncreative.com] of my web browser as a reference for programs to install and I personally guarantee you'll never have another virus again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527770</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>anderiv</author>
	<datestamp>1268903280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...but really, who knows if they're working.</p><p>is there a way to evaluate antivirus software?</p></div><p>Eicar (antivirus test file): <a href="http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm" title="eicar.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm</a> [eicar.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...but really , who knows if they 're working.is there a way to evaluate antivirus software ? Eicar ( antivirus test file ) : http : //www.eicar.org/anti \ _virus \ _test \ _file.htm [ eicar.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...but really, who knows if they're working.is there a way to evaluate antivirus software?Eicar (antivirus test file): http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm [eicar.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526720</id>
	<title>Re:Why free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used Nod32 for a year or two (paid) and liked it.  Then I decided that I was tired of paying the "Windows virus tax" so I switched to Avira.</p><p>I used Avira for about a year and got tired of it popping up with that stupid "BUY ME NOW" ad it has.  Every time the ad popped up, it'd pull me out of my selection tool in Photoshop.  Once a day was too much for that.  I also didn't understand why Avira thought I would pay for something to remove an annoyance.  Annoyances just make me find something less annoying.</p><p>So I switched one more time and installed MS Security Essentials.  It does more than Avira did and doesn't have a pop-up.  So far it has been fine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used Nod32 for a year or two ( paid ) and liked it .
Then I decided that I was tired of paying the " Windows virus tax " so I switched to Avira.I used Avira for about a year and got tired of it popping up with that stupid " BUY ME NOW " ad it has .
Every time the ad popped up , it 'd pull me out of my selection tool in Photoshop .
Once a day was too much for that .
I also did n't understand why Avira thought I would pay for something to remove an annoyance .
Annoyances just make me find something less annoying.So I switched one more time and installed MS Security Essentials .
It does more than Avira did and does n't have a pop-up .
So far it has been fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used Nod32 for a year or two (paid) and liked it.
Then I decided that I was tired of paying the "Windows virus tax" so I switched to Avira.I used Avira for about a year and got tired of it popping up with that stupid "BUY ME NOW" ad it has.
Every time the ad popped up, it'd pull me out of my selection tool in Photoshop.
Once a day was too much for that.
I also didn't understand why Avira thought I would pay for something to remove an annoyance.
Annoyances just make me find something less annoying.So I switched one more time and installed MS Security Essentials.
It does more than Avira did and doesn't have a pop-up.
So far it has been fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533456</id>
	<title>Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268940240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find av-comparatives.org is a good resource for comparing available antivirus software. Notice, they publish their methods. Avira seems to end up at the top of the pack in all testing. Yes, it has false positives, but the removal process is interactive.  I wouldn't recommend it for passive users. BUT, if you are reading this blog, it is unlikely you are a passive user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find av-comparatives.org is a good resource for comparing available antivirus software .
Notice , they publish their methods .
Avira seems to end up at the top of the pack in all testing .
Yes , it has false positives , but the removal process is interactive .
I would n't recommend it for passive users .
BUT , if you are reading this blog , it is unlikely you are a passive user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find av-comparatives.org is a good resource for comparing available antivirus software.
Notice, they publish their methods.
Avira seems to end up at the top of the pack in all testing.
Yes, it has false positives, but the removal process is interactive.
I wouldn't recommend it for passive users.
BUT, if you are reading this blog, it is unlikely you are a passive user.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527468</id>
	<title>AVG, clamwin, adaware</title>
	<author>mrflash818</author>
	<datestamp>1268945640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We run AVG, clamwin (weekly scheduled run), and adaware on my wife's M$ XP Pro box.</p><p>We liked AVG and ad-aware enough that we started giving them the money, and switched from free to paying for the licences.<br>***<br>For my Debian box, I have clamav that I built from source code, and scan my box from time to time just for fun. It has never been compromised by virii, far as I know. I run it as an unpriviledged user, and sudo as needed for administrative tasks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We run AVG , clamwin ( weekly scheduled run ) , and adaware on my wife 's M $ XP Pro box.We liked AVG and ad-aware enough that we started giving them the money , and switched from free to paying for the licences .
* * * For my Debian box , I have clamav that I built from source code , and scan my box from time to time just for fun .
It has never been compromised by virii , far as I know .
I run it as an unpriviledged user , and sudo as needed for administrative tasks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We run AVG, clamwin (weekly scheduled run), and adaware on my wife's M$ XP Pro box.We liked AVG and ad-aware enough that we started giving them the money, and switched from free to paying for the licences.
***For my Debian box, I have clamav that I built from source code, and scan my box from time to time just for fun.
It has never been compromised by virii, far as I know.
I run it as an unpriviledged user, and sudo as needed for administrative tasks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527098</id>
	<title>Options for family support?</title>
	<author>pavon</author>
	<datestamp>1268944620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep that has always been my biggest complaint with Avast and Antivirus applications in general. I have no problem doing so on my computer, but it took me a long time to train my relatives not to enter personal information into random popups (or worse credit card info for the commercial options). I don't want to subvert that work now. Does anyone know of a reasonably priced product that I can reauthorize from my own computer, without it nagging the user? I am imagining getting an email when one of the subscriptions I manage is due to expire. Then I would go to a website where I can view the status of each subscription (when it expires, what version they are running, when it last updated it virus definitions, etc), and pay to renew. Options for emails when a computer has not been updated in a long time would be nice too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep that has always been my biggest complaint with Avast and Antivirus applications in general .
I have no problem doing so on my computer , but it took me a long time to train my relatives not to enter personal information into random popups ( or worse credit card info for the commercial options ) .
I do n't want to subvert that work now .
Does anyone know of a reasonably priced product that I can reauthorize from my own computer , without it nagging the user ?
I am imagining getting an email when one of the subscriptions I manage is due to expire .
Then I would go to a website where I can view the status of each subscription ( when it expires , what version they are running , when it last updated it virus definitions , etc ) , and pay to renew .
Options for emails when a computer has not been updated in a long time would be nice too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep that has always been my biggest complaint with Avast and Antivirus applications in general.
I have no problem doing so on my computer, but it took me a long time to train my relatives not to enter personal information into random popups (or worse credit card info for the commercial options).
I don't want to subvert that work now.
Does anyone know of a reasonably priced product that I can reauthorize from my own computer, without it nagging the user?
I am imagining getting an email when one of the subscriptions I manage is due to expire.
Then I would go to a website where I can view the status of each subscription (when it expires, what version they are running, when it last updated it virus definitions, etc), and pay to renew.
Options for emails when a computer has not been updated in a long time would be nice too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531128</id>
	<title>immunet protect</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268918280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i recently found immunet protect. it's open source, community based antivirus. it's mse friendly.</p><p>www.immunet.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i recently found immunet protect .
it 's open source , community based antivirus .
it 's mse friendly.www.immunet.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i recently found immunet protect.
it's open source, community based antivirus.
it's mse friendly.www.immunet.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526360</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was recently introduced to this, and it pleasantly surprised me. It's lightweight, and it's rated well. Pretty much the only packages that have better detection rates is payware, and this beats the payware in false positives. Also, the interface is easy to understand, and it stays out of the way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was recently introduced to this , and it pleasantly surprised me .
It 's lightweight , and it 's rated well .
Pretty much the only packages that have better detection rates is payware , and this beats the payware in false positives .
Also , the interface is easy to understand , and it stays out of the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was recently introduced to this, and it pleasantly surprised me.
It's lightweight, and it's rated well.
Pretty much the only packages that have better detection rates is payware, and this beats the payware in false positives.
Also, the interface is easy to understand, and it stays out of the way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534716</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>EdgeCreeper</author>
	<datestamp>1269003480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seconded.</p><p>I switched to Avira from AVG a while ago because AVG was slowing things down.  I chose it because it rated highest in the detection rates at Virus Bulletin.  Unfortunately it also got the highest false positive rates on the tests, although I have never received a false positive on my machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seconded.I switched to Avira from AVG a while ago because AVG was slowing things down .
I chose it because it rated highest in the detection rates at Virus Bulletin .
Unfortunately it also got the highest false positive rates on the tests , although I have never received a false positive on my machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seconded.I switched to Avira from AVG a while ago because AVG was slowing things down.
I chose it because it rated highest in the detection rates at Virus Bulletin.
Unfortunately it also got the highest false positive rates on the tests, although I have never received a false positive on my machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31544126</id>
	<title>Immunology</title>
	<author>jman.org</author>
	<datestamp>1268994600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are 2 main alternatives.  Alas, only one is free:
<br>
1) The free one is called "Ubuntu".
<br>
2) The other one is very shiny, and very expensive, but the good news is it comes with a free computer.  Its name is "Snow Leopard".</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are 2 main alternatives .
Alas , only one is free : 1 ) The free one is called " Ubuntu " .
2 ) The other one is very shiny , and very expensive , but the good news is it comes with a free computer .
Its name is " Snow Leopard " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are 2 main alternatives.
Alas, only one is free:

1) The free one is called "Ubuntu".
2) The other one is very shiny, and very expensive, but the good news is it comes with a free computer.
Its name is "Snow Leopard".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527354</id>
	<title>Re:Smaller AV programs?</title>
	<author>Mr\_Silver</author>
	<datestamp>1268945340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Um, in case you haven't noticed, more viruses, exploits and malware are coming out all the time.<br>
I'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.</p></div></blockquote><p>Whilst this is a good point, I personally believe that there is <b>absolutely no need</b> for an anti-virus program to have a skinning engine built in. It's not designed to look pretty (read: non-standard and usually worse), it's designed to be small, light and unobtrusive. The Windows UI may not win awards, but it's perfectly acceptable.</p><p>Any kind of non-standard skinning is adding bloat to a program that, if it works well, you hardly ever see the UI.</p><p>I've moved over from AVG to Microsoft Security Essentials and have been happy with it. It's lightweight, updated silently, doesn't nag me, doesn't pop up useless alerts and is ranked pretty highly in some of the antivirus test results I've seen.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , in case you have n't noticed , more viruses , exploits and malware are coming out all the time .
I 'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.Whilst this is a good point , I personally believe that there is absolutely no need for an anti-virus program to have a skinning engine built in .
It 's not designed to look pretty ( read : non-standard and usually worse ) , it 's designed to be small , light and unobtrusive .
The Windows UI may not win awards , but it 's perfectly acceptable.Any kind of non-standard skinning is adding bloat to a program that , if it works well , you hardly ever see the UI.I 've moved over from AVG to Microsoft Security Essentials and have been happy with it .
It 's lightweight , updated silently , does n't nag me , does n't pop up useless alerts and is ranked pretty highly in some of the antivirus test results I 've seen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, in case you haven't noticed, more viruses, exploits and malware are coming out all the time.
I'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.Whilst this is a good point, I personally believe that there is absolutely no need for an anti-virus program to have a skinning engine built in.
It's not designed to look pretty (read: non-standard and usually worse), it's designed to be small, light and unobtrusive.
The Windows UI may not win awards, but it's perfectly acceptable.Any kind of non-standard skinning is adding bloat to a program that, if it works well, you hardly ever see the UI.I've moved over from AVG to Microsoft Security Essentials and have been happy with it.
It's lightweight, updated silently, doesn't nag me, doesn't pop up useless alerts and is ranked pretty highly in some of the antivirus test results I've seen.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526210</id>
	<title>Re:Avast history</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I only had to re-register every year. If it's 6 months, now...that's new. But I haven't used it in some time. I use Security Essentials now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I only had to re-register every year .
If it 's 6 months , now...that 's new .
But I have n't used it in some time .
I use Security Essentials now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I only had to re-register every year.
If it's 6 months, now...that's new.
But I haven't used it in some time.
I use Security Essentials now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527576</id>
	<title>Whatever Hypotoad tells me to use.</title>
	<author>DarthVain</author>
	<datestamp>1268945940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>all hail hypnotoad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>all hail hypnotoad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all hail hypnotoad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537196</id>
	<title>Agreed 110\% on MS Security Essentials... apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269012900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Microsoft Security Essentials. It's really the only choice imo. All the others are trying to sell you something. Now, if you're willing to pay, there are perhaps better choices. The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously. All AV sucks, badly. It's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things. It's the only option, but it sucks. MSSE is good."</b> - by spottedkangaroo (451692) * on Thursday March 18, @02:08PM (#31526502) Homepage</p></div><p>I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's truly, good stuff, AND FREE TOO!</p><p>I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc. (all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik? Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>(That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what? They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc. et al))... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Per my subject-line above , &amp; this quote from you ?
" Microsoft Security Essentials .
It 's really the only choice imo .
All the others are trying to sell you something .
Now , if you 're willing to pay , there are perhaps better choices .
The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously .
All AV sucks , badly .
It 's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things .
It 's the only option , but it sucks .
MSSE is good .
" - by spottedkangaroo ( 451692 ) * on Thursday March 18 , @ 02 : 08PM ( # 31526502 ) HomepageI 'll " 2nd that motion " ( after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it 's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact , &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here ) ... it 's truly , good stuff , AND FREE TOO ! I.E./E.G.- &gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot " Search &amp; Destroy " + NORMAN Malware Cleaner ( &amp; of course , MS ' monthly updated " MS Malicious Software Removal Tool " as well ) - for " many doctors ' opinions " etc .
( all " latest/greatest " versions , fully updated of course also ) : Microsoft Security Essentials does the job , + well... &amp; afaik ?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a " Combined Package " , in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package ( thus , it 's " 2-for-the-price-of-1 " ) @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job , plus well , &amp; that 's also from reviews I have seen of this program ( as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS ) .Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND , Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even , IF you like , right here - &gt; http : //www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [ microsoft.com ] ( That 's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well ( bonus ) ) .APKP.S. = &gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package ( yes , they bought it out , but so what ?
They 're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way , Way , WAY " off " as far as I am concerned , because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact , they 're not even charging for protection ( ala " the mob " etc .
et al ) ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?
"Microsoft Security Essentials.
It's really the only choice imo.
All the others are trying to sell you something.
Now, if you're willing to pay, there are perhaps better choices.
The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously.
All AV sucks, badly.
It's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things.
It's the only option, but it sucks.
MSSE is good.
" - by spottedkangaroo (451692) * on Thursday March 18, @02:08PM (#31526502) HomepageI'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's truly, good stuff, AND FREE TOO!I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc.
(all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [microsoft.com](That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).APKP.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what?
They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc.
et al))... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526796</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>diamondsw</author>
	<datestamp>1268943780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it won't pop up for another 24 hours.</p></div><p>So... it's adware. That's what I'm trying to get rid of.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it wo n't pop up for another 24 hours.So... it 's adware .
That 's what I 'm trying to get rid of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it won't pop up for another 24 hours.So... it's adware.
That's what I'm trying to get rid of.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527270</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second your endorsement of ESET NOD32.  I used AVG for years, but finally the annoying pop-ups got to me.  NOD32 is quiet, unobtrusive, and has a negligible impact on performance while seeming to be quite good at pointing out and blocking potential viruses.  It is by far the best anti-virus program I have used yet.  I have never had the need to turn it off for performance reasons even while gaming or doing digital recording.  Great software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second your endorsement of ESET NOD32 .
I used AVG for years , but finally the annoying pop-ups got to me .
NOD32 is quiet , unobtrusive , and has a negligible impact on performance while seeming to be quite good at pointing out and blocking potential viruses .
It is by far the best anti-virus program I have used yet .
I have never had the need to turn it off for performance reasons even while gaming or doing digital recording .
Great software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second your endorsement of ESET NOD32.
I used AVG for years, but finally the annoying pop-ups got to me.
NOD32 is quiet, unobtrusive, and has a negligible impact on performance while seeming to be quite good at pointing out and blocking potential viruses.
It is by far the best anti-virus program I have used yet.
I have never had the need to turn it off for performance reasons even while gaming or doing digital recording.
Great software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526936</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No one has mention Combofix, not a AV by itself but pretty good on cleaning virus laden PCs<br>- el\_truji</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No one has mention Combofix , not a AV by itself but pretty good on cleaning virus laden PCs- el \ _truji</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one has mention Combofix, not a AV by itself but pretty good on cleaning virus laden PCs- el\_truji</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527048</id>
	<title>Windows???</title>
	<author>majesty2180</author>
	<datestamp>1268944500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is this Windows of which you speak???

All joking aside, if it is just going to be used by me, I use ClamWin (www.clamwin.org).  If my wife or anyone else is going to use it (the less "aware" folks in my life, I tend to go with something a little more thorough like Avast (albeit slower and a little more bloated....  thats even a little redundant).  Avast has served me very well in the past, and would use it at the drop of a hat.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is this Windows of which you speak ? ? ?
All joking aside , if it is just going to be used by me , I use ClamWin ( www.clamwin.org ) .
If my wife or anyone else is going to use it ( the less " aware " folks in my life , I tend to go with something a little more thorough like Avast ( albeit slower and a little more bloated.... thats even a little redundant ) .
Avast has served me very well in the past , and would use it at the drop of a hat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is this Windows of which you speak???
All joking aside, if it is just going to be used by me, I use ClamWin (www.clamwin.org).
If my wife or anyone else is going to use it (the less "aware" folks in my life, I tend to go with something a little more thorough like Avast (albeit slower and a little more bloated....  thats even a little redundant).
Avast has served me very well in the past, and would use it at the drop of a hat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528706</id>
	<title>This is Easy</title>
	<author>empathjoe</author>
	<datestamp>1268906160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After using AVG Free for many years I switched to Microsoft Security Essentials and haven't looked back.  Tiny footprint and up to date definitions make this not only the best free A/V available but one of the best all around A/V programs out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After using AVG Free for many years I switched to Microsoft Security Essentials and have n't looked back .
Tiny footprint and up to date definitions make this not only the best free A/V available but one of the best all around A/V programs out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After using AVG Free for many years I switched to Microsoft Security Essentials and haven't looked back.
Tiny footprint and up to date definitions make this not only the best free A/V available but one of the best all around A/V programs out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535768</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Doaner</author>
	<datestamp>1269009120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree. We've been slowly changing from McAfee to Microsoft Security Essentials at work for the last 4 months and it's worked really well.  Its fast, has a small footprint and you can't beat free.  I've read that it doesn't do a great job on behavioral detection, but I think that's why it has that small footprint, it's not using processing power 24/7.  Highly recommended.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
We 've been slowly changing from McAfee to Microsoft Security Essentials at work for the last 4 months and it 's worked really well .
Its fast , has a small footprint and you ca n't beat free .
I 've read that it does n't do a great job on behavioral detection , but I think that 's why it has that small footprint , it 's not using processing power 24/7 .
Highly recommended .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
We've been slowly changing from McAfee to Microsoft Security Essentials at work for the last 4 months and it's worked really well.
Its fast, has a small footprint and you can't beat free.
I've read that it doesn't do a great job on behavioral detection, but I think that's why it has that small footprint, it's not using processing power 24/7.
Highly recommended.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527450</id>
	<title>Av-comparatives</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1268945640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have criticised the site and the report. I'll agree that nothing is perfect but it's the best I've seen.</p><p><a href="http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf" title="av-comparatives.org">http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf</a> [av-comparatives.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have criticised the site and the report .
I 'll agree that nothing is perfect but it 's the best I 've seen.http : //www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf [ av-comparatives.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have criticised the site and the report.
I'll agree that nothing is perfect but it's the best I've seen.http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf [av-comparatives.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529628</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK</p> </div><p>An ad that pops up every day?! Seems like a virus would be less troublesome.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK An ad that pops up every day ? !
Seems like a virus would be less troublesome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK An ad that pops up every day?!
Seems like a virus would be less troublesome.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320</id>
	<title>Ars technica review of MSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/first-look-microsoft-security-essentials-impresses.ars</p><p>An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/first-look-microsoft-security-essentials-impresses.arsAn in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials , it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend 's laptop ( I run OS X myself ) and it 's worked great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/first-look-microsoft-security-essentials-impresses.arsAn in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526694</id>
	<title>I won't suggest you any specific software...</title>
	<author>aylons</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mileage always vary. You may have speedier machine, a new one, or your client may be trying to get the last drop of juice from his 8-years-old Windows XP box. It may need to remove virus more often or will be better with a more reliable real-time detection.

I suggest you to go to <a href="http://www.av-comparatives.org/" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">AV-Comparatives</a> [av-comparatives.org]. They make nice (sometimes clever) tests and publish really extensive reports about them. Their tests are not limited to effectiveness (like the ability to detect viruses), but also to other aspects, as performance(meaning how AV affects system performance) or even "corporate reviews".

Surprisingly to me, MS Security Essentials is doing quite well, according to their tests. Maybe an option for clueless users, as it's easy to use and nice to the system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mileage always vary .
You may have speedier machine , a new one , or your client may be trying to get the last drop of juice from his 8-years-old Windows XP box .
It may need to remove virus more often or will be better with a more reliable real-time detection .
I suggest you to go to AV-Comparatives [ av-comparatives.org ] .
They make nice ( sometimes clever ) tests and publish really extensive reports about them .
Their tests are not limited to effectiveness ( like the ability to detect viruses ) , but also to other aspects , as performance ( meaning how AV affects system performance ) or even " corporate reviews " .
Surprisingly to me , MS Security Essentials is doing quite well , according to their tests .
Maybe an option for clueless users , as it 's easy to use and nice to the system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mileage always vary.
You may have speedier machine, a new one, or your client may be trying to get the last drop of juice from his 8-years-old Windows XP box.
It may need to remove virus more often or will be better with a more reliable real-time detection.
I suggest you to go to AV-Comparatives [av-comparatives.org].
They make nice (sometimes clever) tests and publish really extensive reports about them.
Their tests are not limited to effectiveness (like the ability to detect viruses), but also to other aspects, as performance(meaning how AV affects system performance) or even "corporate reviews".
Surprisingly to me, MS Security Essentials is doing quite well, according to their tests.
Maybe an option for clueless users, as it's easy to use and nice to the system.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526536</id>
	<title>Avast registration</title>
	<author>DaFallus</author>
	<datestamp>1268943000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Avast required free registration for Avast Home for quite a while?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct me if I 'm wrong , but has n't Avast required free registration for Avast Home for quite a while ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Avast required free registration for Avast Home for quite a while?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31536694</id>
	<title>you get what you pay for</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269011820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Security isn't free.  Antivirus is no place to skimp.  Next time you're writing a letter, try using Notepad.  Try using PBrush instead of PhotoShop!  Are you seriously going to touch the same developers that leave all those exploits open in WinBlows to patch the bugs?  The fox is guarding the henhouse...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Security is n't free .
Antivirus is no place to skimp .
Next time you 're writing a letter , try using Notepad .
Try using PBrush instead of PhotoShop !
Are you seriously going to touch the same developers that leave all those exploits open in WinBlows to patch the bugs ?
The fox is guarding the henhouse.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Security isn't free.
Antivirus is no place to skimp.
Next time you're writing a letter, try using Notepad.
Try using PBrush instead of PhotoShop!
Are you seriously going to touch the same developers that leave all those exploits open in WinBlows to patch the bugs?
The fox is guarding the henhouse...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527262</id>
	<title>Re:Why free? here's why!</title>
	<author>petes\_PoV</author>
	<datestamp>1268945100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looking at all the reviews, you can find studies that show pretty much any AV is the "best". they all have reviews (or tame reviewers) where they come out ahead of the pack. What that tells us in real life is the <b>no single product is significantly better</b> that any other. Under those circumstances, there are three approaches:

<p> - pick the most expensive, on the basis that it will have made the biggest investment in "getting it right"</p><p> - pick any one at random, then select the reviews which show you've made the best choice</p><p> - pick the cheapest</p><p>

If you're a doctor, you'd probably go for the first approach, if you're of the religious persuasion I'd expect you to plumb for the second and if you just want to get on with your wor, the third.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Looking at all the reviews , you can find studies that show pretty much any AV is the " best " .
they all have reviews ( or tame reviewers ) where they come out ahead of the pack .
What that tells us in real life is the no single product is significantly better that any other .
Under those circumstances , there are three approaches : - pick the most expensive , on the basis that it will have made the biggest investment in " getting it right " - pick any one at random , then select the reviews which show you 've made the best choice - pick the cheapest If you 're a doctor , you 'd probably go for the first approach , if you 're of the religious persuasion I 'd expect you to plumb for the second and if you just want to get on with your wor , the third .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looking at all the reviews, you can find studies that show pretty much any AV is the "best".
they all have reviews (or tame reviewers) where they come out ahead of the pack.
What that tells us in real life is the no single product is significantly better that any other.
Under those circumstances, there are three approaches:

 - pick the most expensive, on the basis that it will have made the biggest investment in "getting it right" - pick any one at random, then select the reviews which show you've made the best choice - pick the cheapest

If you're a doctor, you'd probably go for the first approach, if you're of the religious persuasion I'd expect you to plumb for the second and if you just want to get on with your wor, the third.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533638</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>i.of.the.storm</author>
	<datestamp>1269030180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Eh, Avast always had the registration, 5.0 just made it easier to do. Although I guess the only reason I use Avast instead of MSE is momentum; I've been using it for several years and it just has an untangible familiarity (silly, I know). Otherwise I would have switched to MSE a long time ago. On a related note, it would be nice if MS would allow third parties to tap into Windows Update and make it more like Linux package managers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Eh , Avast always had the registration , 5.0 just made it easier to do .
Although I guess the only reason I use Avast instead of MSE is momentum ; I 've been using it for several years and it just has an untangible familiarity ( silly , I know ) .
Otherwise I would have switched to MSE a long time ago .
On a related note , it would be nice if MS would allow third parties to tap into Windows Update and make it more like Linux package managers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eh, Avast always had the registration, 5.0 just made it easier to do.
Although I guess the only reason I use Avast instead of MSE is momentum; I've been using it for several years and it just has an untangible familiarity (silly, I know).
Otherwise I would have switched to MSE a long time ago.
On a related note, it would be nice if MS would allow third parties to tap into Windows Update and make it more like Linux package managers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527906</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>stakovahflow</author>
	<datestamp>1268903700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clamwin, as well, here...</p><p>Also, Malwarebytes &amp; Spybot S&amp;D.</p><p>Note: I do not really go trolling in Winderz, but if I have to, I'll use Firefox in "Private Browsing" mode...<br>That being said, I generally do not have to worry about crapware.</p><p>In Winderz, I used to use AVG &amp; tried Avira for a while. (Stopped using Avira after being annoyed by the daily pop-up for the "upgrade" to the pay version...) And AVG is dog slow. Verdict: AVG &amp; Avira, not so much.</p><p>Clam has enough features for my taste, but the issue isn't so much with virus attacks, so much as malware, spyware, crapware.</p><p>There are plenty of good malware/crapware scanners out there, but virtually none that will pick up on the smallest trojan or antivirus spoof right away. For either type of problem, most resolutions come after the crap is already on/in the system...</p><p>If all else fails and you cannot help but look at social networking sites, pr0n, &amp; junk, install a Linux/BSD system on a second partition or VMWare Server, Virtualbox, etc, to look at the pretty pictures, etc.</p><p>Remember, kids, don't trust anyone online!</p><p>That's my lame 2 cents worth...</p><p>Cheers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clamwin , as well , here...Also , Malwarebytes &amp; Spybot S&amp;D.Note : I do not really go trolling in Winderz , but if I have to , I 'll use Firefox in " Private Browsing " mode...That being said , I generally do not have to worry about crapware.In Winderz , I used to use AVG &amp; tried Avira for a while .
( Stopped using Avira after being annoyed by the daily pop-up for the " upgrade " to the pay version... ) And AVG is dog slow .
Verdict : AVG &amp; Avira , not so much.Clam has enough features for my taste , but the issue is n't so much with virus attacks , so much as malware , spyware , crapware.There are plenty of good malware/crapware scanners out there , but virtually none that will pick up on the smallest trojan or antivirus spoof right away .
For either type of problem , most resolutions come after the crap is already on/in the system...If all else fails and you can not help but look at social networking sites , pr0n , &amp; junk , install a Linux/BSD system on a second partition or VMWare Server , Virtualbox , etc , to look at the pretty pictures , etc.Remember , kids , do n't trust anyone online ! That 's my lame 2 cents worth...Cheers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clamwin, as well, here...Also, Malwarebytes &amp; Spybot S&amp;D.Note: I do not really go trolling in Winderz, but if I have to, I'll use Firefox in "Private Browsing" mode...That being said, I generally do not have to worry about crapware.In Winderz, I used to use AVG &amp; tried Avira for a while.
(Stopped using Avira after being annoyed by the daily pop-up for the "upgrade" to the pay version...) And AVG is dog slow.
Verdict: AVG &amp; Avira, not so much.Clam has enough features for my taste, but the issue isn't so much with virus attacks, so much as malware, spyware, crapware.There are plenty of good malware/crapware scanners out there, but virtually none that will pick up on the smallest trojan or antivirus spoof right away.
For either type of problem, most resolutions come after the crap is already on/in the system...If all else fails and you cannot help but look at social networking sites, pr0n, &amp; junk, install a Linux/BSD system on a second partition or VMWare Server, Virtualbox, etc, to look at the pretty pictures, etc.Remember, kids, don't trust anyone online!That's my lame 2 cents worth...Cheers!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526714</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>OttoErotic</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Interesting.  I've used ClamWin for years without problems, and just last weekend got my userinit.exe deleted.  I hadn't even thought to blame ClamWin since it's so unobtrusive that I forget about it, and most of the forums I was checking were blaming AdAware; I don't use AdAware so I've been blaming Spybot instead.  Guess I need to go check the ClamWin logs now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting .
I 've used ClamWin for years without problems , and just last weekend got my userinit.exe deleted .
I had n't even thought to blame ClamWin since it 's so unobtrusive that I forget about it , and most of the forums I was checking were blaming AdAware ; I do n't use AdAware so I 've been blaming Spybot instead .
Guess I need to go check the ClamWin logs now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting.
I've used ClamWin for years without problems, and just last weekend got my userinit.exe deleted.
I hadn't even thought to blame ClamWin since it's so unobtrusive that I forget about it, and most of the forums I was checking were blaming AdAware; I don't use AdAware so I've been blaming Spybot instead.
Guess I need to go check the ClamWin logs now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530672</id>
	<title>None</title>
	<author>ears\_d</author>
	<datestamp>1268915280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My Windows machine is seldom used and doesn't have anything on it that I care about.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My Windows machine is seldom used and does n't have anything on it that I care about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Windows machine is seldom used and doesn't have anything on it that I care about.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528614</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Smauler</author>
	<datestamp>1268905800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Admittedly your post may not have been a troll, but it was hugely misguided.  To be honest, you could have posted it to \_anyone\_, no matter what their antivirus protection.  No one knows of viruses they have that they don't know of, obviously.  If you'd have posted information about how the OP was at risk because of his behaviour, it might have been useful.</p><p>As is, your post is essentially meaningless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Admittedly your post may not have been a troll , but it was hugely misguided .
To be honest , you could have posted it to \ _anyone \ _ , no matter what their antivirus protection .
No one knows of viruses they have that they do n't know of , obviously .
If you 'd have posted information about how the OP was at risk because of his behaviour , it might have been useful.As is , your post is essentially meaningless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Admittedly your post may not have been a troll, but it was hugely misguided.
To be honest, you could have posted it to \_anyone\_, no matter what their antivirus protection.
No one knows of viruses they have that they don't know of, obviously.
If you'd have posted information about how the OP was at risk because of his behaviour, it might have been useful.As is, your post is essentially meaningless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1268944380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it was a CNET comparison I read of 19 products. Microsoft Security Essentials was something like 2nd out of 19 products in detection, it was the only free product at the top, and it has the smallest footprint out of all 19 tested.</p><p>You'd be hard pressed to argue there is a better free product right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it was a CNET comparison I read of 19 products .
Microsoft Security Essentials was something like 2nd out of 19 products in detection , it was the only free product at the top , and it has the smallest footprint out of all 19 tested.You 'd be hard pressed to argue there is a better free product right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it was a CNET comparison I read of 19 products.
Microsoft Security Essentials was something like 2nd out of 19 products in detection, it was the only free product at the top, and it has the smallest footprint out of all 19 tested.You'd be hard pressed to argue there is a better free product right now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527854</id>
	<title>MSE and Malwarebytes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Microsoft Security Essentials, because hey wouldn't the makers of the OS know the system and what has changed in the way of security better than anyone?  All politics aside it's free, and you can't always hate on Microsoft.  But these days anyone solution cannot do the job.  That is why I backend my scans with Malwarebytes as it picks up where most anti-virus applications miss.  It also detects those pesky little rootkits that are evading almost all security products these days.  It doesn't always remove the rootkits but it lets you know their in the system.  Then I use ComboFix or SmitFraud to clean off any rootkits after that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Microsoft Security Essentials , because hey would n't the makers of the OS know the system and what has changed in the way of security better than anyone ?
All politics aside it 's free , and you ca n't always hate on Microsoft .
But these days anyone solution can not do the job .
That is why I backend my scans with Malwarebytes as it picks up where most anti-virus applications miss .
It also detects those pesky little rootkits that are evading almost all security products these days .
It does n't always remove the rootkits but it lets you know their in the system .
Then I use ComboFix or SmitFraud to clean off any rootkits after that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Microsoft Security Essentials, because hey wouldn't the makers of the OS know the system and what has changed in the way of security better than anyone?
All politics aside it's free, and you can't always hate on Microsoft.
But these days anyone solution cannot do the job.
That is why I backend my scans with Malwarebytes as it picks up where most anti-virus applications miss.
It also detects those pesky little rootkits that are evading almost all security products these days.
It doesn't always remove the rootkits but it lets you know their in the system.
Then I use ComboFix or SmitFraud to clean off any rootkits after that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526262</id>
	<title>Comodo</title>
	<author>pnuema</author>
	<datestamp>1268942220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.comodo.com/" title="comodo.com">Comodo</a> [comodo.com] gives you firewall and anti-virus in one package, and I have been using it for a couple of years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Comodo [ comodo.com ] gives you firewall and anti-virus in one package , and I have been using it for a couple of years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comodo [comodo.com] gives you firewall and anti-virus in one package, and I have been using it for a couple of years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528</id>
	<title>None...</title>
	<author>AdamTrace</author>
	<datestamp>1268942940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At some point, I got fed up with running anti-virus software on my Windows XP PC.  The benefits never appeared to outweigh the hassle.  And AV software IS a hassle.</p><p>After a year, I can't see any downside to this.</p><p>Note that I'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do, as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At some point , I got fed up with running anti-virus software on my Windows XP PC .
The benefits never appeared to outweigh the hassle .
And AV software IS a hassle.After a year , I ca n't see any downside to this.Note that I 'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do , as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At some point, I got fed up with running anti-virus software on my Windows XP PC.
The benefits never appeared to outweigh the hassle.
And AV software IS a hassle.After a year, I can't see any downside to this.Note that I'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do, as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526552</id>
	<title>PC-Tools AntiVirus/Spyware</title>
	<author>MicahEli</author>
	<datestamp>1268943000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been using PC-Tools Antivirus lately with good results.  It seems to do the job very well while not killing my cpu time and memory/io..   Its also free and the license doesn't prevent using it for commercial use.   You can get it from pack.google.com as well. If you need a version that'll install on Win2k3 server or higher, it'll need to come right from pctools.com.. The pack.google.com version is only for XP/Vista/7.

Just my 2cents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been using PC-Tools Antivirus lately with good results .
It seems to do the job very well while not killing my cpu time and memory/io.. Its also free and the license does n't prevent using it for commercial use .
You can get it from pack.google.com as well .
If you need a version that 'll install on Win2k3 server or higher , it 'll need to come right from pctools.com.. The pack.google.com version is only for XP/Vista/7 .
Just my 2cents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been using PC-Tools Antivirus lately with good results.
It seems to do the job very well while not killing my cpu time and memory/io..   Its also free and the license doesn't prevent using it for commercial use.
You can get it from pack.google.com as well.
If you need a version that'll install on Win2k3 server or higher, it'll need to come right from pctools.com.. The pack.google.com version is only for XP/Vista/7.
Just my 2cents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537074</id>
	<title>I'll even agree w/ ARSTECHNICA (for once)... apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269012660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?</p><p>I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc. (all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great."</b> - by igomaniac (409731)<br>on Thursday March 18, @02:00PM (#31526320)</p></div><p>I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's good stuff!</p><p>Heck - I'll even agree with ARSTECHNICA &amp; their review (which I am NOT "wont to do", usually, but... facts, ARE facts, &amp; they're correct that it's decent!)</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik? Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>(That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what? They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc. et al))... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Per my subject-line above , &amp; this quote from you ? I.E./E.G.- &gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot " Search &amp; Destroy " + NORMAN Malware Cleaner ( &amp; of course , MS ' monthly updated " MS Malicious Software Removal Tool " as well ) - for " many doctors ' opinions " etc .
( all " latest/greatest " versions , fully updated of course also ) : " An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials , it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend 's laptop ( I run OS X myself ) and it 's worked great .
" - by igomaniac ( 409731 ) on Thursday March 18 , @ 02 : 00PM ( # 31526320 ) I 'll " 2nd that motion " ( after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it 's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact , &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here ) ... it 's good stuff ! Heck - I 'll even agree with ARSTECHNICA &amp; their review ( which I am NOT " wont to do " , usually , but... facts , ARE facts , &amp; they 're correct that it 's decent !
) Microsoft Security Essentials does the job , + well... &amp; afaik ?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a " Combined Package " , in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package ( thus , it 's " 2-for-the-price-of-1 " ) @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job , plus well , &amp; that 's also from reviews I have seen of this program ( as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS ) .Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND , Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even , IF you like , right here - &gt; http : //www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [ microsoft.com ] ( That 's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well ( bonus ) ) .APKP.S. = &gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package ( yes , they bought it out , but so what ?
They 're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way , Way , WAY " off " as far as I am concerned , because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact , they 're not even charging for protection ( ala " the mob " etc .
et al ) ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc.
(all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):"An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great.
" - by igomaniac (409731)on Thursday March 18, @02:00PM (#31526320)I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's good stuff!Heck - I'll even agree with ARSTECHNICA &amp; their review (which I am NOT "wont to do", usually, but... facts, ARE facts, &amp; they're correct that it's decent!
)Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [microsoft.com](That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).APKP.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what?
They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc.
et al))... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531900</id>
	<title>Tried many, went with MS Security Essentials</title>
	<author>DarkMagician07</author>
	<datestamp>1268924100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have comcast, which gave me McAfee for the last few years, but then they switched to Norton, which caused nothing but problems for my machine.  So, I went on the same search about a week ago.  I tried quite a few, but after reading about many, I settled on MSE as well.</p><p>Clamwin had issues in that all the testing reviews I could find only showed it recognizing about 50\% of the viruses that were thrown at it.  Avast! was listed higher, but it slowed machines down, AVG has always had one issue or another on the computers I've installed it on, and the free versions of any commercial product are so watered down that they were not worth it, either.</p><p>I went with MSE after reading quite a few positive reviews that put it above most other free AVs out there.  It's got it's own issues (only finding about 95\% of the viruses thrown at it), but it's still much better than any other option I've tried.  I've even found it to not interfere with any other processes that are running.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have comcast , which gave me McAfee for the last few years , but then they switched to Norton , which caused nothing but problems for my machine .
So , I went on the same search about a week ago .
I tried quite a few , but after reading about many , I settled on MSE as well.Clamwin had issues in that all the testing reviews I could find only showed it recognizing about 50 \ % of the viruses that were thrown at it .
Avast ! was listed higher , but it slowed machines down , AVG has always had one issue or another on the computers I 've installed it on , and the free versions of any commercial product are so watered down that they were not worth it , either.I went with MSE after reading quite a few positive reviews that put it above most other free AVs out there .
It 's got it 's own issues ( only finding about 95 \ % of the viruses thrown at it ) , but it 's still much better than any other option I 've tried .
I 've even found it to not interfere with any other processes that are running .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have comcast, which gave me McAfee for the last few years, but then they switched to Norton, which caused nothing but problems for my machine.
So, I went on the same search about a week ago.
I tried quite a few, but after reading about many, I settled on MSE as well.Clamwin had issues in that all the testing reviews I could find only showed it recognizing about 50\% of the viruses that were thrown at it.
Avast! was listed higher, but it slowed machines down, AVG has always had one issue or another on the computers I've installed it on, and the free versions of any commercial product are so watered down that they were not worth it, either.I went with MSE after reading quite a few positive reviews that put it above most other free AVs out there.
It's got it's own issues (only finding about 95\% of the viruses thrown at it), but it's still much better than any other option I've tried.
I've even found it to not interfere with any other processes that are running.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529382</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Again</author>
	<datestamp>1268908620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license</p></div><p>That has to be the worst product name ever!  Just try pronouncing that!  I thought maybe there was line noise or something, or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else.  Next time someone complains about GIMP's name, I'll point to this product.</p></div><p>I agree.  And it sounds like the name of a virus.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I licenseThat has to be the worst product name ever !
Just try pronouncing that !
I thought maybe there was line noise or something , or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else .
Next time someone complains about GIMP 's name , I 'll point to this product.I agree .
And it sounds like the name of a virus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I licenseThat has to be the worst product name ever!
Just try pronouncing that!
I thought maybe there was line noise or something, or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else.
Next time someone complains about GIMP's name, I'll point to this product.I agree.
And it sounds like the name of a virus.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531288</id>
	<title>Re:Install through ninite.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268919240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it.</p></div><p>Grampa:  Now I know young mprinkey said to NEVER RUN EXECUTABLE EMAIL ATTACHMENTS, but email's totally secure and unforgable, so I guess I should do it.</p><p>You're the reason they're all idiots.  Thanks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it.Grampa : Now I know young mprinkey said to NEVER RUN EXECUTABLE EMAIL ATTACHMENTS , but email 's totally secure and unforgable , so I guess I should do it.You 're the reason they 're all idiots .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it.Grampa:  Now I know young mprinkey said to NEVER RUN EXECUTABLE EMAIL ATTACHMENTS, but email's totally secure and unforgable, so I guess I should do it.You're the reason they're all idiots.
Thanks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531064</id>
	<title>Re:buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>backwardMechanic</author>
	<datestamp>1268917800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used purely Linux/Solaris for a few years, but in my current job I have a couple of apps that tie me to Windows. I hate it. I haven't found time yet to experiment with virtual machines, but it's on my list. How do they cope with 3D intensive apps? I need to run Solidworks and CST Microwave Studio. I think Solidworks is the real challenge here - does anyone know if it works?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used purely Linux/Solaris for a few years , but in my current job I have a couple of apps that tie me to Windows .
I hate it .
I have n't found time yet to experiment with virtual machines , but it 's on my list .
How do they cope with 3D intensive apps ?
I need to run Solidworks and CST Microwave Studio .
I think Solidworks is the real challenge here - does anyone know if it works ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used purely Linux/Solaris for a few years, but in my current job I have a couple of apps that tie me to Windows.
I hate it.
I haven't found time yet to experiment with virtual machines, but it's on my list.
How do they cope with 3D intensive apps?
I need to run Solidworks and CST Microwave Studio.
I think Solidworks is the real challenge here - does anyone know if it works?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31538182</id>
	<title>Natural Immunity</title>
	<author>Convector</author>
	<datestamp>1269015300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The best thing is to drop all this and let your system's natural immunity develop.  Overprescription of AV software just encourages the growth of AV resistant viruses.  Basic hygiene is still important, so wash your computer and all peripherals daily with warm soapy water.  That will eliminate 99.9\% of all viruses.  Also data.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The best thing is to drop all this and let your system 's natural immunity develop .
Overprescription of AV software just encourages the growth of AV resistant viruses .
Basic hygiene is still important , so wash your computer and all peripherals daily with warm soapy water .
That will eliminate 99.9 \ % of all viruses .
Also data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The best thing is to drop all this and let your system's natural immunity develop.
Overprescription of AV software just encourages the growth of AV resistant viruses.
Basic hygiene is still important, so wash your computer and all peripherals daily with warm soapy water.
That will eliminate 99.9\% of all viruses.
Also data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527888</id>
	<title>Avast versus free ISP commercial versions</title>
	<author>ITJC68</author>
	<datestamp>1268903640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Previous versions of Avast also required registering but they would send the key string usually in a few minutes of registration. I used it up until my ISP offered a commercial version for free. My whole family uses computers but none want to be bothered with running scans or updating antispyware so they have the free commercial version. It does slow the machines down a little but they are no longer bothered with having to do tasks as they are done in the background. If I get a virus on the systems then I may go back to avast but for now Symantec is ok.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Previous versions of Avast also required registering but they would send the key string usually in a few minutes of registration .
I used it up until my ISP offered a commercial version for free .
My whole family uses computers but none want to be bothered with running scans or updating antispyware so they have the free commercial version .
It does slow the machines down a little but they are no longer bothered with having to do tasks as they are done in the background .
If I get a virus on the systems then I may go back to avast but for now Symantec is ok .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Previous versions of Avast also required registering but they would send the key string usually in a few minutes of registration.
I used it up until my ISP offered a commercial version for free.
My whole family uses computers but none want to be bothered with running scans or updating antispyware so they have the free commercial version.
It does slow the machines down a little but they are no longer bothered with having to do tasks as they are done in the background.
If I get a virus on the systems then I may go back to avast but for now Symantec is ok.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530378</id>
	<title>MS + AVIRA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268913480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>free, light and they seem to play nicely together.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>free , light and they seem to play nicely together .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>free, light and they seem to play nicely together.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526296</id>
	<title>Avira or Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Bos20k</author>
	<datestamp>1268942340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would recommend either Avira <a href="http://www.freeav.com/" title="freeav.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.freeav.com/</a> [freeav.com] or M$ Security Essentials.</p><p>A while ago I read some link off Slashdot that compared the CPU/RAM usage of various virus scanners.  Avira was at or near the top on all the tests.  My use of it seems to validate that.</p><p>Security Essentials is a Microsoft product so I figure they know all or most of the tricks of their own OS to make it reasonably low on resource usage which it seems to be.  It also has no nag screens which is nice.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would recommend either Avira http : //www.freeav.com/ [ freeav.com ] or M $ Security Essentials.A while ago I read some link off Slashdot that compared the CPU/RAM usage of various virus scanners .
Avira was at or near the top on all the tests .
My use of it seems to validate that.Security Essentials is a Microsoft product so I figure they know all or most of the tricks of their own OS to make it reasonably low on resource usage which it seems to be .
It also has no nag screens which is nice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would recommend either Avira http://www.freeav.com/ [freeav.com] or M$ Security Essentials.A while ago I read some link off Slashdot that compared the CPU/RAM usage of various virus scanners.
Avira was at or near the top on all the tests.
My use of it seems to validate that.Security Essentials is a Microsoft product so I figure they know all or most of the tricks of their own OS to make it reasonably low on resource usage which it seems to be.
It also has no nag screens which is nice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526836</id>
	<title>Not sure about antivirus, but....</title>
	<author>WindBourne</author>
	<datestamp>1268943900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I understand that a lot of free virus are installed second on windows.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand that a lot of free virus are installed second on windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand that a lot of free virus are installed second on windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530272</id>
	<title>Windows Server 2008 R2?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268912820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use 2k8 R2 as a workstation (because of HyperV). Any good free AVs for it? (MSE won't install)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use 2k8 R2 as a workstation ( because of HyperV ) .
Any good free AVs for it ?
( MSE wo n't install )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use 2k8 R2 as a workstation (because of HyperV).
Any good free AVs for it?
(MSE won't install)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529556</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Weird. I would've figured people on slashdot were into optimization. I've even turned off the XP startupGUI in msconfig. I've got Windows Update turned off, and the new Avast has a "silent mode" that's easily accessible from the right-click menu on the icon in the taskbar, so it can still update (in periods of time that you can specify down to the minute) but no noise or pop up windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Weird .
I would 've figured people on slashdot were into optimization .
I 've even turned off the XP startupGUI in msconfig .
I 've got Windows Update turned off , and the new Avast has a " silent mode " that 's easily accessible from the right-click menu on the icon in the taskbar , so it can still update ( in periods of time that you can specify down to the minute ) but no noise or pop up windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Weird.
I would've figured people on slashdot were into optimization.
I've even turned off the XP startupGUI in msconfig.
I've got Windows Update turned off, and the new Avast has a "silent mode" that's easily accessible from the right-click menu on the icon in the taskbar, so it can still update (in periods of time that you can specify down to the minute) but no noise or pop up windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</id>
	<title>i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>avast kept popping up ads to buy their stuff.<br>switched to avira, no popups.    similar number of false positives as avast...    i saw no difference between them.   but really, who knows if they're working.</p><p>is there a way to evaluate antivirus software?   i mean, after it's 1.) no popups, 2.) not bloaty 3.) easy on the system 4.) convenient to use...   how do you know if it actually works?</p><p>I mean I could write a system tray app that's a "virus checker".   and always tells you your system's ok...   haha</p><p>anyway, reading around, seemed like avast, avira, and avg were the best free ones.   and after running avg and avast, I liked avira.  but really, no idea who's the best.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>avast kept popping up ads to buy their stuff.switched to avira , no popups .
similar number of false positives as avast... i saw no difference between them .
but really , who knows if they 're working.is there a way to evaluate antivirus software ?
i mean , after it 's 1 .
) no popups , 2 .
) not bloaty 3 .
) easy on the system 4 .
) convenient to use... how do you know if it actually works ? I mean I could write a system tray app that 's a " virus checker " .
and always tells you your system 's ok... hahaanyway , reading around , seemed like avast , avira , and avg were the best free ones .
and after running avg and avast , I liked avira .
but really , no idea who 's the best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>avast kept popping up ads to buy their stuff.switched to avira, no popups.
similar number of false positives as avast...    i saw no difference between them.
but really, who knows if they're working.is there a way to evaluate antivirus software?
i mean, after it's 1.
) no popups, 2.
) not bloaty 3.
) easy on the system 4.
) convenient to use...   how do you know if it actually works?I mean I could write a system tray app that's a "virus checker".
and always tells you your system's ok...   hahaanyway, reading around, seemed like avast, avira, and avg were the best free ones.
and after running avg and avast, I liked avira.
but really, no idea who's the best.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176</id>
	<title>Panda Cloud</title>
	<author>Dotren</author>
	<datestamp>1268941920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been trying this out on my home computers so far and its definitely less resource intensive than previous AV solutions I've used.  I haven't gotten infected with anything lately (that I know of) so I don't know how well it handles infections yet.</p><p>Actual web page is <a href="http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/" title="cloudantivirus.com">here</a> [cloudantivirus.com] and you can read up on it a bit <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panda\_Cloud\_Antivirus" title="wikipedia.org">here</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been trying this out on my home computers so far and its definitely less resource intensive than previous AV solutions I 've used .
I have n't gotten infected with anything lately ( that I know of ) so I do n't know how well it handles infections yet.Actual web page is here [ cloudantivirus.com ] and you can read up on it a bit here [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been trying this out on my home computers so far and its definitely less resource intensive than previous AV solutions I've used.
I haven't gotten infected with anything lately (that I know of) so I don't know how well it handles infections yet.Actual web page is here [cloudantivirus.com] and you can read up on it a bit here [wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528394</id>
	<title>Re:Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268905020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Version 4 detected and removed rootkits as well.  I've been using Avast for years...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Version 4 detected and removed rootkits as well .
I 've been using Avast for years.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Version 4 detected and removed rootkits as well.
I've been using Avast for years...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1268941860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month. Then they upgraded to 5.0. Didn't care about the registration, but everything else just irked me to no end. On the other hand, MSE has every advantage you listed, plus no registration, and the updates are gathered through Windows Update, so you don't have yet another service updating itself.</p><p>Oh, and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month .
Then they upgraded to 5.0 .
Did n't care about the registration , but everything else just irked me to no end .
On the other hand , MSE has every advantage you listed , plus no registration , and the updates are gathered through Windows Update , so you do n't have yet another service updating itself.Oh , and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month.
Then they upgraded to 5.0.
Didn't care about the registration, but everything else just irked me to no end.
On the other hand, MSE has every advantage you listed, plus no registration, and the updates are gathered through Windows Update, so you don't have yet another service updating itself.Oh, and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502</id>
	<title>MSSE</title>
	<author>spottedkangaroo</author>
	<datestamp>1268942880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft Security Essentials.  It's really the only choice imo.  All the others are trying to sell you something.  Now, if you're willing to pay, there are perhaps better choices.  The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously.  All AV sucks, badly.  It's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things.  It's the only option, but it sucks.  MSSE is good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essentials .
It 's really the only choice imo .
All the others are trying to sell you something .
Now , if you 're willing to pay , there are perhaps better choices .
The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously .
All AV sucks , badly .
It 's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things .
It 's the only option , but it sucks .
MSSE is good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essentials.
It's really the only choice imo.
All the others are trying to sell you something.
Now, if you're willing to pay, there are perhaps better choices.
The most important thing to remember is to not take it too awful seriously.
All AV sucks, badly.
It's reactive and it only detects a small percentage of the naughty things.
It's the only option, but it sucks.
MSSE is good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533260</id>
	<title>Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268937600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Try Avira AntiVir. Its much better. I used to use Avast &amp; AVG but somehow they both created problems for me. There were several viruses which AVG ignored (although it was up-to-date), but AntiVir is awesome. I have been using it now for more than 2 years. Never had any issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Try Avira AntiVir .
Its much better .
I used to use Avast &amp; AVG but somehow they both created problems for me .
There were several viruses which AVG ignored ( although it was up-to-date ) , but AntiVir is awesome .
I have been using it now for more than 2 years .
Never had any issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try Avira AntiVir.
Its much better.
I used to use Avast &amp; AVG but somehow they both created problems for me.
There were several viruses which AVG ignored (although it was up-to-date), but AntiVir is awesome.
I have been using it now for more than 2 years.
Never had any issues.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534204</id>
	<title>What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268997240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I do install Linux.</p><p>No problem...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I do install Linux.No problem.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I do install Linux.No problem...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527494</id>
	<title>Re:Panda Cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is my Antivirus of choice, has excellent detection and interception rates. I used to use AVG then I switched to Avast and now I'm using either Panda or Microsoft Security Essentials on everyhing. Microsoft SE is comprable in terms of resource consumption and detection rates  however, with Panda there is no need to use automatic windows updates to keep up with new malware! Awesome product!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is my Antivirus of choice , has excellent detection and interception rates .
I used to use AVG then I switched to Avast and now I 'm using either Panda or Microsoft Security Essentials on everyhing .
Microsoft SE is comprable in terms of resource consumption and detection rates however , with Panda there is no need to use automatic windows updates to keep up with new malware !
Awesome product !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is my Antivirus of choice, has excellent detection and interception rates.
I used to use AVG then I switched to Avast and now I'm using either Panda or Microsoft Security Essentials on everyhing.
Microsoft SE is comprable in terms of resource consumption and detection rates  however, with Panda there is no need to use automatic windows updates to keep up with new malware!
Awesome product!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988</id>
	<title>Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1268941440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still use Avast.  Oh noes, it took me 2 minutes to fill out the little form.  It takes up few resources, it has updates for it nearly every day, it's free as in beer, and I have gotten a virus in ages.  What's not to like?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still use Avast .
Oh noes , it took me 2 minutes to fill out the little form .
It takes up few resources , it has updates for it nearly every day , it 's free as in beer , and I have gotten a virus in ages .
What 's not to like ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still use Avast.
Oh noes, it took me 2 minutes to fill out the little form.
It takes up few resources, it has updates for it nearly every day, it's free as in beer, and I have gotten a virus in ages.
What's not to like?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</id>
	<title>That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At work (a university) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos. It is, well, crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources. So, instead we use Security Essentials on many systems. Works well, it has successfully stopped viruses that users have tried to get. Pretty light on resources over all, not the lightest weight program I've seen but up there.</p><p>Best one for free I've seen. Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license for home, but if the price requirement is $0, then MSE is what I use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At work ( a university ) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos .
It is , well , crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources .
So , instead we use Security Essentials on many systems .
Works well , it has successfully stopped viruses that users have tried to get .
Pretty light on resources over all , not the lightest weight program I 've seen but up there.Best one for free I 've seen .
Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license for home , but if the price requirement is $ 0 , then MSE is what I use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At work (a university) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos.
It is, well, crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources.
So, instead we use Security Essentials on many systems.
Works well, it has successfully stopped viruses that users have tried to get.
Pretty light on resources over all, not the lightest weight program I've seen but up there.Best one for free I've seen.
Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license for home, but if the price requirement is $0, then MSE is what I use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528418</id>
	<title>My faves...</title>
	<author>electrongunner</author>
	<datestamp>1268905080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always run 3 antivirus progs on my PC and have found the following setup to work fine with minimal impact on system performance:
<ol>
<li> <strong>ClamwinAV</strong> - The gold standard for linux server admins, ported to Windows - the smallest memory footprint of any of them and doesn't interfere with other antivirus progs. </li><li> <strong>Avast</strong> - You're crazy if you think it's any harder to get their free version than it ever was. You've always had to re-register for a new key every year. Been using it for over 5 years. Other posters are correct, the voice that alerts you to your daily updates really kills the mood when you're trying to get jiggy with your lady friends. I always turn off that voice first thing.
</li><li> <strong>Microsoft Security Essentials</strong> - This also runs fine with the other antivirus progs. </li></ol><p>
The only caveat I've found running these 3 progs together is that sometimes one virus prog will flag the automatic virus updates of another prog and try to quarantine them, but all you have to do is add the relevant folder to the list of excluded dirs in whichever program flags the updates.

About once a year (or whenever I disregard my own security knowledge and download some infected software), I run several anti-malware progs (spybot,adaware,etc.) and also run a trial of whatever seems like the highest rated commercial antivirus product at the time. This year it was Avira, which I'm still running, but getting sick of the daily pop-up ads. Avira recently did a great job of removing a pesky trojan that other progs had trouble with after I installed an infected bittorrent download. So right now I'm actually running Clamwin, Avira and MSFT Security Essentials. The only time it bogs down my system is when doing a full scan, but that's to be expected.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always run 3 antivirus progs on my PC and have found the following setup to work fine with minimal impact on system performance : ClamwinAV - The gold standard for linux server admins , ported to Windows - the smallest memory footprint of any of them and does n't interfere with other antivirus progs .
Avast - You 're crazy if you think it 's any harder to get their free version than it ever was .
You 've always had to re-register for a new key every year .
Been using it for over 5 years .
Other posters are correct , the voice that alerts you to your daily updates really kills the mood when you 're trying to get jiggy with your lady friends .
I always turn off that voice first thing .
Microsoft Security Essentials - This also runs fine with the other antivirus progs .
The only caveat I 've found running these 3 progs together is that sometimes one virus prog will flag the automatic virus updates of another prog and try to quarantine them , but all you have to do is add the relevant folder to the list of excluded dirs in whichever program flags the updates .
About once a year ( or whenever I disregard my own security knowledge and download some infected software ) , I run several anti-malware progs ( spybot,adaware,etc .
) and also run a trial of whatever seems like the highest rated commercial antivirus product at the time .
This year it was Avira , which I 'm still running , but getting sick of the daily pop-up ads .
Avira recently did a great job of removing a pesky trojan that other progs had trouble with after I installed an infected bittorrent download .
So right now I 'm actually running Clamwin , Avira and MSFT Security Essentials .
The only time it bogs down my system is when doing a full scan , but that 's to be expected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always run 3 antivirus progs on my PC and have found the following setup to work fine with minimal impact on system performance:

 ClamwinAV - The gold standard for linux server admins, ported to Windows - the smallest memory footprint of any of them and doesn't interfere with other antivirus progs.
Avast - You're crazy if you think it's any harder to get their free version than it ever was.
You've always had to re-register for a new key every year.
Been using it for over 5 years.
Other posters are correct, the voice that alerts you to your daily updates really kills the mood when you're trying to get jiggy with your lady friends.
I always turn off that voice first thing.
Microsoft Security Essentials - This also runs fine with the other antivirus progs.
The only caveat I've found running these 3 progs together is that sometimes one virus prog will flag the automatic virus updates of another prog and try to quarantine them, but all you have to do is add the relevant folder to the list of excluded dirs in whichever program flags the updates.
About once a year (or whenever I disregard my own security knowledge and download some infected software), I run several anti-malware progs (spybot,adaware,etc.
) and also run a trial of whatever seems like the highest rated commercial antivirus product at the time.
This year it was Avira, which I'm still running, but getting sick of the daily pop-up ads.
Avira recently did a great job of removing a pesky trojan that other progs had trouble with after I installed an infected bittorrent download.
So right now I'm actually running Clamwin, Avira and MSFT Security Essentials.
The only time it bogs down my system is when doing a full scan, but that's to be expected.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530320</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1268913120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month. Then they upgraded to 5.0. Didn't care about the registration, but everything else just irked me to no end. On the other hand, MSE has every advantage you listed, plus no registration, and the updates are gathered through Windows Update, so you don't have yet another service updating itself.</p><p>Oh, and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes.</p></div><p>I trust Microsoft to fix their problems like I trust a junkie to hold my money.</p><p>Seriously, if MS wanted to fix the problems, they can do it at the OS level, not as an add on program.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month .
Then they upgraded to 5.0 .
Did n't care about the registration , but everything else just irked me to no end .
On the other hand , MSE has every advantage you listed , plus no registration , and the updates are gathered through Windows Update , so you do n't have yet another service updating itself.Oh , and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes.I trust Microsoft to fix their problems like I trust a junkie to hold my money.Seriously , if MS wanted to fix the problems , they can do it at the OS level , not as an add on program .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used Avast 4.8 for about a month.
Then they upgraded to 5.0.
Didn't care about the registration, but everything else just irked me to no end.
On the other hand, MSE has every advantage you listed, plus no registration, and the updates are gathered through Windows Update, so you don't have yet another service updating itself.Oh, and the quick scan takes about 3 minutes.I trust Microsoft to fix their problems like I trust a junkie to hold my money.Seriously, if MS wanted to fix the problems, they can do it at the OS level, not as an add on program.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526492</id>
	<title>Avira/AntiVir</title>
	<author>kroby</author>
	<datestamp>1268942820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avira get's my vote.  Low resource use, high detection rate, and free for personal use.  What more could you ask for?
Since it is freeware the default installation has some nag screens, but those are easily disabled.  <a href="http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable\_antivir\_nag.htm" title="elitekiller.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable\_antivir\_nag.htm</a> [elitekiller.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira get 's my vote .
Low resource use , high detection rate , and free for personal use .
What more could you ask for ?
Since it is freeware the default installation has some nag screens , but those are easily disabled .
http : //www.elitekiller.com/files/disable \ _antivir \ _nag.htm [ elitekiller.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira get's my vote.
Low resource use, high detection rate, and free for personal use.
What more could you ask for?
Since it is freeware the default installation has some nag screens, but those are easily disabled.
http://www.elitekiller.com/files/disable\_antivir\_nag.htm [elitekiller.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526362</id>
	<title>NONE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why they choke your computer as bad as the virus that they dont ever catch while constantly nagging you</p><p>besides system restore takes what a whole 4 min, there is no real viruses anymore just windows spyware</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why they choke your computer as bad as the virus that they dont ever catch while constantly nagging youbesides system restore takes what a whole 4 min , there is no real viruses anymore just windows spyware</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why they choke your computer as bad as the virus that they dont ever catch while constantly nagging youbesides system restore takes what a whole 4 min, there is no real viruses anymore just windows spyware</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528386</id>
	<title>Re:I don't use anything.</title>
	<author>jisou</author>
	<datestamp>1268905020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Key Words: YET. just because you show no signs of viruses doesn't mean you dont have one. Remember that people have/will use things like Script injections to infect a trustworthy site and drive by download a virus to your machine faster then you can say "your virus database has been updated"
Also not all viruses have the intent of shutting down your machine. Some just want to use your machine to host child porn or other illegal things, and if that happens then you may end up one day with police knocking on your door with a warrant for your arrest.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Key Words : YET .
just because you show no signs of viruses does n't mean you dont have one .
Remember that people have/will use things like Script injections to infect a trustworthy site and drive by download a virus to your machine faster then you can say " your virus database has been updated " Also not all viruses have the intent of shutting down your machine .
Some just want to use your machine to host child porn or other illegal things , and if that happens then you may end up one day with police knocking on your door with a warrant for your arrest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Key Words: YET.
just because you show no signs of viruses doesn't mean you dont have one.
Remember that people have/will use things like Script injections to infect a trustworthy site and drive by download a virus to your machine faster then you can say "your virus database has been updated"
Also not all viruses have the intent of shutting down your machine.
Some just want to use your machine to host child porn or other illegal things, and if that happens then you may end up one day with police knocking on your door with a warrant for your arrest.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532712</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>rdnetto</author>
	<datestamp>1268931360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's possible to disable the ad. <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/8528513/Avira-Notification-Disable" title="scribd.com">Link here</a> [scribd.com].<br>IMO, the best part about Avira is its heuristics - they're miles better than all the others' and catch everything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's possible to disable the ad .
Link here [ scribd.com ] .IMO , the best part about Avira is its heuristics - they 're miles better than all the others ' and catch everything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's possible to disable the ad.
Link here [scribd.com].IMO, the best part about Avira is its heuristics - they're miles better than all the others' and catch everything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530636</id>
	<title>Delete IE</title>
	<author>evanh</author>
	<datestamp>1268915100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Solve all your woes in one foul swoop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Solve all your woes in one foul swoop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Solve all your woes in one foul swoop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527820</id>
	<title>Firewall too</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about extend this question to firewalls..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about extend this question to firewalls. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about extend this question to firewalls..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527594</id>
	<title>I check the scored on Virus Bulliten and...</title>
	<author>techdavis</author>
	<datestamp>1268902800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I check the scored on Virus Bulletin <a href="http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=summary" title="virusbtn.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=summary</a> [virusbtn.com] and AV Comparitives <a href="http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf</a> [av-comparatives.org] to get the best available. I have used Avast! for years with great success, and recently started using Microsoft Security Essentials, both of which are VB100 rated. I like the small footprint of the new MS offering, and the fact that it has such a high detection and low false-positive rating. So far so good, even on my in-laws' laptop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I check the scored on Virus Bulletin http : //www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results ? display = summary [ virusbtn.com ] and AV Comparitives http : //www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf [ av-comparatives.org ] to get the best available .
I have used Avast !
for years with great success , and recently started using Microsoft Security Essentials , both of which are VB100 rated .
I like the small footprint of the new MS offering , and the fact that it has such a high detection and low false-positive rating .
So far so good , even on my in-laws ' laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I check the scored on Virus Bulletin http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=summary [virusbtn.com] and AV Comparitives http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/summary/summary2009.pdf [av-comparatives.org] to get the best available.
I have used Avast!
for years with great success, and recently started using Microsoft Security Essentials, both of which are VB100 rated.
I like the small footprint of the new MS offering, and the fact that it has such a high detection and low false-positive rating.
So far so good, even on my in-laws' laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526450</id>
	<title>Re:Spybot Search &amp; Destroy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still use Spybot S&amp;D, but I also use Symantec Corporate Edition.  You really need more than one AV these days.  The NoScript plugin for Firefox helps a lot when it comes to random internet browsing.  Prevention is the best protection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still use Spybot S&amp;D , but I also use Symantec Corporate Edition .
You really need more than one AV these days .
The NoScript plugin for Firefox helps a lot when it comes to random internet browsing .
Prevention is the best protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still use Spybot S&amp;D, but I also use Symantec Corporate Edition.
You really need more than one AV these days.
The NoScript plugin for Firefox helps a lot when it comes to random internet browsing.
Prevention is the best protection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526232</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526348</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>$RANDOMLUSER</author>
	<datestamp>1268942460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I mean, if anyone knows about viruses, it'd be Microsoft.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
<i>Caring</i> is another matter. Given their long history of "lightning fast" responses to security problems, I'm not overwhelmed with confidence in their commitment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , if anyone knows about viruses , it 'd be Microsoft .
Caring is another matter .
Given their long history of " lightning fast " responses to security problems , I 'm not overwhelmed with confidence in their commitment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, if anyone knows about viruses, it'd be Microsoft.
Caring is another matter.
Given their long history of "lightning fast" responses to security problems, I'm not overwhelmed with confidence in their commitment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1268904720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license</p> </div><p>That has to be the worst product name ever!  Just try pronouncing that!  I thought maybe there was line noise or something, or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else.  Next time someone complains about GIMP's name, I'll point to this product.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license That has to be the worst product name ever !
Just try pronouncing that !
I thought maybe there was line noise or something , or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else .
Next time someone complains about GIMP 's name , I 'll point to this product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally ESET NOD32 is my favourite and what I license That has to be the worst product name ever!
Just try pronouncing that!
I thought maybe there was line noise or something, or maybe your keyboard exploded while trying to type something else.
Next time someone complains about GIMP's name, I'll point to this product.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527214</id>
	<title>Just uninstalled AVG yesterday</title>
	<author>frovingslosh</author>
	<datestamp>1268944980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just uninstalled AVG 8.x yesterday. I just want an virus scan software that I can keep on my system, and either manually scan a selected file on demand or occasionally scan a partition or the entire computer. I certainly don't want software that is running all of the time and using resources to snoop on my e-mail or scan every download. I supposedly have all of that extra snooping disabled in AVG. Yet I was appalled by all of the AVG processes that were running in the background, and further disgusted that they couldn't even be terminated in Task Manager (when I did try to terminate then it seemed two more started for every one that I tried to kill).

</p><p>So this is an interesting thread, I would sure like to find something that can be run on demand but otherwise doesn't waste cpu and memory resources when not needed. So far have not found it yet, and it is depressing that this topic isn't leading to any good choices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just uninstalled AVG 8.x yesterday .
I just want an virus scan software that I can keep on my system , and either manually scan a selected file on demand or occasionally scan a partition or the entire computer .
I certainly do n't want software that is running all of the time and using resources to snoop on my e-mail or scan every download .
I supposedly have all of that extra snooping disabled in AVG .
Yet I was appalled by all of the AVG processes that were running in the background , and further disgusted that they could n't even be terminated in Task Manager ( when I did try to terminate then it seemed two more started for every one that I tried to kill ) .
So this is an interesting thread , I would sure like to find something that can be run on demand but otherwise does n't waste cpu and memory resources when not needed .
So far have not found it yet , and it is depressing that this topic is n't leading to any good choices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just uninstalled AVG 8.x yesterday.
I just want an virus scan software that I can keep on my system, and either manually scan a selected file on demand or occasionally scan a partition or the entire computer.
I certainly don't want software that is running all of the time and using resources to snoop on my e-mail or scan every download.
I supposedly have all of that extra snooping disabled in AVG.
Yet I was appalled by all of the AVG processes that were running in the background, and further disgusted that they couldn't even be terminated in Task Manager (when I did try to terminate then it seemed two more started for every one that I tried to kill).
So this is an interesting thread, I would sure like to find something that can be run on demand but otherwise doesn't waste cpu and memory resources when not needed.
So far have not found it yet, and it is depressing that this topic isn't leading to any good choices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527380</id>
	<title>Re:GNU/Linux!</title>
	<author>rec9140</author>
	<datestamp>1268945460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;Delphi on Linux? DVDFab? DVDLabPro? Camtasia? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R. videogames? Vector NTI?</p><p>I don't use them, so who cares. If your going to ask lame questions about some program written for a DIFFERENT OS, whats the point. Find a Linux equal/equivalent, or you've answered your own question stay on the w virOS.</p><p>&gt;no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel, at least not on Ubuntu 9.10</p><p>Hmmm... I use KMint and some Logitech Quickam or something works, it was cheap and I possibly needed a web cam, but the need went a way. All it needs is a little tweaking to get the color etc. set, but since I don't use it any way.. I am not putting the effort to get it tweaked.</p><p>Can't tell you about the video cameras, have not owned one since one of those original VHS camcorders that were all so popular... just don't have the need...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Delphi on Linux ?
DVDFab ? DVDLabPro ?
Camtasia ? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R .
videogames ? Vector NTI ? I do n't use them , so who cares .
If your going to ask lame questions about some program written for a DIFFERENT OS , whats the point .
Find a Linux equal/equivalent , or you 've answered your own question stay on the w virOS. &gt; no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel , at least not on Ubuntu 9.10Hmmm... I use KMint and some Logitech Quickam or something works , it was cheap and I possibly needed a web cam , but the need went a way .
All it needs is a little tweaking to get the color etc .
set , but since I do n't use it any way.. I am not putting the effort to get it tweaked.Ca n't tell you about the video cameras , have not owned one since one of those original VHS camcorders that were all so popular... just do n't have the need.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Delphi on Linux?
DVDFab? DVDLabPro?
Camtasia? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
videogames? Vector NTI?I don't use them, so who cares.
If your going to ask lame questions about some program written for a DIFFERENT OS, whats the point.
Find a Linux equal/equivalent, or you've answered your own question stay on the w virOS.&gt;no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel, at least not on Ubuntu 9.10Hmmm... I use KMint and some Logitech Quickam or something works, it was cheap and I possibly needed a web cam, but the need went a way.
All it needs is a little tweaking to get the color etc.
set, but since I don't use it any way.. I am not putting the effort to get it tweaked.Can't tell you about the video cameras, have not owned one since one of those original VHS camcorders that were all so popular... just don't have the need...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526744</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526184</id>
	<title>Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Though technically I install it "over", not "on" Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Though technically I install it " over " , not " on " Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Though technically I install it "over", not "on" Windows.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529610</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>legio\_noctis</author>
	<datestamp>1268909580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another +1 for Avira.</p><p>The paid version always scores superbly (i.e. it is almost always in the top three) in the AV-Comparatives tests <a href="http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc\_report24.pdf" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">1</a> [av-comparatives.org], <a href="http://av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc\_report23.pdf" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">2</a> [av-comparatives.org] (although its award status often suffers due to a slightly higher than average number of false positives). If the quality of the paid versions has any bearing on that of the free versions, Avira absolutely smashes AVG and Avast!.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another + 1 for Avira.The paid version always scores superbly ( i.e .
it is almost always in the top three ) in the AV-Comparatives tests 1 [ av-comparatives.org ] , 2 [ av-comparatives.org ] ( although its award status often suffers due to a slightly higher than average number of false positives ) .
If the quality of the paid versions has any bearing on that of the free versions , Avira absolutely smashes AVG and Avast ! .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another +1 for Avira.The paid version always scores superbly (i.e.
it is almost always in the top three) in the AV-Comparatives tests 1 [av-comparatives.org], 2 [av-comparatives.org] (although its award status often suffers due to a slightly higher than average number of false positives).
If the quality of the paid versions has any bearing on that of the free versions, Avira absolutely smashes AVG and Avast!.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527182</id>
	<title>Cloud Immunity - ClamAV</title>
	<author>richrumble</author>
	<datestamp>1268944860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.clamav.net/lang/en/about/win32/" title="clamav.net" rel="nofollow">ClamAV</a> [clamav.net] is using Amazons EC2 Cloud. Real-time (upon execution) scanning, scanning on install, and scanning on service startup, as well as removal/quarantine. You do have to be connected however for the hash and heuristics checks to work.
But best practices are much better than any AV any day. Don't use IE, don't run as admin, it is that simple: <a href="http://richrumble.blogspot.com/2006/08/anti-admin-vs-anti-virus.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://richrumble.blogspot.com/2006/08/anti-admin-vs-anti-virus.html</a> [blogspot.com]
-rich</htmltext>
<tokenext>ClamAV [ clamav.net ] is using Amazons EC2 Cloud .
Real-time ( upon execution ) scanning , scanning on install , and scanning on service startup , as well as removal/quarantine .
You do have to be connected however for the hash and heuristics checks to work .
But best practices are much better than any AV any day .
Do n't use IE , do n't run as admin , it is that simple : http : //richrumble.blogspot.com/2006/08/anti-admin-vs-anti-virus.html [ blogspot.com ] -rich</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ClamAV [clamav.net] is using Amazons EC2 Cloud.
Real-time (upon execution) scanning, scanning on install, and scanning on service startup, as well as removal/quarantine.
You do have to be connected however for the hash and heuristics checks to work.
But best practices are much better than any AV any day.
Don't use IE, don't run as admin, it is that simple: http://richrumble.blogspot.com/2006/08/anti-admin-vs-anti-virus.html [blogspot.com]
-rich</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529350</id>
	<title>Re:None</title>
	<author>Smauler</author>
	<datestamp>1268908500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up.</i> </p><p>Wait...  seriously?  This may work if you're supporting a couple of people who never install new hardware (cameras, printers, satnavs, every last electronic device), but I do not want to be rung at all hours of the day with a relative asking if it's ok to install their new gadget.  Not to mention upgrading drivers, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up .
Wait... seriously ?
This may work if you 're supporting a couple of people who never install new hardware ( cameras , printers , satnavs , every last electronic device ) , but I do not want to be rung at all hours of the day with a relative asking if it 's ok to install their new gadget .
Not to mention upgrading drivers , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up.
Wait...  seriously?
This may work if you're supporting a couple of people who never install new hardware (cameras, printers, satnavs, every last electronic device), but I do not want to be rung at all hours of the day with a relative asking if it's ok to install their new gadget.
Not to mention upgrading drivers, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31536928</id>
	<title>Give it a try DSAvi: MS Security Essentials = GOOD</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269012300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you? I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's good stuff!</p><p>I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc. (all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"I have heard good things about MSE from several people, but I haven't tried it myself."</b> - by dsavi (1540343) on Thursday March 18, @01:54PM (#31526202) Homepage</p></div><p>It does the job, + well... &amp; afaik?</p><p>It is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1").</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>(That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what? They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc. et al))... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Per my subject-line above , &amp; this quote from you ?
I 'll " 2nd that motion " ( after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it 's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact , &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here ) ... it 's good stuff ! I.E./E.G.- &gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot " Search &amp; Destroy " + NORMAN Malware Cleaner ( &amp; of course , MS ' monthly updated " MS Malicious Software Removal Tool " as well ) - for " many doctors ' opinions " etc .
( all " latest/greatest " versions , fully updated of course also ) : " I have heard good things about MSE from several people , but I have n't tried it myself .
" - by dsavi ( 1540343 ) on Thursday March 18 , @ 01 : 54PM ( # 31526202 ) HomepageIt does the job , + well... &amp; afaik ? It is also a " Combined Package " , in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package ( thus , it 's " 2-for-the-price-of-1 " ) .Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job , plus well , &amp; that 's also from reviews I have seen of this program ( as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS ) .Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND , Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even , IF you like , right here - &gt; http : //www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [ microsoft.com ] ( That 's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well ( bonus ) ) .APKP.S. = &gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package ( yes , they bought it out , but so what ?
They 're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way , Way , WAY " off " as far as I am concerned , because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact , they 're not even charging for protection ( ala " the mob " etc .
et al ) ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?
I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)... it's good stuff!I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc.
(all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):"I have heard good things about MSE from several people, but I haven't tried it myself.
" - by dsavi (1540343) on Thursday March 18, @01:54PM (#31526202) HomepageIt does the job, + well... &amp; afaik?It is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1").Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [microsoft.com](That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).APKP.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what?
They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc.
et al))... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526202</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530898</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anpheus</author>
	<datestamp>1268916720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's the compression algorithms that often get used in demos that cause the problem. Compression is great obfuscation on the actual payload, but the problem is that the compression algorithm is an easy to target signature.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the compression algorithms that often get used in demos that cause the problem .
Compression is great obfuscation on the actual payload , but the problem is that the compression algorithm is an easy to target signature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the compression algorithms that often get used in demos that cause the problem.
Compression is great obfuscation on the actual payload, but the problem is that the compression algorithm is an easy to target signature.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526934</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526076</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>jrronimo</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security\_essentials/" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">Microsoft Security Essentials</a> [microsoft.com] is free, lightweight, and pretty good. Even <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2009/09/first-look-microsoft-security-essentials-impresses.ars" title="arstechnica.com" rel="nofollow">Ars Techinca</a> [arstechnica.com] thought so, if you trust them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essentials [ microsoft.com ] is free , lightweight , and pretty good .
Even Ars Techinca [ arstechnica.com ] thought so , if you trust them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essentials [microsoft.com] is free, lightweight, and pretty good.
Even Ars Techinca [arstechnica.com] thought so, if you trust them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526886</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Vu1turEMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1268944020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AVG 8.5 installed on a co-worker's computer didn't catch a WONDERFUL webpage spoofing attack that asked for her pin number. Luckily she called me. I went to try Avast, but now it was harder to register and they took out the options to make the program operate silently (ie it forces you to use a dialog box for restart or force a restart, whereas in 4.8 there was an option for "Update on Next Restart", an awesome feature).</p><p>Just heard a good review the day prior of MSE and installed it, updated definitions, did a quick scan which found 3 other things, and then a full scan which found the main culprit. It also apparently cleaned (not deleted) a Windows Backup file with the virus on an external drive, ensuring that their backups are actually working properly. I've had Avast delete these on me in the past, losing vital backups.</p><p>It takes up little resources, is free for ANYONE (ie, most are only free for Home AND non-commercial use...which means non-profits are shit outta luck), and JUST WORKS.</p><p>I heart it. so. hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AVG 8.5 installed on a co-worker 's computer did n't catch a WONDERFUL webpage spoofing attack that asked for her pin number .
Luckily she called me .
I went to try Avast , but now it was harder to register and they took out the options to make the program operate silently ( ie it forces you to use a dialog box for restart or force a restart , whereas in 4.8 there was an option for " Update on Next Restart " , an awesome feature ) .Just heard a good review the day prior of MSE and installed it , updated definitions , did a quick scan which found 3 other things , and then a full scan which found the main culprit .
It also apparently cleaned ( not deleted ) a Windows Backup file with the virus on an external drive , ensuring that their backups are actually working properly .
I 've had Avast delete these on me in the past , losing vital backups.It takes up little resources , is free for ANYONE ( ie , most are only free for Home AND non-commercial use...which means non-profits are shit outta luck ) , and JUST WORKS.I heart it .
so. hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AVG 8.5 installed on a co-worker's computer didn't catch a WONDERFUL webpage spoofing attack that asked for her pin number.
Luckily she called me.
I went to try Avast, but now it was harder to register and they took out the options to make the program operate silently (ie it forces you to use a dialog box for restart or force a restart, whereas in 4.8 there was an option for "Update on Next Restart", an awesome feature).Just heard a good review the day prior of MSE and installed it, updated definitions, did a quick scan which found 3 other things, and then a full scan which found the main culprit.
It also apparently cleaned (not deleted) a Windows Backup file with the virus on an external drive, ensuring that their backups are actually working properly.
I've had Avast delete these on me in the past, losing vital backups.It takes up little resources, is free for ANYONE (ie, most are only free for Home AND non-commercial use...which means non-profits are shit outta luck), and JUST WORKS.I heart it.
so. hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529194</id>
	<title>I'll second "none."</title>
	<author>fortfive</author>
	<datestamp>1268907960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My office mate runs no AV.  When we first started sharing an office, and I discovered she used no protection, I was shocked and convinced her to let me install one.  It found no viruses or malware, and so slowed her machine she demanded I remove it, which I did.

She's a lawyer, older, and not at all tech saavy.

Of course, she never looks at porn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My office mate runs no AV .
When we first started sharing an office , and I discovered she used no protection , I was shocked and convinced her to let me install one .
It found no viruses or malware , and so slowed her machine she demanded I remove it , which I did .
She 's a lawyer , older , and not at all tech saavy .
Of course , she never looks at porn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My office mate runs no AV.
When we first started sharing an office, and I discovered she used no protection, I was shocked and convinced her to let me install one.
It found no viruses or malware, and so slowed her machine she demanded I remove it, which I did.
She's a lawyer, older, and not at all tech saavy.
Of course, she never looks at porn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31538960</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>OutOfMyTree</author>
	<datestamp>1269017460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great if it works for you.  From other forums, I am not the only one suffering from it expanding and bogging everything down. I am now back with Avast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great if it works for you .
From other forums , I am not the only one suffering from it expanding and bogging everything down .
I am now back with Avast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great if it works for you.
From other forums, I am not the only one suffering from it expanding and bogging everything down.
I am now back with Avast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530808</id>
	<title>Sadly Free AV Doesn't Do the Job</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268916120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's really unfortunate, but running free AV almost guarantees that you have an infection. However, the user of free AV software will never know it because it just won&rsquo;t find the infections, so it will always report the system is clean.</p><p>It&rsquo;s not that free AV doesn&rsquo;t have value. First and foremost, it&rsquo;s free and a lot of users are cheap or lazy so won&rsquo;t renew their subscriptions And free AV will work better than no AV or disabled AV.</p><p>Also, depending on the &ldquo;brand&rdquo; free AV will provide protection for about 50\% to 85\% of attacks and to a lesser degree malware that AV products are expected to provide protection for in competitive AV testing as well as real world prevalent threats; so it provides some protection.</p><p>But now the flip-side Of course the above also means those same products have 15\% to 50\% coverage gaps in the same detection criteria. Additionally, these free solutions provide almost 0\%, if not absolutely 0\%, of protection from drive-by Web browser based attacks. In the &ldquo;almost&rdquo; case, you are already getting infected before the on access scanner can save you, so free AV might detect it, maybe even delete the file it hit on, but won&rsquo;t actually stop or remediate the infection, and so the user still got infected and was told it was cleaned Not good.</p><p>Additionally, the free products only provide attack based protection, they rarely provide protection based on the actual vulnerability. That means the detections are based on specific attack information, and it will be possible, in many cases, to modify an attack so that it evades the detection; usually such a modification is trivial.</p><p>A poor analogy If your computer was Fort Knox, using free AV is like having a bunch of guys from the sheriff&rsquo;s office with pickup trucks, side-arms, and a couple shotguns protecting it. Whereas using one of the good big commercial products is like having a small battalion of troops with Humvees, M60 chain-guns, gun-ships, tow-missiles, and a sniper or two. Both examples have an ultimate tangible and non-tangible cost, both are defeatable, both are evadable, but one type of security is far more likely to keep the gold in the fort than the other.</p><p>This is not to say all commercial products are superior. Some offer no more protection that free AV solutions and are just a waste of money when there is a free solution, while the top-tier commercial products (read most expensive and you can count them on 3 or 4 fingers) are light-years better than the rest and worth every dime. No AV/security product, free or for a price, is the Holy Grail; anybody who tells you otherwise doesn&rsquo;t know their a55 from a hot rock or they are just trying to sell you something.</p><p>Disclosure, I work in the AV/security field, and I get paid to do so. I&rsquo;m not trying to hock product here, I just see the reality what people sacrifice using one type of product versus another. I do know what I&rsquo;m talking about, but you don&rsquo;t have to believe me It&rsquo;s no skin off my nose<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really unfortunate , but running free AV almost guarantees that you have an infection .
However , the user of free AV software will never know it because it just won    t find the infections , so it will always report the system is clean.It    s not that free AV doesn    t have value .
First and foremost , it    s free and a lot of users are cheap or lazy so won    t renew their subscriptions And free AV will work better than no AV or disabled AV.Also , depending on the    brand    free AV will provide protection for about 50 \ % to 85 \ % of attacks and to a lesser degree malware that AV products are expected to provide protection for in competitive AV testing as well as real world prevalent threats ; so it provides some protection.But now the flip-side Of course the above also means those same products have 15 \ % to 50 \ % coverage gaps in the same detection criteria .
Additionally , these free solutions provide almost 0 \ % , if not absolutely 0 \ % , of protection from drive-by Web browser based attacks .
In the    almost    case , you are already getting infected before the on access scanner can save you , so free AV might detect it , maybe even delete the file it hit on , but won    t actually stop or remediate the infection , and so the user still got infected and was told it was cleaned Not good.Additionally , the free products only provide attack based protection , they rarely provide protection based on the actual vulnerability .
That means the detections are based on specific attack information , and it will be possible , in many cases , to modify an attack so that it evades the detection ; usually such a modification is trivial.A poor analogy If your computer was Fort Knox , using free AV is like having a bunch of guys from the sheriff    s office with pickup trucks , side-arms , and a couple shotguns protecting it .
Whereas using one of the good big commercial products is like having a small battalion of troops with Humvees , M60 chain-guns , gun-ships , tow-missiles , and a sniper or two .
Both examples have an ultimate tangible and non-tangible cost , both are defeatable , both are evadable , but one type of security is far more likely to keep the gold in the fort than the other.This is not to say all commercial products are superior .
Some offer no more protection that free AV solutions and are just a waste of money when there is a free solution , while the top-tier commercial products ( read most expensive and you can count them on 3 or 4 fingers ) are light-years better than the rest and worth every dime .
No AV/security product , free or for a price , is the Holy Grail ; anybody who tells you otherwise doesn    t know their a55 from a hot rock or they are just trying to sell you something.Disclosure , I work in the AV/security field , and I get paid to do so .
I    m not trying to hock product here , I just see the reality what people sacrifice using one type of product versus another .
I do know what I    m talking about , but you don    t have to believe me It    s no skin off my nose ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really unfortunate, but running free AV almost guarantees that you have an infection.
However, the user of free AV software will never know it because it just won’t find the infections, so it will always report the system is clean.It’s not that free AV doesn’t have value.
First and foremost, it’s free and a lot of users are cheap or lazy so won’t renew their subscriptions And free AV will work better than no AV or disabled AV.Also, depending on the “brand” free AV will provide protection for about 50\% to 85\% of attacks and to a lesser degree malware that AV products are expected to provide protection for in competitive AV testing as well as real world prevalent threats; so it provides some protection.But now the flip-side Of course the above also means those same products have 15\% to 50\% coverage gaps in the same detection criteria.
Additionally, these free solutions provide almost 0\%, if not absolutely 0\%, of protection from drive-by Web browser based attacks.
In the “almost” case, you are already getting infected before the on access scanner can save you, so free AV might detect it, maybe even delete the file it hit on, but won’t actually stop or remediate the infection, and so the user still got infected and was told it was cleaned Not good.Additionally, the free products only provide attack based protection, they rarely provide protection based on the actual vulnerability.
That means the detections are based on specific attack information, and it will be possible, in many cases, to modify an attack so that it evades the detection; usually such a modification is trivial.A poor analogy If your computer was Fort Knox, using free AV is like having a bunch of guys from the sheriff’s office with pickup trucks, side-arms, and a couple shotguns protecting it.
Whereas using one of the good big commercial products is like having a small battalion of troops with Humvees, M60 chain-guns, gun-ships, tow-missiles, and a sniper or two.
Both examples have an ultimate tangible and non-tangible cost, both are defeatable, both are evadable, but one type of security is far more likely to keep the gold in the fort than the other.This is not to say all commercial products are superior.
Some offer no more protection that free AV solutions and are just a waste of money when there is a free solution, while the top-tier commercial products (read most expensive and you can count them on 3 or 4 fingers) are light-years better than the rest and worth every dime.
No AV/security product, free or for a price, is the Holy Grail; anybody who tells you otherwise doesn’t know their a55 from a hot rock or they are just trying to sell you something.Disclosure, I work in the AV/security field, and I get paid to do so.
I’m not trying to hock product here, I just see the reality what people sacrifice using one type of product versus another.
I do know what I’m talking about, but you don’t have to believe me It’s no skin off my nose ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</id>
	<title>Microsoft</title>
	<author>dan828</author>
	<datestamp>1268941500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft security essentials <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security\_essentials/" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/security\_essentials/</a> [microsoft.com]

<br> <br>I mean, if anyone knows about viruses, it'd be Microsoft.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft security essentials http : //www.microsoft.com/security \ _essentials/ [ microsoft.com ] I mean , if anyone knows about viruses , it 'd be Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft security essentials http://www.microsoft.com/security\_essentials/ [microsoft.com]

 I mean, if anyone knows about viruses, it'd be Microsoft.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526128</id>
	<title>Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>disclaimer: a very good friend of mine works on some of the core technologies in this product</p><p>It pretty much isn't noticeable, i run an E6600 and game/dev/surf on my desktop and it really isn't noticeable. certainly nothing 'weird'. I also use it on my netbook which is only a 1.6GHz atom and still no real performance hogging.</p><p>I've had a number of times where it has gone off about this or that file, and when it does it is pretty much hands off if i don't start clicking buttons and choosing actions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>disclaimer : a very good friend of mine works on some of the core technologies in this productIt pretty much is n't noticeable , i run an E6600 and game/dev/surf on my desktop and it really is n't noticeable .
certainly nothing 'weird' .
I also use it on my netbook which is only a 1.6GHz atom and still no real performance hogging.I 've had a number of times where it has gone off about this or that file , and when it does it is pretty much hands off if i do n't start clicking buttons and choosing actions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>disclaimer: a very good friend of mine works on some of the core technologies in this productIt pretty much isn't noticeable, i run an E6600 and game/dev/surf on my desktop and it really isn't noticeable.
certainly nothing 'weird'.
I also use it on my netbook which is only a 1.6GHz atom and still no real performance hogging.I've had a number of times where it has gone off about this or that file, and when it does it is pretty much hands off if i don't start clicking buttons and choosing actions.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</id>
	<title>clam</title>
	<author>Capt.DrumkenBum</author>
	<datestamp>1268941740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.clamwin.com/" title="clamwin.com">http://www.clamwin.com/</a> [clamwin.com] <br>
Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.clamwin.com/ [ clamwin.com ] Although it is missing an on access scan , I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.clamwin.com/ [clamwin.com] 
Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528624</id>
	<title>WTF?</title>
	<author>cawpin</author>
	<datestamp>1268905860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"both are making it harder to actually find the free version"
<br> <br>
Yeah, <a href="http://free.avg.com/" title="avg.com">http://free.avg.com/</a> [avg.com] is really difficult.
<br> <br>
I personally use MSE now because AVG started getting a little bloated before 9.0 came out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" both are making it harder to actually find the free version " Yeah , http : //free.avg.com/ [ avg.com ] is really difficult .
I personally use MSE now because AVG started getting a little bloated before 9.0 came out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"both are making it harder to actually find the free version"
 
Yeah, http://free.avg.com/ [avg.com] is really difficult.
I personally use MSE now because AVG started getting a little bloated before 9.0 came out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531674</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>osu-neko</author>
	<datestamp>1268922180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <a href="http://www.clamwin.com/" title="clamwin.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.clamwin.com/</a> [clamwin.com]

Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus.</p></div><p>A definite plus.  I've never gotten a virus infection on my desktop, period.  If anything uses one iota of resources other than when it's doing the weekly scan to make sure this remains the case, it's junk.  It's wasting time on something that's far too unlikely to ever happen for me to justify the wasted time and resources.  But just because it's never happened doesn't mean it never will, and how would I know if I wasn't looking for it?  Thus, I do the regular scans.  I need a scanner, I don't need a "shield".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.clamwin.com/ [ clamwin.com ] Although it is missing an on access scan , I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus.A definite plus .
I 've never gotten a virus infection on my desktop , period .
If anything uses one iota of resources other than when it 's doing the weekly scan to make sure this remains the case , it 's junk .
It 's wasting time on something that 's far too unlikely to ever happen for me to justify the wasted time and resources .
But just because it 's never happened does n't mean it never will , and how would I know if I was n't looking for it ?
Thus , I do the regular scans .
I need a scanner , I do n't need a " shield " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> http://www.clamwin.com/ [clamwin.com]

Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus.A definite plus.
I've never gotten a virus infection on my desktop, period.
If anything uses one iota of resources other than when it's doing the weekly scan to make sure this remains the case, it's junk.
It's wasting time on something that's far too unlikely to ever happen for me to justify the wasted time and resources.
But just because it's never happened doesn't mean it never will, and how would I know if I wasn't looking for it?
Thus, I do the regular scans.
I need a scanner, I don't need a "shield".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527174</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials and Clam</title>
	<author>DroppedAtBirth</author>
	<datestamp>1268944800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use  Microsoft Security Essentials for my Windows 7 and Windows XP boxes, and use clam for windows 2003</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Microsoft Security Essentials for my Windows 7 and Windows XP boxes , and use clam for windows 2003</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use  Microsoft Security Essentials for my Windows 7 and Windows XP boxes, and use clam for windows 2003</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526904</id>
	<title>Panda Cloud AV</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been using this on several Win7 boxes and it works great.  I dont have many issues but other members of my family are terrible with thier inability to avoid clicking every link they shouldnt and they tell me that the Panda has found and taken care of the viruses for them.  Very small foot print and takes up almost no resources.  Give a try! Panda Cloud AV - http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been using this on several Win7 boxes and it works great .
I dont have many issues but other members of my family are terrible with thier inability to avoid clicking every link they shouldnt and they tell me that the Panda has found and taken care of the viruses for them .
Very small foot print and takes up almost no resources .
Give a try !
Panda Cloud AV - http : //www.cloudantivirus.com/en/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been using this on several Win7 boxes and it works great.
I dont have many issues but other members of my family are terrible with thier inability to avoid clicking every link they shouldnt and they tell me that the Panda has found and taken care of the viruses for them.
Very small foot print and takes up almost no resources.
Give a try!
Panda Cloud AV - http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528338</id>
	<title>Free antivirus and stuff.....</title>
	<author>Vanderwaife</author>
	<datestamp>1268904900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've used Comodo's free <a href="http://www.comodo.com/home/free/free-protection.php" title="comodo.com" rel="nofollow"> Home &amp; Home Office products</a> [comodo.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Comodo 's free Home &amp; Home Office products [ comodo.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Comodo's free  Home &amp; Home Office products [comodo.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531508</id>
	<title>Can't Fault AVG Free - But I Use Comodo Internet S</title>
	<author>taichibabbo</author>
	<datestamp>1268920860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I currently use Commodo Internet Suite (Free Version) and ThreatFire (Anti-Malware) concurrently.  And since I tend to be very paranoid, I will update and run malwarebytes on full scan mode maybe every two weeks.  I started with AVG 0.9 way back when and still recommend the free edition to anyone who asks me for a good "free" anti-virus suite, I also recommend running an additional resident anti-malware program concurrently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I currently use Commodo Internet Suite ( Free Version ) and ThreatFire ( Anti-Malware ) concurrently .
And since I tend to be very paranoid , I will update and run malwarebytes on full scan mode maybe every two weeks .
I started with AVG 0.9 way back when and still recommend the free edition to anyone who asks me for a good " free " anti-virus suite , I also recommend running an additional resident anti-malware program concurrently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I currently use Commodo Internet Suite (Free Version) and ThreatFire (Anti-Malware) concurrently.
And since I tend to be very paranoid, I will update and run malwarebytes on full scan mode maybe every two weeks.
I started with AVG 0.9 way back when and still recommend the free edition to anyone who asks me for a good "free" anti-virus suite, I also recommend running an additional resident anti-malware program concurrently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528132</id>
	<title>AV Comparative</title>
	<author>kubajz</author>
	<datestamp>1268904240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had the same question two weeks ago, and www.av-comparatives.org helped tremendously by providing comprehensive comparisons of free options such as Avira, Comodo, AVG, MSE and Avast in detection, proactive protection, performance and all-around usefulness. Depending on which of these you value most, I am sure their report summaries can be useful for you.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had the same question two weeks ago , and www.av-comparatives.org helped tremendously by providing comprehensive comparisons of free options such as Avira , Comodo , AVG , MSE and Avast in detection , proactive protection , performance and all-around usefulness .
Depending on which of these you value most , I am sure their report summaries can be useful for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had the same question two weeks ago, and www.av-comparatives.org helped tremendously by providing comprehensive comparisons of free options such as Avira, Comodo, AVG, MSE and Avast in detection, proactive protection, performance and all-around usefulness.
Depending on which of these you value most, I am sure their report summaries can be useful for you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534638</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1269002640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just be sure to properly chisel out the prior AV stuff first.  The AVG uninstall did not go well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just be sure to properly chisel out the prior AV stuff first .
The AVG uninstall did not go well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just be sure to properly chisel out the prior AV stuff first.
The AVG uninstall did not go well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526878</id>
	<title>Re:Ars technica review of MSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great.</p></div><p>I was right there with you till you mentioned you had a girlfriend. Then I realized you made the whole thing up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials , it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend 's laptop ( I run OS X myself ) and it 's worked great.I was right there with you till you mentioned you had a girlfriend .
Then I realized you made the whole thing up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An in-depth look at Microsoft Security Essentials, it made me decide to try it out on my girlfriend's laptop (I run OS X myself) and it's worked great.I was right there with you till you mentioned you had a girlfriend.
Then I realized you made the whole thing up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526716</id>
	<title>I install the only one worth installing</title>
	<author>Smooth and Shiny</author>
	<datestamp>1268943540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avira AntiVir - <a href="http://www.free-av.com/" title="free-av.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.free-av.com/</a> [free-av.com] --- free version. It scores high on all independent tests and isn't crazy about hogging your resources or slowing your machine to a crawl.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira AntiVir - http : //www.free-av.com/ [ free-av.com ] --- free version .
It scores high on all independent tests and is n't crazy about hogging your resources or slowing your machine to a crawl .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira AntiVir - http://www.free-av.com/ [free-av.com] --- free version.
It scores high on all independent tests and isn't crazy about hogging your resources or slowing your machine to a crawl.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526988</id>
	<title>Laughingman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>must say MSE is really great apart from being free, it is also dam good.<br>no virus malwares or any such things for 5 months now<br>or maybe its win7 x64, looks like MS finally got there head out of there asses for Win7</p><p>still not a big fan of windows only use it for gaming<br>Use linux or even better freeBSD or openSOLARIS<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>must say MSE is really great apart from being free , it is also dam good.no virus malwares or any such things for 5 months nowor maybe its win7 x64 , looks like MS finally got there head out of there asses for Win7still not a big fan of windows only use it for gamingUse linux or even better freeBSD or openSOLARIS ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>must say MSE is really great apart from being free, it is also dam good.no virus malwares or any such things for 5 months nowor maybe its win7 x64, looks like MS finally got there head out of there asses for Win7still not a big fan of windows only use it for gamingUse linux or even better freeBSD or openSOLARIS ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528616</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials or Avira AntiVir</title>
	<author>Lord of Hyphens</author>
	<datestamp>1268905860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take your pick.

Microsoft Security Essentials used to be OneCare (now free), Avira has had a decent free offering for years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take your pick .
Microsoft Security Essentials used to be OneCare ( now free ) , Avira has had a decent free offering for years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take your pick.
Microsoft Security Essentials used to be OneCare (now free), Avira has had a decent free offering for years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527538</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>mxh83</author>
	<datestamp>1268945820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You get promotional popups with Avira.  I use it cause it has the least overhead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You get promotional popups with Avira .
I use it cause it has the least overhead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You get promotional popups with Avira.
I use it cause it has the least overhead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532382</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268928540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can easily get rid of the daily ad. Goggle will tell you how.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can easily get rid of the daily ad .
Goggle will tell you how .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can easily get rid of the daily ad.
Goggle will tell you how.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534670</id>
	<title>A nice option is to browse from a virtual machine</title>
	<author>master\_p</author>
	<datestamp>1269003000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A very safe way to browse is to do the browsing from inside a virtual machine. A good option is to copy the virtual machine hard disk image each time you start, so next time you start from a clean machine.</p><p>This ensures that your computer will not be infected, and that you can run an antivirus in it but not bother with it very much (AVG, for example, is the one I run). You could even risk running your machine without an antivirus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A very safe way to browse is to do the browsing from inside a virtual machine .
A good option is to copy the virtual machine hard disk image each time you start , so next time you start from a clean machine.This ensures that your computer will not be infected , and that you can run an antivirus in it but not bother with it very much ( AVG , for example , is the one I run ) .
You could even risk running your machine without an antivirus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A very safe way to browse is to do the browsing from inside a virtual machine.
A good option is to copy the virtual machine hard disk image each time you start, so next time you start from a clean machine.This ensures that your computer will not be infected, and that you can run an antivirus in it but not bother with it very much (AVG, for example, is the one I run).
You could even risk running your machine without an antivirus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534904</id>
	<title>Re:I don't use anything.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269005460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Same here.  I do all my web surfing on a Linux virtual machine.  I only open up a browser on Windows when I have to download an app and I only do that for trusted sites.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here .
I do all my web surfing on a Linux virtual machine .
I only open up a browser on Windows when I have to download an app and I only do that for trusted sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here.
I do all my web surfing on a Linux virtual machine.
I only open up a browser on Windows when I have to download an app and I only do that for trusted sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531872</id>
	<title>Re:I dont use...</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1268923920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has to do with computers. Don't fret your little mind over it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has to do with computers .
Do n't fret your little mind over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has to do with computers.
Don't fret your little mind over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526708</id>
	<title>How about...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Antivirus 2009 &amp; Internet Security 2010?  They seem pretty popular...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Antivirus 2009 &amp; Internet Security 2010 ?
They seem pretty popular.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Antivirus 2009 &amp; Internet Security 2010?
They seem pretty popular...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092</id>
	<title>Avast history</title>
	<author>flimm</author>
	<datestamp>1268941740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You always had to register for the free version of Avast, and re-register every six months.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You always had to register for the free version of Avast , and re-register every six months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You always had to register for the free version of Avast, and re-register every six months.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527040</id>
	<title>Panda Cloud AV</title>
	<author>rrossman2</author>
	<datestamp>1268944440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/" title="cloudantivirus.com">http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/</a> [cloudantivirus.com] <br> <br>
I was looking for something better than MSSE for my wife's mothers PC. Her dad tends to stick to AVG (I'd rather him use something else but whatever)... I found the Panda Cloud AV after googling around wasting time. The reviews I've read are pretty positive, with some hick-ups listed in the forums but that's to be expected as it's a "Beta" and mostly related to UI.<br> <br>
Another question I have about Free AV... has anyone found one that will work on a Server version of Windows? I have a small box that is running Server 2003 downloaded via Dreamspark, it's mostly just for fooling around with not actual server server roles. Every AV, even free, will refuse to install on it unless it's a Corp or Enterprise edition. Problem is, I don't have a ton of boxes I need a Corp or Enterprise edition on, and you can only get those versions of AV in 6 or more license packs for a pretty hefty chuck of cash. I will say I didn't try to install the Cloud AV yet, but I doubt it will work either. This machine doesn't have internet access unless I have it bridged via my laptop, it's mainly for just my internal lan use. Can anyone provide any feedback there?</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.cloudantivirus.com/en/ [ cloudantivirus.com ] I was looking for something better than MSSE for my wife 's mothers PC .
Her dad tends to stick to AVG ( I 'd rather him use something else but whatever ) ... I found the Panda Cloud AV after googling around wasting time .
The reviews I 've read are pretty positive , with some hick-ups listed in the forums but that 's to be expected as it 's a " Beta " and mostly related to UI .
Another question I have about Free AV... has anyone found one that will work on a Server version of Windows ?
I have a small box that is running Server 2003 downloaded via Dreamspark , it 's mostly just for fooling around with not actual server server roles .
Every AV , even free , will refuse to install on it unless it 's a Corp or Enterprise edition .
Problem is , I do n't have a ton of boxes I need a Corp or Enterprise edition on , and you can only get those versions of AV in 6 or more license packs for a pretty hefty chuck of cash .
I will say I did n't try to install the Cloud AV yet , but I doubt it will work either .
This machine does n't have internet access unless I have it bridged via my laptop , it 's mainly for just my internal lan use .
Can anyone provide any feedback there ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.cloudantivirus.com/en/ [cloudantivirus.com]  
I was looking for something better than MSSE for my wife's mothers PC.
Her dad tends to stick to AVG (I'd rather him use something else but whatever)... I found the Panda Cloud AV after googling around wasting time.
The reviews I've read are pretty positive, with some hick-ups listed in the forums but that's to be expected as it's a "Beta" and mostly related to UI.
Another question I have about Free AV... has anyone found one that will work on a Server version of Windows?
I have a small box that is running Server 2003 downloaded via Dreamspark, it's mostly just for fooling around with not actual server server roles.
Every AV, even free, will refuse to install on it unless it's a Corp or Enterprise edition.
Problem is, I don't have a ton of boxes I need a Corp or Enterprise edition on, and you can only get those versions of AV in 6 or more license packs for a pretty hefty chuck of cash.
I will say I didn't try to install the Cloud AV yet, but I doubt it will work either.
This machine doesn't have internet access unless I have it bridged via my laptop, it's mainly for just my internal lan use.
Can anyone provide any feedback there?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527742</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>shadowfaxcrx</author>
	<datestamp>1268903160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use it as well. It's caught enough stuff to convince me that it's probably doing a pretty good job of keeping my system clean.</p><p>Best of all, I installed it on the computer I built for my mom. Much nicer not getting a call twice a day asking if she should accept or deny some firewall access request. I just pointed at the taskbar icon and told her "If this is green, things are fine. If it's red, and it's not asking you to upgrade it, then it's unhappy about something and you should call me."  My cell phone bill has gone way down since then<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use it as well .
It 's caught enough stuff to convince me that it 's probably doing a pretty good job of keeping my system clean.Best of all , I installed it on the computer I built for my mom .
Much nicer not getting a call twice a day asking if she should accept or deny some firewall access request .
I just pointed at the taskbar icon and told her " If this is green , things are fine .
If it 's red , and it 's not asking you to upgrade it , then it 's unhappy about something and you should call me .
" My cell phone bill has gone way down since then ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use it as well.
It's caught enough stuff to convince me that it's probably doing a pretty good job of keeping my system clean.Best of all, I installed it on the computer I built for my mom.
Much nicer not getting a call twice a day asking if she should accept or deny some firewall access request.
I just pointed at the taskbar icon and told her "If this is green, things are fine.
If it's red, and it's not asking you to upgrade it, then it's unhappy about something and you should call me.
"  My cell phone bill has gone way down since then ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529876</id>
	<title>Re:I don't</title>
	<author>xactuary</author>
	<datestamp>1268910840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm thinking of doing just that for some relatives' PCs and am wondering what you consider the downsides to be with your approach. Thanks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm thinking of doing just that for some relatives ' PCs and am wondering what you consider the downsides to be with your approach .
Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm thinking of doing just that for some relatives' PCs and am wondering what you consider the downsides to be with your approach.
Thanks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527898</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>Rigodi</author>
	<datestamp>1268903640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I choose Avira three years ago after reading a comparaison test found on the net. Seemed to be tested quite honestly done by triggering attacks with several types of viruses.<br>Avira went first but it was three years ago. I swapped from Avast that was a bit too fat for my system, Avira turned to be quite light with it.</p><p>But today I would not be able to say which one is the best. So far so good, with Avira, no virus detected on my machine, thanks to it, to my firewalls (routers &amp; desktop) and my surval habits on the net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I choose Avira three years ago after reading a comparaison test found on the net .
Seemed to be tested quite honestly done by triggering attacks with several types of viruses.Avira went first but it was three years ago .
I swapped from Avast that was a bit too fat for my system , Avira turned to be quite light with it.But today I would not be able to say which one is the best .
So far so good , with Avira , no virus detected on my machine , thanks to it , to my firewalls ( routers &amp; desktop ) and my surval habits on the net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I choose Avira three years ago after reading a comparaison test found on the net.
Seemed to be tested quite honestly done by triggering attacks with several types of viruses.Avira went first but it was three years ago.
I swapped from Avast that was a bit too fat for my system, Avira turned to be quite light with it.But today I would not be able to say which one is the best.
So far so good, with Avira, no virus detected on my machine, thanks to it, to my firewalls (routers &amp; desktop) and my surval habits on the net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527316</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1268945280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seconded on both counts. If you simply want top notch, and are willing to pay for it, then NOD32 is it. If you want free &amp; "just works", then MSE is probably the easiest choice to go with these days.</p><p>One bonus point for MSE is that it fetches virus signature updates (as well as version updates for itself) through Windows/Microsoft Update. That's one less "Foo Updater" process running on your PC.</p><p>Oh, and it scores pretty well in tests. Not top of the line, but generally above average, and certainly competitive with other free offerings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seconded on both counts .
If you simply want top notch , and are willing to pay for it , then NOD32 is it .
If you want free &amp; " just works " , then MSE is probably the easiest choice to go with these days.One bonus point for MSE is that it fetches virus signature updates ( as well as version updates for itself ) through Windows/Microsoft Update .
That 's one less " Foo Updater " process running on your PC.Oh , and it scores pretty well in tests .
Not top of the line , but generally above average , and certainly competitive with other free offerings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seconded on both counts.
If you simply want top notch, and are willing to pay for it, then NOD32 is it.
If you want free &amp; "just works", then MSE is probably the easiest choice to go with these days.One bonus point for MSE is that it fetches virus signature updates (as well as version updates for itself) through Windows/Microsoft Update.
That's one less "Foo Updater" process running on your PC.Oh, and it scores pretty well in tests.
Not top of the line, but generally above average, and certainly competitive with other free offerings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537304</id>
	<title>Agreed 110\%: About MS' Security Essentials... apk</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269013200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?</p><div class="quote"><p><b>"Microsoft Security Essentials is all you need for non-enterprise A/V. It's free, it's unobtrusive and it works very well. What's more, commercial AV vendors, like Symantec, realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them.  The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers."</b> - by PhunkySchtuff (208108)  on Thursday March 18, @02:59PM (#31527572) Homepage</p></div><p>I'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)...</p><p><b>It's truly, good stuff, AND FREE TOO!</b></p><p>I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc. (all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik? Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).</p><p>Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;</p><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx" title="microsoft.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx</a> [microsoft.com]</p><p>(That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).</p><p>APK</p><p>P.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what? They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc. et al))... apk</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Per my subject-line above , &amp; this quote from you ?
" Microsoft Security Essentials is all you need for non-enterprise A/V .
It 's free , it 's unobtrusive and it works very well .
What 's more , commercial AV vendors , like Symantec , realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I 've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them .
The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers .
" - by PhunkySchtuff ( 208108 ) on Thursday March 18 , @ 02 : 59PM ( # 31527572 ) HomepageI 'll " 2nd that motion " ( after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it 's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact , &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here ) ...It 's truly , good stuff , AND FREE TOO ! I.E./E.G.- &gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot " Search &amp; Destroy " + NORMAN Malware Cleaner ( &amp; of course , MS ' monthly updated " MS Malicious Software Removal Tool " as well ) - for " many doctors ' opinions " etc .
( all " latest/greatest " versions , fully updated of course also ) : Microsoft Security Essentials does the job , + well... &amp; afaik ?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a " Combined Package " , in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package ( thus , it 's " 2-for-the-price-of-1 " ) @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job , plus well , &amp; that 's also from reviews I have seen of this program ( as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS ) .Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND , Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even , IF you like , right here - &gt; http : //www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [ microsoft.com ] ( That 's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well ( bonus ) ) .APKP.S. = &gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package ( yes , they bought it out , but so what ?
They 're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way , Way , WAY " off " as far as I am concerned , because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact , they 're not even charging for protection ( ala " the mob " etc .
et al ) ) ... apk</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Per my subject-line above, &amp; this quote from you?
"Microsoft Security Essentials is all you need for non-enterprise A/V.
It's free, it's unobtrusive and it works very well.
What's more, commercial AV vendors, like Symantec, realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them.
The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers.
" - by PhunkySchtuff (208108)  on Thursday March 18, @02:59PM (#31527572) HomepageI'll "2nd that motion" (after my having used MS-Security Essentials here for the entire time it's been offered FREE to users no less/since its inception-release in fact, &amp; on Windows 7 64-bit here)...It's truly, good stuff, AND FREE TOO!I.E./E.G.-&gt; I use it in combination with ESET NOD32 4.x &amp; Spybot "Search &amp; Destroy" + NORMAN Malware Cleaner (&amp; of course, MS' monthly updated "MS Malicious Software Removal Tool" as well) - for "many doctors' opinions" etc.
(all "latest/greatest" versions, fully updated of course also):Microsoft Security Essentials does the job, + well... &amp; afaik?
Microsoft Security Essentials is also a "Combined Package", in that it functions as BOTH an antivirus AND antispyware program package (thus, it's "2-for-the-price-of-1") @ both the 32-bit level AND 64-bit level offerings.Microsoft Security Essentials does do the job, plus well, &amp; that's also from reviews I have seen of this program (as well as my own usage of it here since it was released by MS).Microsoft Security Essentials is also QUITE regularly/frequently updated too... AND, Microsoft provides a spot to manually download updates too even, IF you like, right here -&gt;http://www.microsoft.com/security/portal/Definitions/ADL.aspx [microsoft.com](That's for both the 32-bit builds &amp; the 64-bit builds as well (bonus)).APKP.S.=&gt; Nice job by Microsoft on this package (yes, they bought it out, but so what?
They're not even charging for it - So you guys who put MS down are way, Way, WAY "off" as far as I am concerned, because MS is taking the security front issue seriously... so seriously in fact, they're not even charging for protection (ala "the mob" etc.
et al))... apk
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527700</id>
	<title>Re:Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>Docboy-J23</author>
	<datestamp>1268903100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've always been fond of the pre-logon scan feature that Avast has.  I haven't seen that in any other free AV package, and I've caught many infected items that couldn't be detected with the user profile running.

OTOH, I've also encountered weird rogue anti-viruses that could only be detected *while* they were running.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always been fond of the pre-logon scan feature that Avast has .
I have n't seen that in any other free AV package , and I 've caught many infected items that could n't be detected with the user profile running .
OTOH , I 've also encountered weird rogue anti-viruses that could only be detected * while * they were running .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always been fond of the pre-logon scan feature that Avast has.
I haven't seen that in any other free AV package, and I've caught many infected items that couldn't be detected with the user profile running.
OTOH, I've also encountered weird rogue anti-viruses that could only be detected *while* they were running.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531704</id>
	<title>Re:MSSE</title>
	<author>toygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1268922480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MSSE or any other antivirus should be complimented by Malwarebytes.org Anti-malware program. For $25 (not per year, its a one time fee) it will run in the background and keep malware from getting into the PC. Its an excellent product.</p><p>Virus = common cold<br>Antivirus = daily vitamins</p><p>Malware = 9mm FMJ to the gut<br>malwarebytes registered = Bullet proof vest</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MSSE or any other antivirus should be complimented by Malwarebytes.org Anti-malware program .
For $ 25 ( not per year , its a one time fee ) it will run in the background and keep malware from getting into the PC .
Its an excellent product.Virus = common coldAntivirus = daily vitaminsMalware = 9mm FMJ to the gutmalwarebytes registered = Bullet proof vest</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MSSE or any other antivirus should be complimented by Malwarebytes.org Anti-malware program.
For $25 (not per year, its a one time fee) it will run in the background and keep malware from getting into the PC.
Its an excellent product.Virus = common coldAntivirus = daily vitaminsMalware = 9mm FMJ to the gutmalwarebytes registered = Bullet proof vest</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526920</id>
	<title>Try Microsoft's offering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials.</p><p>Its free and it comes out really well in the reviews....</p><p>http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc\_report24.pdf</p><p>It also seems very lightweight and its replaced avast on all my machines</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials.Its free and it comes out really well in the reviews....http : //www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc \ _report24.pdfIt also seems very lightweight and its replaced avast on all my machines</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials.Its free and it comes out really well in the reviews....http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc\_report24.pdfIt also seems very lightweight and its replaced avast on all my machines</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526330</id>
	<title>Re:Why free?</title>
	<author>honestmonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1268942400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, I could have moderated you, but thought I'd agree with my 2 cents. I run Kaspersky, and it IS mostly free. I pick it up at Fry's when it's on sale, and there's a rebate (for the upgrade, so I guess I paid something at one point). But it's, if not 100\% free, pretty cheap, usually gets pretty good marks on the various comparisons, and seems to be keeping my computer safe. And the license has been for 3 copies, so all the computers I have run it. For maybe $10-20 bucks to start, and not much more than $10 a year after that, if anything. I had been using AVG, I find I like Kaspersky a little better. But I have sent money to AVG in the past, I'm not averse to paying for good software.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I could have moderated you , but thought I 'd agree with my 2 cents .
I run Kaspersky , and it IS mostly free .
I pick it up at Fry 's when it 's on sale , and there 's a rebate ( for the upgrade , so I guess I paid something at one point ) .
But it 's , if not 100 \ % free , pretty cheap , usually gets pretty good marks on the various comparisons , and seems to be keeping my computer safe .
And the license has been for 3 copies , so all the computers I have run it .
For maybe $ 10-20 bucks to start , and not much more than $ 10 a year after that , if anything .
I had been using AVG , I find I like Kaspersky a little better .
But I have sent money to AVG in the past , I 'm not averse to paying for good software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I could have moderated you, but thought I'd agree with my 2 cents.
I run Kaspersky, and it IS mostly free.
I pick it up at Fry's when it's on sale, and there's a rebate (for the upgrade, so I guess I paid something at one point).
But it's, if not 100\% free, pretty cheap, usually gets pretty good marks on the various comparisons, and seems to be keeping my computer safe.
And the license has been for 3 copies, so all the computers I have run it.
For maybe $10-20 bucks to start, and not much more than $10 a year after that, if anything.
I had been using AVG, I find I like Kaspersky a little better.
But I have sent money to AVG in the past, I'm not averse to paying for good software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31617662</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>wiedzmin</author>
	<datestamp>1269511620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Believe it or not, I use Microsoft Security Essentials - I figured since most antiviruses are useless at detecting new threats anyways (bad guys can access the same antiviruses and make sure that they don't catch their new malware), I'm better off letting the guys who created my operating system, protect it. I've used Avast! and COMODO in the past and they were all good, but MSE has a very low footprint, updates well, and I'm pretty sure will be the first to protect against zero day vulnerabilities that Microsoft discovers... Next, I will try Panda Cloud AV.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Believe it or not , I use Microsoft Security Essentials - I figured since most antiviruses are useless at detecting new threats anyways ( bad guys can access the same antiviruses and make sure that they do n't catch their new malware ) , I 'm better off letting the guys who created my operating system , protect it .
I 've used Avast !
and COMODO in the past and they were all good , but MSE has a very low footprint , updates well , and I 'm pretty sure will be the first to protect against zero day vulnerabilities that Microsoft discovers... Next , I will try Panda Cloud AV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Believe it or not, I use Microsoft Security Essentials - I figured since most antiviruses are useless at detecting new threats anyways (bad guys can access the same antiviruses and make sure that they don't catch their new malware), I'm better off letting the guys who created my operating system, protect it.
I've used Avast!
and COMODO in the past and they were all good, but MSE has a very low footprint, updates well, and I'm pretty sure will be the first to protect against zero day vulnerabilities that Microsoft discovers... Next, I will try Panda Cloud AV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526698</id>
	<title>AVG</title>
	<author>punapea</author>
	<datestamp>1268943480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Always used AVG -even tho I have to admit it has gone a bit crazy lately. My suggestion -get a Mac.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Always used AVG -even tho I have to admit it has gone a bit crazy lately .
My suggestion -get a Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always used AVG -even tho I have to admit it has gone a bit crazy lately.
My suggestion -get a Mac.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527734</id>
	<title>Re:Install through ninite.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I cron this every day, have fun!</p><p>fog@fog:/usr/local/bin$ cat getantivirus.sh<br>wget -N -i<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/antivirus/filestoget.txt -P<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/antivirus</p><p>fog@fog:/antivirus$ cat filestoget.txt<br><a href="http://www.superantispyware.com/downloads/SASDEFINITIONS.EXE" title="superantispyware.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.superantispyware.com/downloads/SASDEFINITIONS.EXE</a> [superantispyware.com]<br><a href="http://downloads.superantispyware.com/downloads/SUPERAntiSpyware.exe" title="superantispyware.com" rel="nofollow">http://downloads.superantispyware.com/downloads/SUPERAntiSpyware.exe</a> [superantispyware.com]<br><a href="http://download.bleepingcomputer.com/sUBs/ComboFix.exe" title="bleepingcomputer.com" rel="nofollow">http://download.bleepingcomputer.com/sUBs/ComboFix.exe</a> [bleepingcomputer.com]<br><a href="http://www.spybotupdates.com/files/spybotsd162.exe" title="spybotupdates.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.spybotupdates.com/files/spybotsd162.exe</a> [spybotupdates.com]<br><a href="http://www.spybotupdates.biz/updates/files/spybotsd\_includes.exe" title="spybotupdates.biz" rel="nofollow">http://www.spybotupdates.biz/updates/files/spybotsd\_includes.exe</a> [spybotupdates.biz]<br><a href="http://download.avgfree.com/filedir/inst/avg\_free\_stf\_en\_85\_420a1708.exe" title="avgfree.com" rel="nofollow">http://download.avgfree.com/filedir/inst/avg\_free\_stf\_en\_85\_420a1708.exe</a> [avgfree.com]<br><a href="http://go.trendmicro.com/free-tools/hijackthis/HijackThisInstaller.exe" title="trendmicro.com" rel="nofollow">http://go.trendmicro.com/free-tools/hijackthis/HijackThisInstaller.exe</a> [trendmicro.com]<br><a href="http://dlce.antivir.com/package/wks\_avira/win32/en/pecl/avira\_antivir\_personal\_en.exe" title="antivir.com" rel="nofollow">http://dlce.antivir.com/package/wks\_avira/win32/en/pecl/avira\_antivir\_personal\_en.exe</a> [antivir.com]<br><a href="http://dl.antivir.de/down/vdf/ivdf\_fusebundle\_nt\_en.zip" title="antivir.de" rel="nofollow">http://dl.antivir.de/down/vdf/ivdf\_fusebundle\_nt\_en.zip</a> [antivir.de]<br><a href="http://mbam.malwarebytes.org/database/mbam-rules.exe" title="malwarebytes.org" rel="nofollow">http://mbam.malwarebytes.org/database/mbam-rules.exe</a> [malwarebytes.org]<br><a href="http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam/program/mbam-setup.exe" title="malwarebytes.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam/program/mbam-setup.exe</a> [malwarebytes.org]<br><a href="http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/vpsupd.exe" title="avast.com" rel="nofollow">http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/vpsupd.exe</a> [avast.com]<br><a href="http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/setupeng.exe" title="avast.com" rel="nofollow">http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/setupeng.exe</a> [avast.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I cron this every day , have fun ! fog @ fog : /usr/local/bin $ cat getantivirus.shwget -N -i /antivirus/filestoget.txt -P /antivirusfog @ fog : /antivirus $ cat filestoget.txthttp : //www.superantispyware.com/downloads/SASDEFINITIONS.EXE [ superantispyware.com ] http : //downloads.superantispyware.com/downloads/SUPERAntiSpyware.exe [ superantispyware.com ] http : //download.bleepingcomputer.com/sUBs/ComboFix.exe [ bleepingcomputer.com ] http : //www.spybotupdates.com/files/spybotsd162.exe [ spybotupdates.com ] http : //www.spybotupdates.biz/updates/files/spybotsd \ _includes.exe [ spybotupdates.biz ] http : //download.avgfree.com/filedir/inst/avg \ _free \ _stf \ _en \ _85 \ _420a1708.exe [ avgfree.com ] http : //go.trendmicro.com/free-tools/hijackthis/HijackThisInstaller.exe [ trendmicro.com ] http : //dlce.antivir.com/package/wks \ _avira/win32/en/pecl/avira \ _antivir \ _personal \ _en.exe [ antivir.com ] http : //dl.antivir.de/down/vdf/ivdf \ _fusebundle \ _nt \ _en.zip [ antivir.de ] http : //mbam.malwarebytes.org/database/mbam-rules.exe [ malwarebytes.org ] http : //www.malwarebytes.org/mbam/program/mbam-setup.exe [ malwarebytes.org ] http : //files.avast.com/iavs4pro/vpsupd.exe [ avast.com ] http : //files.avast.com/iavs4pro/setupeng.exe [ avast.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cron this every day, have fun!fog@fog:/usr/local/bin$ cat getantivirus.shwget -N -i /antivirus/filestoget.txt -P /antivirusfog@fog:/antivirus$ cat filestoget.txthttp://www.superantispyware.com/downloads/SASDEFINITIONS.EXE [superantispyware.com]http://downloads.superantispyware.com/downloads/SUPERAntiSpyware.exe [superantispyware.com]http://download.bleepingcomputer.com/sUBs/ComboFix.exe [bleepingcomputer.com]http://www.spybotupdates.com/files/spybotsd162.exe [spybotupdates.com]http://www.spybotupdates.biz/updates/files/spybotsd\_includes.exe [spybotupdates.biz]http://download.avgfree.com/filedir/inst/avg\_free\_stf\_en\_85\_420a1708.exe [avgfree.com]http://go.trendmicro.com/free-tools/hijackthis/HijackThisInstaller.exe [trendmicro.com]http://dlce.antivir.com/package/wks\_avira/win32/en/pecl/avira\_antivir\_personal\_en.exe [antivir.com]http://dl.antivir.de/down/vdf/ivdf\_fusebundle\_nt\_en.zip [antivir.de]http://mbam.malwarebytes.org/database/mbam-rules.exe [malwarebytes.org]http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam/program/mbam-setup.exe [malwarebytes.org]http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/vpsupd.exe [avast.com]http://files.avast.com/iavs4pro/setupeng.exe [avast.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526194</id>
	<title>A few options</title>
	<author>kimvette</author>
	<datestamp>1268941980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are quite a few options actually. I'll list them in order of effectiveness.</p><p>1. BSD or Linux. You won't get hit by viruses or any crap like that, unless you're enough of a moron to run everything as root and go out of your way to make the system open. Unfortunately neither option will run 100\% of your Windows software.</p><p>2. Unplug your Windows box. Guaranteed 100\% effective. The drawback is that apps won't run.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>3. Comodo antivirus; <a href="http://personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html" title="comodo.com">http://personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html</a> [comodo.com]   I have been trying it on various workstations and have found it to be reasonably good.   Less effective than the above options!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) Seriously though it's pretty good. It's not antispyware though, and it doesn't slow the system to a crawl like some other programs.  That should be a non-issue. If not, then why are you running MSIE after you've been warned for years?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>4. Microsoft Security Essentials: Microsoft actually did a very good job with this basic suite. It's not bloated at all, is straight and to the point, and catches some spyware even malwarebytes misses. It's good now, but then again, Microsoft has dropped the ball with every antivirus and antispyware software they have installed to date.</p><p>5. You could try Norton Internet Security. I understand they've completely rearchitected it and brought over NO legacy code and are not bloated so you might want to try it,  but I haven't looked at the Norton suite since the 2003 version that turned their antivirus into a failed abortion.</p><p>I was using Moon Secure on various systems for a while: it's free, open source, etc. but it has not been updated in forever and is rapidly becoming less and less effective, plus it has quite a few defects including making the Windows logon process EXTREMELY slow on some configurations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are quite a few options actually .
I 'll list them in order of effectiveness.1 .
BSD or Linux .
You wo n't get hit by viruses or any crap like that , unless you 're enough of a moron to run everything as root and go out of your way to make the system open .
Unfortunately neither option will run 100 \ % of your Windows software.2 .
Unplug your Windows box .
Guaranteed 100 \ % effective .
The drawback is that apps wo n't run .
; ) 3. Comodo antivirus ; http : //personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html [ comodo.com ] I have been trying it on various workstations and have found it to be reasonably good .
Less effective than the above options !
; ) Seriously though it 's pretty good .
It 's not antispyware though , and it does n't slow the system to a crawl like some other programs .
That should be a non-issue .
If not , then why are you running MSIE after you 've been warned for years ?
; ) 4. Microsoft Security Essentials : Microsoft actually did a very good job with this basic suite .
It 's not bloated at all , is straight and to the point , and catches some spyware even malwarebytes misses .
It 's good now , but then again , Microsoft has dropped the ball with every antivirus and antispyware software they have installed to date.5 .
You could try Norton Internet Security .
I understand they 've completely rearchitected it and brought over NO legacy code and are not bloated so you might want to try it , but I have n't looked at the Norton suite since the 2003 version that turned their antivirus into a failed abortion.I was using Moon Secure on various systems for a while : it 's free , open source , etc .
but it has not been updated in forever and is rapidly becoming less and less effective , plus it has quite a few defects including making the Windows logon process EXTREMELY slow on some configurations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are quite a few options actually.
I'll list them in order of effectiveness.1.
BSD or Linux.
You won't get hit by viruses or any crap like that, unless you're enough of a moron to run everything as root and go out of your way to make the system open.
Unfortunately neither option will run 100\% of your Windows software.2.
Unplug your Windows box.
Guaranteed 100\% effective.
The drawback is that apps won't run.
;)3. Comodo antivirus; http://personalfirewall.comodo.com/free-download.html [comodo.com]   I have been trying it on various workstations and have found it to be reasonably good.
Less effective than the above options!
;) Seriously though it's pretty good.
It's not antispyware though, and it doesn't slow the system to a crawl like some other programs.
That should be a non-issue.
If not, then why are you running MSIE after you've been warned for years?
;)4. Microsoft Security Essentials: Microsoft actually did a very good job with this basic suite.
It's not bloated at all, is straight and to the point, and catches some spyware even malwarebytes misses.
It's good now, but then again, Microsoft has dropped the ball with every antivirus and antispyware software they have installed to date.5.
You could try Norton Internet Security.
I understand they've completely rearchitected it and brought over NO legacy code and are not bloated so you might want to try it,  but I haven't looked at the Norton suite since the 2003 version that turned their antivirus into a failed abortion.I was using Moon Secure on various systems for a while: it's free, open source, etc.
but it has not been updated in forever and is rapidly becoming less and less effective, plus it has quite a few defects including making the Windows logon process EXTREMELY slow on some configurations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527142</id>
	<title>To :Tecman83</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Avast. Have since 1995. Of the 300 computers I have done reinstall of the OS ---ZERO, I repeat ZERO people have called me to complain of any virus occurring while having this program installed. They have usually called me to thank me for taking the 2 worst offenders off their computer (McAfee and Norton) and really enjoy the Virus database is updated secure feeling of Avast. You have to ask- really, you are worried about the program becoming Bloatware?  Really? C'mon!<br>AND SERIOUSLY--You have always had to register your copy of Avast after 60 days or it does not get updated. It is the  same registration it always has been -Some name (does not have to be yours) and a valid email address. The big improvement is now the whole process does not require you to copy and past a string code to register the product--it is all there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Avast .
Have since 1995 .
Of the 300 computers I have done reinstall of the OS ---ZERO , I repeat ZERO people have called me to complain of any virus occurring while having this program installed .
They have usually called me to thank me for taking the 2 worst offenders off their computer ( McAfee and Norton ) and really enjoy the Virus database is updated secure feeling of Avast .
You have to ask- really , you are worried about the program becoming Bloatware ?
Really ? C'mon ! AND SERIOUSLY--You have always had to register your copy of Avast after 60 days or it does not get updated .
It is the same registration it always has been -Some name ( does not have to be yours ) and a valid email address .
The big improvement is now the whole process does not require you to copy and past a string code to register the product--it is all there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Avast.
Have since 1995.
Of the 300 computers I have done reinstall of the OS ---ZERO, I repeat ZERO people have called me to complain of any virus occurring while having this program installed.
They have usually called me to thank me for taking the 2 worst offenders off their computer (McAfee and Norton) and really enjoy the Virus database is updated secure feeling of Avast.
You have to ask- really, you are worried about the program becoming Bloatware?
Really? C'mon!AND SERIOUSLY--You have always had to register your copy of Avast after 60 days or it does not get updated.
It is the  same registration it always has been -Some name (does not have to be yours) and a valid email address.
The big improvement is now the whole process does not require you to copy and past a string code to register the product--it is all there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530322</id>
	<title>Re:Panda Cloud</title>
	<author>Altesse</author>
	<datestamp>1268913180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You do know Panda <a href="http://www.humanrights-france.org/economic-discrimination.htm" title="humanrights-france.org" rel="nofollow">is linked to Scientology</a> [humanrights-france.org], right ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do know Panda is linked to Scientology [ humanrights-france.org ] , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do know Panda is linked to Scientology [humanrights-france.org], right ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526588</id>
	<title>Trinity</title>
	<author>Tmack</author>
	<datestamp>1268943180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Its probably not quite what you were looking for, but the <a href="http://trinityhome.org/Home/index.php?wpid=1&amp;front\_id=12" title="trinityhome.org">Trinity Rescue Kit</a> [trinityhome.org] will boot directly into running several of the free virus scanners if you like (AVG (broken, soon to be removed too), Avast (coming soon), Vexira, F-prot, Clamav, and a bunch of people voting to get Avira added). Get an old 128Mb+ usb stick and use unetbootin to load the bootable image to it (or just burn the iso to cd), and make sure the computer in question is rebooted to it once a week or so (or whenever its "acting up"). It wont actively block things in windows (duh, its running from its own linux kernel on boot), but its a great off-line scanner that can scrape away some of the really nasty ones.

<p>Tm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its probably not quite what you were looking for , but the Trinity Rescue Kit [ trinityhome.org ] will boot directly into running several of the free virus scanners if you like ( AVG ( broken , soon to be removed too ) , Avast ( coming soon ) , Vexira , F-prot , Clamav , and a bunch of people voting to get Avira added ) .
Get an old 128Mb + usb stick and use unetbootin to load the bootable image to it ( or just burn the iso to cd ) , and make sure the computer in question is rebooted to it once a week or so ( or whenever its " acting up " ) .
It wont actively block things in windows ( duh , its running from its own linux kernel on boot ) , but its a great off-line scanner that can scrape away some of the really nasty ones .
Tm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its probably not quite what you were looking for, but the Trinity Rescue Kit [trinityhome.org] will boot directly into running several of the free virus scanners if you like (AVG (broken, soon to be removed too), Avast (coming soon), Vexira, F-prot, Clamav, and a bunch of people voting to get Avira added).
Get an old 128Mb+ usb stick and use unetbootin to load the bootable image to it (or just burn the iso to cd), and make sure the computer in question is rebooted to it once a week or so (or whenever its "acting up").
It wont actively block things in windows (duh, its running from its own linux kernel on boot), but its a great off-line scanner that can scrape away some of the really nasty ones.
Tm</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526364</id>
	<title>Obligatory answer...</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1268942520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Linux<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I don't mean that in the snarky, "everyone should only use Linux" sense.  But my Linux computers are certainly the ones that require the least care and feeding.  And Linux <i>is</i> free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux : ) I do n't mean that in the snarky , " everyone should only use Linux " sense .
But my Linux computers are certainly the ones that require the least care and feeding .
And Linux is free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux :)I don't mean that in the snarky, "everyone should only use Linux" sense.
But my Linux computers are certainly the ones that require the least care and feeding.
And Linux is free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529490</id>
	<title>antivirus comparison and reviews</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PC Magazine just did a review of free antivirus software http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356509,00.asp<br>Even more interesting is this comparison of ram usage of different antivirus software http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2008/07/11/which-free-antivirus-is-the-lightest-on-system-memory-usage/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PC Magazine just did a review of free antivirus software http : //www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356509,00.aspEven more interesting is this comparison of ram usage of different antivirus software http : //www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2008/07/11/which-free-antivirus-is-the-lightest-on-system-memory-usage/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PC Magazine just did a review of free antivirus software http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2356509,00.aspEven more interesting is this comparison of ram usage of different antivirus software http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/2008/07/11/which-free-antivirus-is-the-lightest-on-system-memory-usage/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528822</id>
	<title>Re:Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just think of the registration as some sort of survey, since they don't really need you to fill in everything... They just pretty much want to know how many people use it, and what kinds of people and from where... Probably to improve the product itself, or just plain survey people who use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just think of the registration as some sort of survey , since they do n't really need you to fill in everything... They just pretty much want to know how many people use it , and what kinds of people and from where... Probably to improve the product itself , or just plain survey people who use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just think of the registration as some sort of survey, since they don't really need you to fill in everything... They just pretty much want to know how many people use it, and what kinds of people and from where... Probably to improve the product itself, or just plain survey people who use it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526208</id>
	<title>I use VirusX</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1268942040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I also use an Amiga, so that's probably not helpful for you.</p><p>Spybot Search &amp; Destroy does a good job of protecting not only your browser (makes it immune) and adware, but also cleans up viruses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I also use an Amiga , so that 's probably not helpful for you.Spybot Search &amp; Destroy does a good job of protecting not only your browser ( makes it immune ) and adware , but also cleans up viruses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also use an Amiga, so that's probably not helpful for you.Spybot Search &amp; Destroy does a good job of protecting not only your browser (makes it immune) and adware, but also cleans up viruses.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526520</id>
	<title>Server OS...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Windows Server 2008 Standard for my Desktop OS - any ideas on AV for this other than ClamAV?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Windows Server 2008 Standard for my Desktop OS - any ideas on AV for this other than ClamAV ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Windows Server 2008 Standard for my Desktop OS - any ideas on AV for this other than ClamAV?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530552</id>
	<title>SuperUser Answer</title>
	<author>Anadelonbrin</author>
	<datestamp>1268914560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>SuperUser has basically the same question (http://superuser.com/questions/2/free-antivirus-solutions-for-windows/), as well as a discussion of the costs of choosing free over paid.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SuperUser has basically the same question ( http : //superuser.com/questions/2/free-antivirus-solutions-for-windows/ ) , as well as a discussion of the costs of choosing free over paid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SuperUser has basically the same question (http://superuser.com/questions/2/free-antivirus-solutions-for-windows/), as well as a discussion of the costs of choosing free over paid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541664</id>
	<title>Re:buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>ZERO1ZERO</author>
	<datestamp>1269027180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the funniest post I've read all week - cheers<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the funniest post I 've read all week - cheers : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the funniest post I've read all week - cheers :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535248</id>
	<title>some reference</title>
	<author>chenjeru</author>
	<datestamp>1269007500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Nod32 on my corporate network and at home, and can highly recommend it, but this doesn't fit the 'free' specification. AV comparatives is a great independent site where they do regular testing (several times a year) including both free and paid AV software: <a href="http://www.av-comparatives.org/" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.av-comparatives.org/</a> [av-comparatives.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Nod32 on my corporate network and at home , and can highly recommend it , but this does n't fit the 'free ' specification .
AV comparatives is a great independent site where they do regular testing ( several times a year ) including both free and paid AV software : http : //www.av-comparatives.org/ [ av-comparatives.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Nod32 on my corporate network and at home, and can highly recommend it, but this doesn't fit the 'free' specification.
AV comparatives is a great independent site where they do regular testing (several times a year) including both free and paid AV software: http://www.av-comparatives.org/ [av-comparatives.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31538872</id>
	<title>BLINK</title>
	<author>setrops</author>
	<datestamp>1269017160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use blink which is a home version of the Retina scanner by eEye. It has a virus and firewall and other stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use blink which is a home version of the Retina scanner by eEye .
It has a virus and firewall and other stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use blink which is a home version of the Retina scanner by eEye.
It has a virus and firewall and other stuff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531988</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Cyner</author>
	<datestamp>1268925060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work for a company where we use and resell Sophos. Sounds like your installation is misconfigured if it's impacting systems noticeably. The default settings aren't ideal.</p><p>Also, when I looked last year MSE &amp; Forefront were consistently behind most of the major vendors in catching new viruses. This was a major factor in our decision to avoid Forefront (formerly called Antigen), and may have influenced your IT department's decision..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work for a company where we use and resell Sophos .
Sounds like your installation is misconfigured if it 's impacting systems noticeably .
The default settings are n't ideal.Also , when I looked last year MSE &amp; Forefront were consistently behind most of the major vendors in catching new viruses .
This was a major factor in our decision to avoid Forefront ( formerly called Antigen ) , and may have influenced your IT department 's decision. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work for a company where we use and resell Sophos.
Sounds like your installation is misconfigured if it's impacting systems noticeably.
The default settings aren't ideal.Also, when I looked last year MSE &amp; Forefront were consistently behind most of the major vendors in catching new viruses.
This was a major factor in our decision to avoid Forefront (formerly called Antigen), and may have influenced your IT department's decision..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138</id>
	<title>Smaller AV programs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Techman83 writes "...AVG and Avast have been quite good, but are starting to bloat out in size..."</i></p><p>Um, in case you haven't noticed, more viruses, exploits and malware are coming out all the time.<br>I'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.</p><p>In fact, I'd be highly suspicious.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Techman83 writes " ...AVG and Avast have been quite good , but are starting to bloat out in size... " Um , in case you have n't noticed , more viruses , exploits and malware are coming out all the time.I 'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.In fact , I 'd be highly suspicious .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Techman83 writes "...AVG and Avast have been quite good, but are starting to bloat out in size..."Um, in case you haven't noticed, more viruses, exploits and malware are coming out all the time.I'd be very surprised if ANY antivirus software got smaller.In fact, I'd be highly suspicious.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531148</id>
	<title>Re:I don't</title>
	<author>axor1337</author>
	<datestamp>1268918400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>YOU'RE an Idiot, 100\% completely retarded. I think our a liar and know nothing about IT, Antivirus apps are essential. yes Norton, Mcafee and Trendmicro are a huge hassle and slow down your computer and don't work worth a shit, but AVG, AVAST, and MSE are all light weight free and easy to use. MSE is my fav.

you need to stop giving bad advice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>YOU 'RE an Idiot , 100 \ % completely retarded .
I think our a liar and know nothing about IT , Antivirus apps are essential .
yes Norton , Mcafee and Trendmicro are a huge hassle and slow down your computer and do n't work worth a shit , but AVG , AVAST , and MSE are all light weight free and easy to use .
MSE is my fav .
you need to stop giving bad advice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>YOU'RE an Idiot, 100\% completely retarded.
I think our a liar and know nothing about IT, Antivirus apps are essential.
yes Norton, Mcafee and Trendmicro are a huge hassle and slow down your computer and don't work worth a shit, but AVG, AVAST, and MSE are all light weight free and easy to use.
MSE is my fav.
you need to stop giving bad advice.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535262</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1269007560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seen on a recent slashdot comment : "antivirus will use up bandwidth, CPU and RAM, will randomly block applications and slow down your system, they will cost you money. Virus do about the same, but at least they try to be stealthy at it."<br> <br>If your application is non-critical, make a risk analysis of running without anti-virus. If your system is critical, you should better not rely on antivirus (and I have opinions using windows in that case but I know that even on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. this is not a consensus).<br> <br>
In my career, I have seen more data erased by an antivirus than by a virus.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seen on a recent slashdot comment : " antivirus will use up bandwidth , CPU and RAM , will randomly block applications and slow down your system , they will cost you money .
Virus do about the same , but at least they try to be stealthy at it .
" If your application is non-critical , make a risk analysis of running without anti-virus .
If your system is critical , you should better not rely on antivirus ( and I have opinions using windows in that case but I know that even on / .
this is not a consensus ) .
In my career , I have seen more data erased by an antivirus than by a virus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seen on a recent slashdot comment : "antivirus will use up bandwidth, CPU and RAM, will randomly block applications and slow down your system, they will cost you money.
Virus do about the same, but at least they try to be stealthy at it.
" If your application is non-critical, make a risk analysis of running without anti-virus.
If your system is critical, you should better not rely on antivirus (and I have opinions using windows in that case but I know that even on /.
this is not a consensus).
In my career, I have seen more data erased by an antivirus than by a virus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</id>
	<title>I don't</title>
	<author>riegel</author>
	<datestamp>1268943060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines. I have been doing IT since 1992.</p><p>When I am asked this question my answer is always this. None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth. First any new viruses will be undetected, second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.</p><p>Of course this answer immediately creates a follow up question... Well then what do you do?</p><p>The best way to protect yourself is to run as NON - ADMIN. That's it. A coworker recently got a virus and I simply logged in as admin and ran a free online virus scan. It found his problem and removed it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Between my job , some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines .
I have been doing IT since 1992.When I am asked this question my answer is always this .
None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth .
First any new viruses will be undetected , second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.Of course this answer immediately creates a follow up question... Well then what do you do ? The best way to protect yourself is to run as NON - ADMIN .
That 's it .
A coworker recently got a virus and I simply logged in as admin and ran a free online virus scan .
It found his problem and removed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines.
I have been doing IT since 1992.When I am asked this question my answer is always this.
None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth.
First any new viruses will be undetected, second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.Of course this answer immediately creates a follow up question... Well then what do you do?The best way to protect yourself is to run as NON - ADMIN.
That's it.
A coworker recently got a virus and I simply logged in as admin and ran a free online virus scan.
It found his problem and removed it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528898</id>
	<title>Use these 4 tools and you cant go wrong!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. dont ever go to avgs site. Just type in avg free 9.0 and get it from cnet hassle free</p><p>2. You need more than anti virus these days. the new malware hacks of fake anti virues are slick. i use 4 tools for all my needs and never have issues</p><p>tool 1: avg- use this for viruses, its awesome. but it doesn't touch malware<br>tool 2: malbytes anti malware, this program is awesome to remove those nasty little infections of fake anti viruses<br>tool 3: spybot, blocks all that mumbo jumbo you dont want  that can creep into your browser<br>tool 4: the cleaner (moosoft) I dont use this that often but once your truly hacked most wont remove all the trojans. This thing is a trojan beast.</p><p>no 1 program can do the job of all.. so use 4 of the best and most importantly FREE programs out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1. dont ever go to avgs site .
Just type in avg free 9.0 and get it from cnet hassle free2 .
You need more than anti virus these days .
the new malware hacks of fake anti virues are slick .
i use 4 tools for all my needs and never have issuestool 1 : avg- use this for viruses , its awesome .
but it does n't touch malwaretool 2 : malbytes anti malware , this program is awesome to remove those nasty little infections of fake anti virusestool 3 : spybot , blocks all that mumbo jumbo you dont want that can creep into your browsertool 4 : the cleaner ( moosoft ) I dont use this that often but once your truly hacked most wont remove all the trojans .
This thing is a trojan beast.no 1 program can do the job of all.. so use 4 of the best and most importantly FREE programs out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1. dont ever go to avgs site.
Just type in avg free 9.0 and get it from cnet hassle free2.
You need more than anti virus these days.
the new malware hacks of fake anti virues are slick.
i use 4 tools for all my needs and never have issuestool 1: avg- use this for viruses, its awesome.
but it doesn't touch malwaretool 2: malbytes anti malware, this program is awesome to remove those nasty little infections of fake anti virusestool 3: spybot, blocks all that mumbo jumbo you dont want  that can creep into your browsertool 4: the cleaner (moosoft) I dont use this that often but once your truly hacked most wont remove all the trojans.
This thing is a trojan beast.no 1 program can do the job of all.. so use 4 of the best and most importantly FREE programs out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</id>
	<title>Avira</title>
	<author>HellProphet</author>
	<datestamp>1268941740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avira Anti-vir.

It is good, fully functioned with updates, custom scheduled scans and on access scanning. The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it won't pop up for another 24 hours.

Also it uses up half the resources of AVG, McAfee, Norton.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira Anti-vir .
It is good , fully functioned with updates , custom scheduled scans and on access scanning .
The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it wo n't pop up for another 24 hours .
Also it uses up half the resources of AVG , McAfee , Norton .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira Anti-vir.
It is good, fully functioned with updates, custom scheduled scans and on access scanning.
The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK and it won't pop up for another 24 hours.
Also it uses up half the resources of AVG, McAfee, Norton.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532146</id>
	<title>Try Comodo.</title>
	<author>brian2hand</author>
	<datestamp>1268926620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I look after a number of networks and find that Comodo offers one of the best solutions, both free and non-free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I look after a number of networks and find that Comodo offers one of the best solutions , both free and non-free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I look after a number of networks and find that Comodo offers one of the best solutions, both free and non-free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534958</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>kj\_kabaje</author>
	<datestamp>1269006000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>mod over-rated without a link.  Otherwise, this may as well be astro-turf.</htmltext>
<tokenext>mod over-rated without a link .
Otherwise , this may as well be astro-turf .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mod over-rated without a link.
Otherwise, this may as well be astro-turf.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324</id>
	<title>buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>C0vardeAn0nim0</author>
	<datestamp>1268942400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>there.</p><p>you're gonna get a lot of this here. so let's get this out of the way, shall we ?</p><p>now, if you REALLY need to run some kinds of windows apps, since your computer probably came with windows already, no need to put it to waste. move it to a virtual machine with sun's excellent virtual box, plus fork some more cash for crossover office.</p><p>here at my job, I got fed up with windows, so after the company replaced our old notebooks by newwer dual core machines, i moved to linux, office (i can't get rid of outlook yet.) runs on crossover, some proprietary tools run on windows xp inside virtual box, that i fire up only when needed.</p><p>the good thing about virtual machines is that you can make snapshots. create a snapshot of yours right after installing windows. then use it whenever you need, just be carefull not to open anything funny, avoid using a browser inside it. even if all these precautions you get infected, discard the current state and boot the last clean snapshot.</p><p>everything else, run on the linux host. this way you don't need an anti-virus any better than microsoft's own.</p><p>i never used any virtualization solution on macs, but if vmware's fusion product is anything like the windows/linux counterpart, it certainly have similar functionality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>there.you 're gon na get a lot of this here .
so let 's get this out of the way , shall we ? now , if you REALLY need to run some kinds of windows apps , since your computer probably came with windows already , no need to put it to waste .
move it to a virtual machine with sun 's excellent virtual box , plus fork some more cash for crossover office.here at my job , I got fed up with windows , so after the company replaced our old notebooks by newwer dual core machines , i moved to linux , office ( i ca n't get rid of outlook yet .
) runs on crossover , some proprietary tools run on windows xp inside virtual box , that i fire up only when needed.the good thing about virtual machines is that you can make snapshots .
create a snapshot of yours right after installing windows .
then use it whenever you need , just be carefull not to open anything funny , avoid using a browser inside it .
even if all these precautions you get infected , discard the current state and boot the last clean snapshot.everything else , run on the linux host .
this way you do n't need an anti-virus any better than microsoft 's own.i never used any virtualization solution on macs , but if vmware 's fusion product is anything like the windows/linux counterpart , it certainly have similar functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there.you're gonna get a lot of this here.
so let's get this out of the way, shall we ?now, if you REALLY need to run some kinds of windows apps, since your computer probably came with windows already, no need to put it to waste.
move it to a virtual machine with sun's excellent virtual box, plus fork some more cash for crossover office.here at my job, I got fed up with windows, so after the company replaced our old notebooks by newwer dual core machines, i moved to linux, office (i can't get rid of outlook yet.
) runs on crossover, some proprietary tools run on windows xp inside virtual box, that i fire up only when needed.the good thing about virtual machines is that you can make snapshots.
create a snapshot of yours right after installing windows.
then use it whenever you need, just be carefull not to open anything funny, avoid using a browser inside it.
even if all these precautions you get infected, discard the current state and boot the last clean snapshot.everything else, run on the linux host.
this way you don't need an anti-virus any better than microsoft's own.i never used any virtualization solution on macs, but if vmware's fusion product is anything like the windows/linux counterpart, it certainly have similar functionality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534878</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>EdgeCreeper</author>
	<datestamp>1269005160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>is there a way to evaluate antivirus software? i mean, after it's 1.) no popups, 2.) not bloaty 3.) easy on the system 4.) convenient to use... how do you know if it actually works?</p></div><p>There are sites that test AV products, two are:</p><p> <a href="http://www.virusbtn.com/" title="virusbtn.com" rel="nofollow">Virus Bulletin</a> [virusbtn.com] and <a href="http://www.av-comparatives.org/" title="av-comparatives.org" rel="nofollow">AV-Comparatives</a> [av-comparatives.org].</p><p>These can be used to get an idea of the effectiveness of the product.  As for 1, 2, 3 and 4 just trying the product will tell you about it.  If one of those issues causes problems, discard the AV product and get another, this goes especially for the "easy on the system" requirement.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>is there a way to evaluate antivirus software ?
i mean , after it 's 1 .
) no popups , 2 .
) not bloaty 3 .
) easy on the system 4 .
) convenient to use... how do you know if it actually works ? There are sites that test AV products , two are : Virus Bulletin [ virusbtn.com ] and AV-Comparatives [ av-comparatives.org ] .These can be used to get an idea of the effectiveness of the product .
As for 1 , 2 , 3 and 4 just trying the product will tell you about it .
If one of those issues causes problems , discard the AV product and get another , this goes especially for the " easy on the system " requirement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is there a way to evaluate antivirus software?
i mean, after it's 1.
) no popups, 2.
) not bloaty 3.
) easy on the system 4.
) convenient to use... how do you know if it actually works?There are sites that test AV products, two are: Virus Bulletin [virusbtn.com] and AV-Comparatives [av-comparatives.org].These can be used to get an idea of the effectiveness of the product.
As for 1, 2, 3 and 4 just trying the product will tell you about it.
If one of those issues causes problems, discard the AV product and get another, this goes especially for the "easy on the system" requirement.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530934</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268916960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMHO, ClamWin is useful as an additional scanner, and you can use it with Firefox if you install <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/10882" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">Fireclam</a> [mozilla.org]. As for Moonsecure, the project seems inactive, moonsecure.com returns a good old 403 right now, and nobody seems to have bothered to upload the source tarball since like 2 years (see the SourceForge project at sf.net/projects/moonav). How is this free software under the GNU GPL?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO , ClamWin is useful as an additional scanner , and you can use it with Firefox if you install Fireclam [ mozilla.org ] .
As for Moonsecure , the project seems inactive , moonsecure.com returns a good old 403 right now , and nobody seems to have bothered to upload the source tarball since like 2 years ( see the SourceForge project at sf.net/projects/moonav ) .
How is this free software under the GNU GPL ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO, ClamWin is useful as an additional scanner, and you can use it with Firefox if you install Fireclam [mozilla.org].
As for Moonsecure, the project seems inactive, moonsecure.com returns a good old 403 right now, and nobody seems to have bothered to upload the source tarball since like 2 years (see the SourceForge project at sf.net/projects/moonav).
How is this free software under the GNU GPL?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526826</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526680</id>
	<title>ClamAV</title>
	<author>Neanderthal Ninny</author>
	<datestamp>1268943420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use ClamAV and now they have Windows client. <a href="http://www.clamav.net/" title="clamav.net">http://www.clamav.net/</a> [clamav.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use ClamAV and now they have Windows client .
http : //www.clamav.net/ [ clamav.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use ClamAV and now they have Windows client.
http://www.clamav.net/ [clamav.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526848</id>
	<title>Two words</title>
	<author>Dunbal</author>
	<datestamp>1268943900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows Update.</p><p>And stop clicking "Yes" to everything.</p><p>That's all you need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows Update.And stop clicking " Yes " to everything.That 's all you need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows Update.And stop clicking "Yes" to everything.That's all you need.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528082</id>
	<title>Re:Why free?</title>
	<author>dthardcore</author>
	<datestamp>1268904180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with you about Kaspersky, I've been a big fan of them for a while now. I switched to it after Mcafee's software went down the tubes. (Their version 4.0 and prior were great at the time). Another product that I think is well worth the money even though its not an antivirus is MalwareBytes. Even the free version is fantastic. I have had more success using Malwarebytes to clean up peoples machines than anything else. Plus the small file size and relatively small definitions allow me to keep an updated version on my thumbdrive at all times, which is very useful when someone downloads those damn fake antivirus programs that prevent you from downloading a real Antivirus or Definition files to clean it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with you about Kaspersky , I 've been a big fan of them for a while now .
I switched to it after Mcafee 's software went down the tubes .
( Their version 4.0 and prior were great at the time ) .
Another product that I think is well worth the money even though its not an antivirus is MalwareBytes .
Even the free version is fantastic .
I have had more success using Malwarebytes to clean up peoples machines than anything else .
Plus the small file size and relatively small definitions allow me to keep an updated version on my thumbdrive at all times , which is very useful when someone downloads those damn fake antivirus programs that prevent you from downloading a real Antivirus or Definition files to clean it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with you about Kaspersky, I've been a big fan of them for a while now.
I switched to it after Mcafee's software went down the tubes.
(Their version 4.0 and prior were great at the time).
Another product that I think is well worth the money even though its not an antivirus is MalwareBytes.
Even the free version is fantastic.
I have had more success using Malwarebytes to clean up peoples machines than anything else.
Plus the small file size and relatively small definitions allow me to keep an updated version on my thumbdrive at all times, which is very useful when someone downloads those damn fake antivirus programs that prevent you from downloading a real Antivirus or Definition files to clean it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526330</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530054</id>
	<title>I've given up on anti-virus software.</title>
	<author>maillemaker</author>
	<datestamp>1268911680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just bought a new computer, and installed Windows 7 on it.</p><p>I have decided to forego antivirus software.</p><p>It seems to me that these things, like DRM, are circumvented nearly instantaneously.  In fact, I have come to view computer security just like DRM - a futile endeavor.</p><p>I know not to run<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe files from emails, and I know not to download and install files I don't trust.  I'm behind a hardware firewall.</p><p>I've run AVG for years, and never had a detection.</p><p>That's going to be the extent of my efforts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just bought a new computer , and installed Windows 7 on it.I have decided to forego antivirus software.It seems to me that these things , like DRM , are circumvented nearly instantaneously .
In fact , I have come to view computer security just like DRM - a futile endeavor.I know not to run .exe files from emails , and I know not to download and install files I do n't trust .
I 'm behind a hardware firewall.I 've run AVG for years , and never had a detection.That 's going to be the extent of my efforts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just bought a new computer, and installed Windows 7 on it.I have decided to forego antivirus software.It seems to me that these things, like DRM, are circumvented nearly instantaneously.
In fact, I have come to view computer security just like DRM - a futile endeavor.I know not to run .exe files from emails, and I know not to download and install files I don't trust.
I'm behind a hardware firewall.I've run AVG for years, and never had a detection.That's going to be the extent of my efforts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526556</id>
	<title>AVG + Common sense</title>
	<author>SheeEttin</author>
	<datestamp>1268943060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use AVG's free edition for on-access scanning, just for a little extra protection, because I am generally able to avoid getting infected with anything. (Even if something does slip by me, I can often track it down through a service it installs, entry in startup lists, or running processes.)<br>
If I'm downloading something that has a big potential for being a virus (e.g. a no-CD crack), I'll scan it manually with AVG, and also upload it to a scanning service like <a href="http://virusscan.jotti.org/" title="jotti.org">virusscan.jotti.org</a> [jotti.org] or <a href="http://virustotal.com/" title="virustotal.com">virustotal.com</a> [virustotal.com], which take a file and put it through a number of anti-virus products.
<br> <br>
Natually, AVG has also been making it harder to find the free edition. They, of course, want you to buy the full AVG Internet Security package. (To find AVG Free, you have to go to <a href="http://free.avg.com/" title="avg.com">free.avg.com</a> [avg.com], and look for the less-flashy, more hidden buttons.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use AVG 's free edition for on-access scanning , just for a little extra protection , because I am generally able to avoid getting infected with anything .
( Even if something does slip by me , I can often track it down through a service it installs , entry in startup lists , or running processes .
) If I 'm downloading something that has a big potential for being a virus ( e.g .
a no-CD crack ) , I 'll scan it manually with AVG , and also upload it to a scanning service like virusscan.jotti.org [ jotti.org ] or virustotal.com [ virustotal.com ] , which take a file and put it through a number of anti-virus products .
Natually , AVG has also been making it harder to find the free edition .
They , of course , want you to buy the full AVG Internet Security package .
( To find AVG Free , you have to go to free.avg.com [ avg.com ] , and look for the less-flashy , more hidden buttons .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use AVG's free edition for on-access scanning, just for a little extra protection, because I am generally able to avoid getting infected with anything.
(Even if something does slip by me, I can often track it down through a service it installs, entry in startup lists, or running processes.
)
If I'm downloading something that has a big potential for being a virus (e.g.
a no-CD crack), I'll scan it manually with AVG, and also upload it to a scanning service like virusscan.jotti.org [jotti.org] or virustotal.com [virustotal.com], which take a file and put it through a number of anti-virus products.
Natually, AVG has also been making it harder to find the free edition.
They, of course, want you to buy the full AVG Internet Security package.
(To find AVG Free, you have to go to free.avg.com [avg.com], and look for the less-flashy, more hidden buttons.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526918</id>
	<title>Re:buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reinterpretation of "buy a mac or use linux" mantra every time someone asks for an Windows related advice in all too familiar car terminology:</p><p>Windows user: I have this $non-descript-japanese-model hatchback and....<br>Pundit: Scrap that shit, get a Mercedes!<br>WU: Well, it's just this noise...<br>Pundit: Mercedes! Japanese cars are shit!<br>WU:  I can't afford that - anyway I was saying...<br>Pundit: Then you have to go for a tank!<br>WU: A tank? WTF? Is this a car service?<br>Pundit: Or F22 fighter jet. It will happen sooner or later, sonny boy, you car is a piece of shit, it will fall apart any day. Why delaying the inevitable? Switch to proven quality!<br>WU: Uh... ok, I'll go with it. How do I drive a tank? How do I even get the fucking tank?<br>Pundit: It's free! You just have to join the military and pass the training and you're good to go!<br>WU: Can I drive it to work?<br>Pundit: Not really but who cares! It's rock solid!<br>WU:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p><p>And so on...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reinterpretation of " buy a mac or use linux " mantra every time someone asks for an Windows related advice in all too familiar car terminology : Windows user : I have this $ non-descript-japanese-model hatchback and....Pundit : Scrap that shit , get a Mercedes ! WU : Well , it 's just this noise...Pundit : Mercedes !
Japanese cars are shit ! WU : I ca n't afford that - anyway I was saying...Pundit : Then you have to go for a tank ! WU : A tank ?
WTF ? Is this a car service ? Pundit : Or F22 fighter jet .
It will happen sooner or later , sonny boy , you car is a piece of shit , it will fall apart any day .
Why delaying the inevitable ?
Switch to proven quality ! WU : Uh... ok , I 'll go with it .
How do I drive a tank ?
How do I even get the fucking tank ? Pundit : It 's free !
You just have to join the military and pass the training and you 're good to go ! WU : Can I drive it to work ? Pundit : Not really but who cares !
It 's rock solid ! WU : ...And so on.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reinterpretation of "buy a mac or use linux" mantra every time someone asks for an Windows related advice in all too familiar car terminology:Windows user: I have this $non-descript-japanese-model hatchback and....Pundit: Scrap that shit, get a Mercedes!WU: Well, it's just this noise...Pundit: Mercedes!
Japanese cars are shit!WU:  I can't afford that - anyway I was saying...Pundit: Then you have to go for a tank!WU: A tank?
WTF? Is this a car service?Pundit: Or F22 fighter jet.
It will happen sooner or later, sonny boy, you car is a piece of shit, it will fall apart any day.
Why delaying the inevitable?
Switch to proven quality!WU: Uh... ok, I'll go with it.
How do I drive a tank?
How do I even get the fucking tank?Pundit: It's free!
You just have to join the military and pass the training and you're good to go!WU: Can I drive it to work?Pundit: Not really but who cares!
It's rock solid!WU: ...And so on...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31560914</id>
	<title>Re:I don't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269170880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's genius as long as you don't care about any of the data the coworker has access to. And if you don't care if they use a computer that's compromised to access their bank accounts.</p><p>etc, etc</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's genius as long as you do n't care about any of the data the coworker has access to .
And if you do n't care if they use a computer that 's compromised to access their bank accounts.etc , etc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's genius as long as you don't care about any of the data the coworker has access to.
And if you don't care if they use a computer that's compromised to access their bank accounts.etc, etc</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526390</id>
	<title>Avast</title>
	<author>yakatz</author>
	<datestamp>1268942580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, TANSTAAFL.</p><p>That said:<br>Avast Free has always required you to register.<br>I have been using it for years and recommend it to all my clients.<br>In Avast 5, the registration process is easier than ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , TANSTAAFL.That said : Avast Free has always required you to register.I have been using it for years and recommend it to all my clients.In Avast 5 , the registration process is easier than ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, TANSTAAFL.That said:Avast Free has always required you to register.I have been using it for years and recommend it to all my clients.In Avast 5, the registration process is easier than ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31540140</id>
	<title>Antivir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269021240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huge fan of Antivir by Avira. It never slows down my computer. Has daily updates automatically and it seems to detect all kinds of stuff. Have been using it for the better part of 10 years now and never have virus problems anymore.</p><p>http://www.free-av.com/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huge fan of Antivir by Avira .
It never slows down my computer .
Has daily updates automatically and it seems to detect all kinds of stuff .
Have been using it for the better part of 10 years now and never have virus problems anymore.http : //www.free-av.com/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huge fan of Antivir by Avira.
It never slows down my computer.
Has daily updates automatically and it seems to detect all kinds of stuff.
Have been using it for the better part of 10 years now and never have virus problems anymore.http://www.free-av.com/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527240</id>
	<title>AVG Purchase Popups</title>
	<author>jweller13</author>
	<datestamp>1268945040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I installed the free version of AVG but uninstalled it because I started getting annoying pop-ups from the program asking me to purchase the full version.  Which made absolutely no sense to me since one of the the programs functions is specifically to prevent those annoying pop-ups.  It didn't instill much confidence in their product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I installed the free version of AVG but uninstalled it because I started getting annoying pop-ups from the program asking me to purchase the full version .
Which made absolutely no sense to me since one of the the programs functions is specifically to prevent those annoying pop-ups .
It did n't instill much confidence in their product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I installed the free version of AVG but uninstalled it because I started getting annoying pop-ups from the program asking me to purchase the full version.
Which made absolutely no sense to me since one of the the programs functions is specifically to prevent those annoying pop-ups.
It didn't instill much confidence in their product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526930</id>
	<title>Re:Install through ninite.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can find them also on filehippo.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can find them also on filehippo.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can find them also on filehippo.com</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526094</id>
	<title>Another product</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1268941740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i> is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?"</i></p><p>There is.  It's the word "no".  As in, "No, I don't use windows myself, and I don't recommend it.  Sorry I can't help."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer 's doing weird things ' calls to a minimum ?
" There is .
It 's the word " no " .
As in , " No , I do n't use windows myself , and I do n't recommend it .
Sorry I ca n't help .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext> is there another product I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?
"There is.
It's the word "no".
As in, "No, I don't use windows myself, and I don't recommend it.
Sorry I can't help.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532154</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>ouaibe</author>
	<datestamp>1268926680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avira is a nice choice, you can get rid of the ad by adding a new path based security policy restricting access to the "avnotify.exe" process.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira is a nice choice , you can get rid of the ad by adding a new path based security policy restricting access to the " avnotify.exe " process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira is a nice choice, you can get rid of the ad by adding a new path based security policy restricting access to the "avnotify.exe" process.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530364</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268913360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That popup can be hobbled through an EULA-violating procedure of denying execute permissions to avnotify.exe (on versions of Windows where one can actually do this.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That popup can be hobbled through an EULA-violating procedure of denying execute permissions to avnotify.exe ( on versions of Windows where one can actually do this .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That popup can be hobbled through an EULA-violating procedure of denying execute permissions to avnotify.exe (on versions of Windows where one can actually do this.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527744</id>
	<title>Avast registration a new thing?</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1268903160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Avast has always required a registration key, and is now easier than ever to do-- you just click the button from within the program and it does it.<br> <br>
As for good free AV, theres Avira, Avast, and MSSE, all of which are decent.  More to the point, antivirus is the LEAST important thing you can do for friends and family-- FIRST, install firefox, update IE, uninstall Adobe Reader, and install foxit.  This will prevent 100x more viruses than any AV will.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Avast has always required a registration key , and is now easier than ever to do-- you just click the button from within the program and it does it .
As for good free AV , theres Avira , Avast , and MSSE , all of which are decent .
More to the point , antivirus is the LEAST important thing you can do for friends and family-- FIRST , install firefox , update IE , uninstall Adobe Reader , and install foxit .
This will prevent 100x more viruses than any AV will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avast has always required a registration key, and is now easier than ever to do-- you just click the button from within the program and it does it.
As for good free AV, theres Avira, Avast, and MSSE, all of which are decent.
More to the point, antivirus is the LEAST important thing you can do for friends and family-- FIRST, install firefox, update IE, uninstall Adobe Reader, and install foxit.
This will prevent 100x more viruses than any AV will.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528206</id>
	<title>Re:None</title>
	<author>Dmala</author>
	<datestamp>1268904480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was starting to wonder if I was the only one.  I use Windows full time, though, for web, e-mail, games, everything.  My rules are: 1.) Don't use IE, 2.) Keep everything up to date, 3.) Always use a hardware router/firewall. 4.) Don't execute anything unless you know what it is and where it came from.<br> <br>

Every once in a while, I'll use Trend Micro's web-based scanner, and do a quick scan with Spybot and/or AdAware.  They've never come up with anything more serious than tracking cookies.  The one time I had a serious problem, I had launched IE (breaking rule #1) to look at a page that wouldn't render in Firefox and mis-clicked on a popup, hitting "OK" by mistake.  I knew I had been infected immediately, and spent about 4 hours ripping the bastard out.  I really can't understand how people who know what they are doing (or at least should) get hit with random viruses that "just install themselves."</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was starting to wonder if I was the only one .
I use Windows full time , though , for web , e-mail , games , everything .
My rules are : 1 .
) Do n't use IE , 2 .
) Keep everything up to date , 3 .
) Always use a hardware router/firewall .
4. ) Do n't execute anything unless you know what it is and where it came from .
Every once in a while , I 'll use Trend Micro 's web-based scanner , and do a quick scan with Spybot and/or AdAware .
They 've never come up with anything more serious than tracking cookies .
The one time I had a serious problem , I had launched IE ( breaking rule # 1 ) to look at a page that would n't render in Firefox and mis-clicked on a popup , hitting " OK " by mistake .
I knew I had been infected immediately , and spent about 4 hours ripping the bastard out .
I really ca n't understand how people who know what they are doing ( or at least should ) get hit with random viruses that " just install themselves .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was starting to wonder if I was the only one.
I use Windows full time, though, for web, e-mail, games, everything.
My rules are: 1.
) Don't use IE, 2.
) Keep everything up to date, 3.
) Always use a hardware router/firewall.
4.) Don't execute anything unless you know what it is and where it came from.
Every once in a while, I'll use Trend Micro's web-based scanner, and do a quick scan with Spybot and/or AdAware.
They've never come up with anything more serious than tracking cookies.
The one time I had a serious problem, I had launched IE (breaking rule #1) to look at a page that wouldn't render in Firefox and mis-clicked on a popup, hitting "OK" by mistake.
I knew I had been infected immediately, and spent about 4 hours ripping the bastard out.
I really can't understand how people who know what they are doing (or at least should) get hit with random viruses that "just install themselves.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527128</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft Security Essentials is the way to GO !!!!</p><p>I have been using AVG, Avast and others for years, but MSE is really working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essentials is the way to GO ! ! !
! I have been using AVG , Avast and others for years , but MSE is really working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essentials is the way to GO !!!
!I have been using AVG, Avast and others for years, but MSE is really working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527514</id>
	<title>Re:None</title>
	<author>tknd</author>
	<datestamp>1268945760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On my family's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could, and left the others to fend for themselves.</p></div><p>Here's what you do for those other family members:

</p><ul>
<li>Tell them to run Windows 7</li>
<li>When they get their machine, put a password on the default administrator account (usually the first account created).</li>
<li>Setup a new account for them to use that does not have admin privileges (password not required).</li>
<li>Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up.</li>
</ul><p>Now when a program does something fishy, they will call you because they don't know the password  on the admin account. So you can ask them what they're trying to do and if it sounds reasonable (install some purchased software, hookup a digital camera, whatever), you tell them to type the password and they're back on their way. If they're doing something and uac randomly pops up, they can't hit the 'ok' button because they need the password so they'll be forced to hit the cancel button. They'll rarely call you in these instances and this will protect them from most malware.

</p><p>Also setup windows 7 to automatically download and updates in the background and sleep after a few hours of being idle (even if it is a desktop). Don't let them plug directly to the internet. Have a router in between with firewall enabled. That'll keep them clean for a good while.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On my family 's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could , and left the others to fend for themselves.Here 's what you do for those other family members : Tell them to run Windows 7 When they get their machine , put a password on the default administrator account ( usually the first account created ) .
Setup a new account for them to use that does not have admin privileges ( password not required ) .
Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up .
Now when a program does something fishy , they will call you because they do n't know the password on the admin account .
So you can ask them what they 're trying to do and if it sounds reasonable ( install some purchased software , hookup a digital camera , whatever ) , you tell them to type the password and they 're back on their way .
If they 're doing something and uac randomly pops up , they ca n't hit the 'ok ' button because they need the password so they 'll be forced to hit the cancel button .
They 'll rarely call you in these instances and this will protect them from most malware .
Also setup windows 7 to automatically download and updates in the background and sleep after a few hours of being idle ( even if it is a desktop ) .
Do n't let them plug directly to the internet .
Have a router in between with firewall enabled .
That 'll keep them clean for a good while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On my family's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could, and left the others to fend for themselves.Here's what you do for those other family members:


Tell them to run Windows 7
When they get their machine, put a password on the default administrator account (usually the first account created).
Setup a new account for them to use that does not have admin privileges (password not required).
Tell them to use the regular account and call you when the admin uac account pops up.
Now when a program does something fishy, they will call you because they don't know the password  on the admin account.
So you can ask them what they're trying to do and if it sounds reasonable (install some purchased software, hookup a digital camera, whatever), you tell them to type the password and they're back on their way.
If they're doing something and uac randomly pops up, they can't hit the 'ok' button because they need the password so they'll be forced to hit the cancel button.
They'll rarely call you in these instances and this will protect them from most malware.
Also setup windows 7 to automatically download and updates in the background and sleep after a few hours of being idle (even if it is a desktop).
Don't let them plug directly to the internet.
Have a router in between with firewall enabled.
That'll keep them clean for a good while.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528000</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>zizzybaloobah</author>
	<datestamp>1268904000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Registration is once a year, and is *not* new in Avast 5. About the only time I get a call from friends and neighbors whose PC's I've decrapified (and installed Firefox, Avast, and Spybot) is when the Avast registration reneweal comes around. After the first year, they know the routine and do it themselves.

The only people I've had to do repeat decrapifications were for those who went back to using IE, or, just didn't understand the basic principles of avoiding phishing attacks and sneaky links.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Registration is once a year , and is * not * new in Avast 5 .
About the only time I get a call from friends and neighbors whose PC 's I 've decrapified ( and installed Firefox , Avast , and Spybot ) is when the Avast registration reneweal comes around .
After the first year , they know the routine and do it themselves .
The only people I 've had to do repeat decrapifications were for those who went back to using IE , or , just did n't understand the basic principles of avoiding phishing attacks and sneaky links .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Registration is once a year, and is *not* new in Avast 5.
About the only time I get a call from friends and neighbors whose PC's I've decrapified (and installed Firefox, Avast, and Spybot) is when the Avast registration reneweal comes around.
After the first year, they know the routine and do it themselves.
The only people I've had to do repeat decrapifications were for those who went back to using IE, or, just didn't understand the basic principles of avoiding phishing attacks and sneaky links.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527832</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1268903460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just so you know, though MS is awful at making this clear, MSE is only free for "home and home business" applications.  Otherwise you really should be licensing forefront.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just so you know , though MS is awful at making this clear , MSE is only free for " home and home business " applications .
Otherwise you really should be licensing forefront .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just so you know, though MS is awful at making this clear, MSE is only free for "home and home business" applications.
Otherwise you really should be licensing forefront.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530740</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268915700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>+1 for Avira.  Run it on several computers, and recommend it to others.  Very resource friendly, and even with the ad it's fairly non-obtrusive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>+ 1 for Avira .
Run it on several computers , and recommend it to others .
Very resource friendly , and even with the ad it 's fairly non-obtrusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>+1 for Avira.
Run it on several computers, and recommend it to others.
Very resource friendly, and even with the ad it's fairly non-obtrusive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531836</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268923560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Careful.  MSE is for personal use ONLY.  Don't want to get on the wrong side of the EULA with M$.  Or you could just use this simple technique that works most of the time:</p><p>Stop looking for nekkid pictures on the internets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Careful .
MSE is for personal use ONLY .
Do n't want to get on the wrong side of the EULA with M $ .
Or you could just use this simple technique that works most of the time : Stop looking for nekkid pictures on the internets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Careful.
MSE is for personal use ONLY.
Don't want to get on the wrong side of the EULA with M$.
Or you could just use this simple technique that works most of the time:Stop looking for nekkid pictures on the internets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541604</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269026940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>daily ad</p></div><p>Just disallow execution of avnotify.exe . <a href="http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir" title="wikihow.com" rel="nofollow">detailed instructions</a> [wikihow.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>daily adJust disallow execution of avnotify.exe .
detailed instructions [ wikihow.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>daily adJust disallow execution of avnotify.exe .
detailed instructions [wikihow.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</id>
	<title>Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>MisterBuggie</author>
	<datestamp>1268941740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously you've never actually used Avast. You've always had to register for the free version, and renew the regsitration once a year. They're giving it away for free, I honestly don't see registering as a big deal.</p><p>And the new version is actually a lot better, it finally detects rootkits... If you're looking for something that actually does its job and yet doesn't take up any space or processing power, I doubt you'll find anything...</p><p>If you're gonna pay for your operating system, and then complain about free antiviruses, you might want to consider changing to linux...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously you 've never actually used Avast .
You 've always had to register for the free version , and renew the regsitration once a year .
They 're giving it away for free , I honestly do n't see registering as a big deal.And the new version is actually a lot better , it finally detects rootkits... If you 're looking for something that actually does its job and yet does n't take up any space or processing power , I doubt you 'll find anything...If you 're gon na pay for your operating system , and then complain about free antiviruses , you might want to consider changing to linux.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously you've never actually used Avast.
You've always had to register for the free version, and renew the regsitration once a year.
They're giving it away for free, I honestly don't see registering as a big deal.And the new version is actually a lot better, it finally detects rootkits... If you're looking for something that actually does its job and yet doesn't take up any space or processing power, I doubt you'll find anything...If you're gonna pay for your operating system, and then complain about free antiviruses, you might want to consider changing to linux...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532392</id>
	<title>Re:Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>b4dc0d3r</author>
	<datestamp>1268928600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd rather buy and install an anonymously registered package than hand over registration information.  I'm sure the company is legit, but I still don't feel comfortable trusting a company that has access to every file on my drives - hard, floppy, optical, thumb, network - and has registration information with my personal info.  Even if it's just an e-mail address, you can do surprising things.</p><p>I know, tinfoil hat time - but didn't MySpace just choose to sell user data?  Isn't Google data mining for targeted advertising?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd rather buy and install an anonymously registered package than hand over registration information .
I 'm sure the company is legit , but I still do n't feel comfortable trusting a company that has access to every file on my drives - hard , floppy , optical , thumb , network - and has registration information with my personal info .
Even if it 's just an e-mail address , you can do surprising things.I know , tinfoil hat time - but did n't MySpace just choose to sell user data ?
Is n't Google data mining for targeted advertising ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd rather buy and install an anonymously registered package than hand over registration information.
I'm sure the company is legit, but I still don't feel comfortable trusting a company that has access to every file on my drives - hard, floppy, optical, thumb, network - and has registration information with my personal info.
Even if it's just an e-mail address, you can do surprising things.I know, tinfoil hat time - but didn't MySpace just choose to sell user data?
Isn't Google data mining for targeted advertising?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528100</id>
	<title>My take on the free antivirus</title>
	<author>G00F</author>
	<datestamp>1268904180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>AVG - I use to have people use this, but it was not protection people, most of them got viruses that AVG couldn't find.<br>Avira - Better than AVG, do custom install, may need to change some options.<br>Avast - Better than AVG, do custom install, may need to change some options. Talking is annoying . . .<br>Winclam(clamAV) - file scanner only, Its ok.  Good as a 2nd protection measure. I use (clamav) on my firewall for all FTP/HTTP traffic.<br>Panda Cloud Antivirus - Haven't  worked with it much, but I know panda AV has been a solid performer in AV for quite some time.</p><p>The best based on experience (and always do well in tests) is either trendmicro or kaspersky.  Yes, they cost money, but $20 is well worth it. I feel bad when I fix peoples PC's using their products, and leave them with some free AV in hopes it keeps them clean.  At least I suggest they buy one of those two products for better protection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>AVG - I use to have people use this , but it was not protection people , most of them got viruses that AVG could n't find.Avira - Better than AVG , do custom install , may need to change some options.Avast - Better than AVG , do custom install , may need to change some options .
Talking is annoying .
. .Winclam ( clamAV ) - file scanner only , Its ok. Good as a 2nd protection measure .
I use ( clamav ) on my firewall for all FTP/HTTP traffic.Panda Cloud Antivirus - Have n't worked with it much , but I know panda AV has been a solid performer in AV for quite some time.The best based on experience ( and always do well in tests ) is either trendmicro or kaspersky .
Yes , they cost money , but $ 20 is well worth it .
I feel bad when I fix peoples PC 's using their products , and leave them with some free AV in hopes it keeps them clean .
At least I suggest they buy one of those two products for better protection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>AVG - I use to have people use this, but it was not protection people, most of them got viruses that AVG couldn't find.Avira - Better than AVG, do custom install, may need to change some options.Avast - Better than AVG, do custom install, may need to change some options.
Talking is annoying .
. .Winclam(clamAV) - file scanner only, Its ok.  Good as a 2nd protection measure.
I use (clamav) on my firewall for all FTP/HTTP traffic.Panda Cloud Antivirus - Haven't  worked with it much, but I know panda AV has been a solid performer in AV for quite some time.The best based on experience (and always do well in tests) is either trendmicro or kaspersky.
Yes, they cost money, but $20 is well worth it.
I feel bad when I fix peoples PC's using their products, and leave them with some free AV in hopes it keeps them clean.
At least I suggest they buy one of those two products for better protection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526740</id>
	<title>Re:Why free?</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1268943600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The kinds of people who need help to install an antivirus are exactly the kinds of people who forget to renew every year, then come back with a ton of viruses and other smeg.</p><p>I've seen it far too often.  The weakest link in a paid AV setup is the moment it disables itself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The kinds of people who need help to install an antivirus are exactly the kinds of people who forget to renew every year , then come back with a ton of viruses and other smeg.I 've seen it far too often .
The weakest link in a paid AV setup is the moment it disables itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The kinds of people who need help to install an antivirus are exactly the kinds of people who forget to renew every year, then come back with a ton of viruses and other smeg.I've seen it far too often.
The weakest link in a paid AV setup is the moment it disables itself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526448</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>mewsenews</author>
	<datestamp>1268942760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NO. No to ClamWin.</p><p>I've had two different office machines get hosed because ClamWin false positived on Windows' userinit.exe. If userinit.exe is missing, Windows doesn't even display an error message, it simply can't login to the system. Even in SAFE MODE.</p><p>We're a small office and I've taken over IT from the person that installed ClamWin all over the place, we're going with Avast Pro because it's robust and I'm so grateful they offer a free Home version that I can recommend to my family for their personal equipment. Avast Home has always required registration so I'm not sure what sort of crack the OP is smoking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NO .
No to ClamWin.I 've had two different office machines get hosed because ClamWin false positived on Windows ' userinit.exe .
If userinit.exe is missing , Windows does n't even display an error message , it simply ca n't login to the system .
Even in SAFE MODE.We 're a small office and I 've taken over IT from the person that installed ClamWin all over the place , we 're going with Avast Pro because it 's robust and I 'm so grateful they offer a free Home version that I can recommend to my family for their personal equipment .
Avast Home has always required registration so I 'm not sure what sort of crack the OP is smoking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NO.
No to ClamWin.I've had two different office machines get hosed because ClamWin false positived on Windows' userinit.exe.
If userinit.exe is missing, Windows doesn't even display an error message, it simply can't login to the system.
Even in SAFE MODE.We're a small office and I've taken over IT from the person that installed ClamWin all over the place, we're going with Avast Pro because it's robust and I'm so grateful they offer a free Home version that I can recommend to my family for their personal equipment.
Avast Home has always required registration so I'm not sure what sort of crack the OP is smoking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527144</id>
	<title>Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avast supports the spyco company behind Phorm and is riddled with bloatware.</p><p>I switched to the free version of Avira and haven't looked back.</p><p>http://www.free-av.de/en/trialpay\_download/1/avira\_antivir\_personal\_\_free\_antivirus.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avast supports the spyco company behind Phorm and is riddled with bloatware.I switched to the free version of Avira and have n't looked back.http : //www.free-av.de/en/trialpay \ _download/1/avira \ _antivir \ _personal \ _ \ _free \ _antivirus.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avast supports the spyco company behind Phorm and is riddled with bloatware.I switched to the free version of Avira and haven't looked back.http://www.free-av.de/en/trialpay\_download/1/avira\_antivir\_personal\_\_free\_antivirus.html</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537916</id>
	<title>PCTools</title>
	<author>donak</author>
	<datestamp>1269014760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't know if anyone has mentioned this one yet, but I've installed their products on my netbook,<br>to no ill effect so far. They have 3 free products: Anti-virus, Firewall and Threatfire antimalware.</p><p>Website is <a href="http://www.pctools.com/" title="pctools.com">http://www.pctools.com/</a> [pctools.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't know if anyone has mentioned this one yet , but I 've installed their products on my netbook,to no ill effect so far .
They have 3 free products : Anti-virus , Firewall and Threatfire antimalware.Website is http : //www.pctools.com/ [ pctools.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't know if anyone has mentioned this one yet, but I've installed their products on my netbook,to no ill effect so far.
They have 3 free products: Anti-virus, Firewall and Threatfire antimalware.Website is http://www.pctools.com/ [pctools.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535296</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1269007740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have always been uncomfortable about giving the task to fight malwares to the company because of who they are there in the first time. Something sounds illogical in this...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have always been uncomfortable about giving the task to fight malwares to the company because of who they are there in the first time .
Something sounds illogical in this.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have always been uncomfortable about giving the task to fight malwares to the company because of who they are there in the first time.
Something sounds illogical in this...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529286</id>
	<title>if this isn't redundant, slap yourself, but...</title>
	<author>swschrad</author>
	<datestamp>1268908260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>best free antivirus alternative = linux.</p><p>just sayin'...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>best free antivirus alternative = linux.just sayin'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>best free antivirus alternative = linux.just sayin'...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530176</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268912280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My wife had microsoft security essentials running on her PC as her only anti-virus. I made the assumption that a lot of people her have made, "It's probably good enough, especially since she doesn't do that much web surfing." I ended up cleaning off the worst batch of worms and viruses that I'd ever seen. MSE is useless, if you insist on running windows buy antivirus, run it in a virtual machine, or keep a backup image of your hard drive so you can easily restore your system when it gets infected. But the safest thing you can do is switch to Linux or OS X.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My wife had microsoft security essentials running on her PC as her only anti-virus .
I made the assumption that a lot of people her have made , " It 's probably good enough , especially since she does n't do that much web surfing .
" I ended up cleaning off the worst batch of worms and viruses that I 'd ever seen .
MSE is useless , if you insist on running windows buy antivirus , run it in a virtual machine , or keep a backup image of your hard drive so you can easily restore your system when it gets infected .
But the safest thing you can do is switch to Linux or OS X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My wife had microsoft security essentials running on her PC as her only anti-virus.
I made the assumption that a lot of people her have made, "It's probably good enough, especially since she doesn't do that much web surfing.
" I ended up cleaning off the worst batch of worms and viruses that I'd ever seen.
MSE is useless, if you insist on running windows buy antivirus, run it in a virtual machine, or keep a backup image of your hard drive so you can easily restore your system when it gets infected.
But the safest thing you can do is switch to Linux or OS X.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526290</id>
	<title>Trend online scanner nothing on computer</title>
	<author>splatter</author>
	<datestamp>1268942340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Used it for years. God help me if they ditch the old URL I'll have to start googling it.</p><p>
&nbsp; <a href="http://housecall.antivirus.com/" title="antivirus.com">http://housecall.antivirus.com/</a> [antivirus.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Used it for years .
God help me if they ditch the old URL I 'll have to start googling it .
  http : //housecall.antivirus.com/ [ antivirus.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Used it for years.
God help me if they ditch the old URL I'll have to start googling it.
  http://housecall.antivirus.com/ [antivirus.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534816</id>
	<title>Re:I don't</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269004620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines. I have been doing IT since 1992.</p></div><p>...when I read this, I was underwhelmed. For a variety of reasons. I manage 1000 workstations, which, isn't even that impressive. Here again, I guess you were trying a setup for argument by (un)authority. Then I read...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When I am asked this question my answer is always this. None.</p></div><p>...and I auto-facepalmed. Yes, not running as root (or admin) is *part* of the equation. Not using AV software is asking for problems.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Between my job , some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines .
I have been doing IT since 1992....when I read this , I was underwhelmed .
For a variety of reasons .
I manage 1000 workstations , which , is n't even that impressive .
Here again , I guess you were trying a setup for argument by ( un ) authority .
Then I read...When I am asked this question my answer is always this .
None....and I auto-facepalmed .
Yes , not running as root ( or admin ) is * part * of the equation .
Not using AV software is asking for problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines.
I have been doing IT since 1992....when I read this, I was underwhelmed.
For a variety of reasons.
I manage 1000 workstations, which, isn't even that impressive.
Here again, I guess you were trying a setup for argument by (un)authority.
Then I read...When I am asked this question my answer is always this.
None....and I auto-facepalmed.
Yes, not running as root (or admin) is *part* of the equation.
Not using AV software is asking for problems.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529354</id>
	<title>I don't think it matters</title>
	<author>inkrypted</author>
	<datestamp>1268908500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I also run Windows 7 on my gaming machine and I think you get just as much protection using the freebies as a good host file or a black hole DNS. I think it's not a question of if you will get a virus surfing or downloading with Windows but when and how destructive. My personal vote is for ClamWin. The new version features an add in for Outlook, scheduled scans, and a high detection rate. It is however not proactive but you can always pair it with a program like Winpooch.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I also run Windows 7 on my gaming machine and I think you get just as much protection using the freebies as a good host file or a black hole DNS .
I think it 's not a question of if you will get a virus surfing or downloading with Windows but when and how destructive .
My personal vote is for ClamWin .
The new version features an add in for Outlook , scheduled scans , and a high detection rate .
It is however not proactive but you can always pair it with a program like Winpooch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I also run Windows 7 on my gaming machine and I think you get just as much protection using the freebies as a good host file or a black hole DNS.
I think it's not a question of if you will get a virus surfing or downloading with Windows but when and how destructive.
My personal vote is for ClamWin.
The new version features an add in for Outlook, scheduled scans, and a high detection rate.
It is however not proactive but you can always pair it with a program like Winpooch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31549744</id>
	<title>Posting as AC, but good!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269103200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anti virus software tries to do a theoretically impossible task:  somehow stop a run away program that is being executed by the CPU.  In many cases, this is possible, certainly.  But in general *a hostile program running on your machine has already won*.  Once it has been executed, it can install itself in such a way that your anti-virus will be lied to.  Much malware specifically targets all the anti-virus products around already.</p><p>This doesn't mean that AV is useless, but it does mean, at the end of the day, if you are owned, nothing will help you.</p><p>I don't use AV on my main box normally.  I grab a copy once a year, do a scan, and uninstall.  It never finds anything.  Here's how I do stuff:</p><p>1-  It's rare that I download pirated software from bittorrent.  If I do, I wait a few days and see if anyone reports issues with it.  This is a big vector for spreading infections:  if you don't do it, you are pretty well off.</p><p>2-  I assume that WinAMP has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted mp3 file to infect my machine.</p><p>3-  I assume that VLC has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted video file (read: porn) to infect my machine.</p><p>4-  I assume there is no buffer overflow attack active on JPGs when viewed through Firefox or Windows.</p><p>5-  I browse with Firefox with noscript active.  This means I assume that the very few sites trusted to execute Javascript are assumed to not be compromised (Slashdot, my bank, some trusted web forums).</p><p>These assumptions have proven pretty damned good.  There have been a couple times when I believe all of them have been wrong (except 5, I've never had a site trusted to run script be compromised such that hostile script could be run).  There was an exploit with WinAMP years ago, that was fixed (buffer overflow).  I never saw a malicious file.  There was some kind of buffer overflow JPG thing years and years ago, but even unpatched XP should be safe enough.</p><p>Everything has risk, but running an AV has a definite cost, and actual real malware that you might actually catch will be crafted to get around it.  Mostly AV-ware is to defend against people who have to watch the dancing bunny-  crappy virii and wanna-be-botnet villains that are easily foiled by not browsing with IE and not executing email attachments.  If you never pirate software (including keygens), never browse with IE, always browse with NOSCRIPT active and keeping you safe, and focus on the acquisition of *data* files, not code, using applications that you trust to not be piles of shit to read them, you should be fine.</p><p>Of course, I'm technically running everything on Pirated XP, and have been for years.  But the torrent I installed this from was venerable and well proven for nearly a year before I installed it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anti virus software tries to do a theoretically impossible task : somehow stop a run away program that is being executed by the CPU .
In many cases , this is possible , certainly .
But in general * a hostile program running on your machine has already won * .
Once it has been executed , it can install itself in such a way that your anti-virus will be lied to .
Much malware specifically targets all the anti-virus products around already.This does n't mean that AV is useless , but it does mean , at the end of the day , if you are owned , nothing will help you.I do n't use AV on my main box normally .
I grab a copy once a year , do a scan , and uninstall .
It never finds anything .
Here 's how I do stuff : 1- It 's rare that I download pirated software from bittorrent .
If I do , I wait a few days and see if anyone reports issues with it .
This is a big vector for spreading infections : if you do n't do it , you are pretty well off.2- I assume that WinAMP has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted mp3 file to infect my machine.3- I assume that VLC has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted video file ( read : porn ) to infect my machine.4- I assume there is no buffer overflow attack active on JPGs when viewed through Firefox or Windows.5- I browse with Firefox with noscript active .
This means I assume that the very few sites trusted to execute Javascript are assumed to not be compromised ( Slashdot , my bank , some trusted web forums ) .These assumptions have proven pretty damned good .
There have been a couple times when I believe all of them have been wrong ( except 5 , I 've never had a site trusted to run script be compromised such that hostile script could be run ) .
There was an exploit with WinAMP years ago , that was fixed ( buffer overflow ) .
I never saw a malicious file .
There was some kind of buffer overflow JPG thing years and years ago , but even unpatched XP should be safe enough.Everything has risk , but running an AV has a definite cost , and actual real malware that you might actually catch will be crafted to get around it .
Mostly AV-ware is to defend against people who have to watch the dancing bunny- crappy virii and wan na-be-botnet villains that are easily foiled by not browsing with IE and not executing email attachments .
If you never pirate software ( including keygens ) , never browse with IE , always browse with NOSCRIPT active and keeping you safe , and focus on the acquisition of * data * files , not code , using applications that you trust to not be piles of shit to read them , you should be fine.Of course , I 'm technically running everything on Pirated XP , and have been for years .
But the torrent I installed this from was venerable and well proven for nearly a year before I installed it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anti virus software tries to do a theoretically impossible task:  somehow stop a run away program that is being executed by the CPU.
In many cases, this is possible, certainly.
But in general *a hostile program running on your machine has already won*.
Once it has been executed, it can install itself in such a way that your anti-virus will be lied to.
Much malware specifically targets all the anti-virus products around already.This doesn't mean that AV is useless, but it does mean, at the end of the day, if you are owned, nothing will help you.I don't use AV on my main box normally.
I grab a copy once a year, do a scan, and uninstall.
It never finds anything.
Here's how I do stuff:1-  It's rare that I download pirated software from bittorrent.
If I do, I wait a few days and see if anyone reports issues with it.
This is a big vector for spreading infections:  if you don't do it, you are pretty well off.2-  I assume that WinAMP has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted mp3 file to infect my machine.3-  I assume that VLC has no vulnerabilities that would allow a cleverly crafted video file (read: porn) to infect my machine.4-  I assume there is no buffer overflow attack active on JPGs when viewed through Firefox or Windows.5-  I browse with Firefox with noscript active.
This means I assume that the very few sites trusted to execute Javascript are assumed to not be compromised (Slashdot, my bank, some trusted web forums).These assumptions have proven pretty damned good.
There have been a couple times when I believe all of them have been wrong (except 5, I've never had a site trusted to run script be compromised such that hostile script could be run).
There was an exploit with WinAMP years ago, that was fixed (buffer overflow).
I never saw a malicious file.
There was some kind of buffer overflow JPG thing years and years ago, but even unpatched XP should be safe enough.Everything has risk, but running an AV has a definite cost, and actual real malware that you might actually catch will be crafted to get around it.
Mostly AV-ware is to defend against people who have to watch the dancing bunny-  crappy virii and wanna-be-botnet villains that are easily foiled by not browsing with IE and not executing email attachments.
If you never pirate software (including keygens), never browse with IE, always browse with NOSCRIPT active and keeping you safe, and focus on the acquisition of *data* files, not code, using applications that you trust to not be piles of shit to read them, you should be fine.Of course, I'm technically running everything on Pirated XP, and have been for years.
But the torrent I installed this from was venerable and well proven for nearly a year before I installed it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527276</id>
	<title>I've tried them all.  I use MSE.</title>
	<author>SpryGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1268945160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have tried them all, I swear.  Paid and free.  And ALL of them annoyed me to no end, either with nagging, or slow-downs, or with pop-ups, or (shudder) VOICES that actually spoke out every freakin' time it updated its database...</p><p>Until I tried Microsoft Security Essentials.  Not only does it work as well or better than most of the others (paid or free), it's less of a resource hog, and doesn't nag or get in my face.  It does it's job and says out of the way otherwise.</p><p>I've NEVER been truly happy with an anti-virus package before.  I'm kinda shocked that it's Microsoft's that I ended up being happy with, but that's the truth.  I have since ripped out every other anti-virus on every other PC I use, home and at work, and use MSE exclusively now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have tried them all , I swear .
Paid and free .
And ALL of them annoyed me to no end , either with nagging , or slow-downs , or with pop-ups , or ( shudder ) VOICES that actually spoke out every freakin ' time it updated its database...Until I tried Microsoft Security Essentials .
Not only does it work as well or better than most of the others ( paid or free ) , it 's less of a resource hog , and does n't nag or get in my face .
It does it 's job and says out of the way otherwise.I 've NEVER been truly happy with an anti-virus package before .
I 'm kinda shocked that it 's Microsoft 's that I ended up being happy with , but that 's the truth .
I have since ripped out every other anti-virus on every other PC I use , home and at work , and use MSE exclusively now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have tried them all, I swear.
Paid and free.
And ALL of them annoyed me to no end, either with nagging, or slow-downs, or with pop-ups, or (shudder) VOICES that actually spoke out every freakin' time it updated its database...Until I tried Microsoft Security Essentials.
Not only does it work as well or better than most of the others (paid or free), it's less of a resource hog, and doesn't nag or get in my face.
It does it's job and says out of the way otherwise.I've NEVER been truly happy with an anti-virus package before.
I'm kinda shocked that it's Microsoft's that I ended up being happy with, but that's the truth.
I have since ripped out every other anti-virus on every other PC I use, home and at work, and use MSE exclusively now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526470</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In spite of the performance hit, not having on-access scanning on a computer used on the Internet is a big minus, IMO.</p><p>You can always disable the on-access bit if you're gaming, or whatever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In spite of the performance hit , not having on-access scanning on a computer used on the Internet is a big minus , IMO.You can always disable the on-access bit if you 're gaming , or whatever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In spite of the performance hit, not having on-access scanning on a computer used on the Internet is a big minus, IMO.You can always disable the on-access bit if you're gaming, or whatever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528692</id>
	<title>Re:Install through ninite.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ninite is pretty awesome, but it mostly installs things in "default" mode, which can occasionally get you stuck with a lot of ad-bars and random settings that I find annoying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ninite is pretty awesome , but it mostly installs things in " default " mode , which can occasionally get you stuck with a lot of ad-bars and random settings that I find annoying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ninite is pretty awesome, but it mostly installs things in "default" mode, which can occasionally get you stuck with a lot of ad-bars and random settings that I find annoying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527342</id>
	<title>MS security essentials</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i would have to vote for MS security essentials...i have it on my 3 pc at home and it's been working great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i would have to vote for MS security essentials...i have it on my 3 pc at home and it 's been working great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i would have to vote for MS security essentials...i have it on my 3 pc at home and it's been working great.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527564</id>
	<title>GNU alternatives:</title>
	<author>sageres</author>
	<datestamp>1268945880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Clamwin <a href="http://www.clamwin.org/" title="clamwin.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.clamwin.org/</a> [clamwin.org] virusscanner with ClamSentinel  <a href="http://clamsentinel.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">http://clamsentinel.sourceforge.net/</a> [sourceforge.net] that provides on-access scanning.

It works wonders for me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Clamwin http : //www.clamwin.org/ [ clamwin.org ] virusscanner with ClamSentinel http : //clamsentinel.sourceforge.net/ [ sourceforge.net ] that provides on-access scanning .
It works wonders for me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clamwin http://www.clamwin.org/ [clamwin.org] virusscanner with ClamSentinel  http://clamsentinel.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] that provides on-access scanning.
It works wonders for me!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526226</id>
	<title>I install...</title>
	<author>kungfuj35u5</author>
	<datestamp>1268942100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>none, I prefer my operating system without a condom.  It's more fun that way<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).  I also stripe without parity (mainly because I don't care what happens to my windows installations).</htmltext>
<tokenext>none , I prefer my operating system without a condom .
It 's more fun that way : ) .
I also stripe without parity ( mainly because I do n't care what happens to my windows installations ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>none, I prefer my operating system without a condom.
It's more fun that way :).
I also stripe without parity (mainly because I don't care what happens to my windows installations).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531568</id>
	<title>There ain't no such thing as a free lunch...</title>
	<author>YankDownUnder</author>
	<datestamp>1268921160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see why it's so hard to use the situation as a point of marketing for GNU/linux, or to show the person(s)/relative(s) that overall costs of using/maintaining a Microsoft Windows based workstation (or server) far outweigh the other options. Ok, a Mac costs a bit, but how much is spent on maintenance? Ok, the public is freaky about using GNU/linux,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,but what about total software costs and maintenance?

My mother and father living in Texas (rather far-off for me to support them from Sydney) finally *DID* bite the bait, and bought a Mac. Happy? Very. Many of my personal clients have either taken the step to move to GNU/linux, or have purchased Macs. With the odd exception here and there, they're all happy. The exceptions are mostly along the lines of "Well, I'm supposed to run *THIS* because of work..." - or "My workplaces doesn't support GNU/linux or Mac" (Even though it's just a matter of running Microsoft Office and nothing more).

Remember that you get what you pay for.

I would, however, stick with doling out AVG for folks - and that being the case, stay on top of having the latest installation EXE for it - along with AdAware by Lavasoft and Spybot Search &amp; Destroy. There is also ClamAV (developed initially for UNIX/GNU/Linux) for MS Windows - and it's F.O.S.S. - but hey, in the end it's your choice.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see why it 's so hard to use the situation as a point of marketing for GNU/linux , or to show the person ( s ) /relative ( s ) that overall costs of using/maintaining a Microsoft Windows based workstation ( or server ) far outweigh the other options .
Ok , a Mac costs a bit , but how much is spent on maintenance ?
Ok , the public is freaky about using GNU/linux , ,but what about total software costs and maintenance ?
My mother and father living in Texas ( rather far-off for me to support them from Sydney ) finally * DID * bite the bait , and bought a Mac .
Happy ? Very .
Many of my personal clients have either taken the step to move to GNU/linux , or have purchased Macs .
With the odd exception here and there , they 're all happy .
The exceptions are mostly along the lines of " Well , I 'm supposed to run * THIS * because of work... " - or " My workplaces does n't support GNU/linux or Mac " ( Even though it 's just a matter of running Microsoft Office and nothing more ) .
Remember that you get what you pay for .
I would , however , stick with doling out AVG for folks - and that being the case , stay on top of having the latest installation EXE for it - along with AdAware by Lavasoft and Spybot Search &amp; Destroy .
There is also ClamAV ( developed initially for UNIX/GNU/Linux ) for MS Windows - and it 's F.O.S.S .
- but hey , in the end it 's your choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see why it's so hard to use the situation as a point of marketing for GNU/linux, or to show the person(s)/relative(s) that overall costs of using/maintaining a Microsoft Windows based workstation (or server) far outweigh the other options.
Ok, a Mac costs a bit, but how much is spent on maintenance?
Ok, the public is freaky about using GNU/linux, ,but what about total software costs and maintenance?
My mother and father living in Texas (rather far-off for me to support them from Sydney) finally *DID* bite the bait, and bought a Mac.
Happy? Very.
Many of my personal clients have either taken the step to move to GNU/linux, or have purchased Macs.
With the odd exception here and there, they're all happy.
The exceptions are mostly along the lines of "Well, I'm supposed to run *THIS* because of work..." - or "My workplaces doesn't support GNU/linux or Mac" (Even though it's just a matter of running Microsoft Office and nothing more).
Remember that you get what you pay for.
I would, however, stick with doling out AVG for folks - and that being the case, stay on top of having the latest installation EXE for it - along with AdAware by Lavasoft and Spybot Search &amp; Destroy.
There is also ClamAV (developed initially for UNIX/GNU/Linux) for MS Windows - and it's F.O.S.S.
- but hey, in the end it's your choice.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31548074</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>cjb110</author>
	<datestamp>1269076800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed, its the only one that stays in the background, doesn't bother the user unless there's a problem.</p><p>Doesn't seem to need to many resources either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed , its the only one that stays in the background , does n't bother the user unless there 's a problem.Does n't seem to need to many resources either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed, its the only one that stays in the background, doesn't bother the user unless there's a problem.Doesn't seem to need to many resources either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use it at home because it's free, and probably doesn't contain malware itself. Can't really say how effective it is because it has never found any malware on my machines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use it at home because it 's free , and probably does n't contain malware itself .
Ca n't really say how effective it is because it has never found any malware on my machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use it at home because it's free, and probably doesn't contain malware itself.
Can't really say how effective it is because it has never found any malware on my machines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527010</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>TrevorDoom</author>
	<datestamp>1268944380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's free and works well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's free and works well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's free and works well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526232</id>
	<title>Spybot Search &amp; Destroy</title>
	<author>Pete Venkman</author>
	<datestamp>1268942100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used Spybot S&amp;D since my XP days.  I like it, but I don't know how much cred it has with other people.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Spybot S&amp;D since my XP days .
I like it , but I do n't know how much cred it has with other people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Spybot S&amp;D since my XP days.
I like it, but I don't know how much cred it has with other people.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526326</id>
	<title>BitDefender</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use BitDefender.

It works well on my Atom-powered netbook (Windows XP) and my main workstation (Windows 7). It has a quick scan mode which is pretty neat that skips scanning unchanged files. The performance hit is negligible. It integrates with Thunderbird to enhance my junk mail filtering. it works well with low-resolution screens such as my netbook with its 600 pixel vertical resolution. Most importantly, it is consistently one of the highest rated products in terms of detecting malware. I also like the fact that you can have the interface cater to beginner users, with an interface that has but three buttons (one of which is to scan), or advanced users with all the options laid out.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use BitDefender .
It works well on my Atom-powered netbook ( Windows XP ) and my main workstation ( Windows 7 ) .
It has a quick scan mode which is pretty neat that skips scanning unchanged files .
The performance hit is negligible .
It integrates with Thunderbird to enhance my junk mail filtering .
it works well with low-resolution screens such as my netbook with its 600 pixel vertical resolution .
Most importantly , it is consistently one of the highest rated products in terms of detecting malware .
I also like the fact that you can have the interface cater to beginner users , with an interface that has but three buttons ( one of which is to scan ) , or advanced users with all the options laid out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use BitDefender.
It works well on my Atom-powered netbook (Windows XP) and my main workstation (Windows 7).
It has a quick scan mode which is pretty neat that skips scanning unchanged files.
The performance hit is negligible.
It integrates with Thunderbird to enhance my junk mail filtering.
it works well with low-resolution screens such as my netbook with its 600 pixel vertical resolution.
Most importantly, it is consistently one of the highest rated products in terms of detecting malware.
I also like the fact that you can have the interface cater to beginner users, with an interface that has but three buttons (one of which is to scan), or advanced users with all the options laid out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31543698</id>
	<title>Comodo Free Antivirus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268992680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have used Comodo Firewall + Antivirus for the last five years. Program gives you HIPS technology for free. I almost feel guilty using it. My livelihood depends on my PC and I had a computer since 1980. Comodo has not let me down yet. Highly recommend it. And for 40 dollars a year they fix any problem in your computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have used Comodo Firewall + Antivirus for the last five years .
Program gives you HIPS technology for free .
I almost feel guilty using it .
My livelihood depends on my PC and I had a computer since 1980 .
Comodo has not let me down yet .
Highly recommend it .
And for 40 dollars a year they fix any problem in your computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have used Comodo Firewall + Antivirus for the last five years.
Program gives you HIPS technology for free.
I almost feel guilty using it.
My livelihood depends on my PC and I had a computer since 1980.
Comodo has not let me down yet.
Highly recommend it.
And for 40 dollars a year they fix any problem in your computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527464</id>
	<title>Re:Smaller AV programs?</title>
	<author>PitaBred</author>
	<datestamp>1268945640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The software bloat is different than the database growing. The software bloat is all the "shiny" interface crap and such that all the products do that are only marginally related to virus scanning. It's feature creep.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The software bloat is different than the database growing .
The software bloat is all the " shiny " interface crap and such that all the products do that are only marginally related to virus scanning .
It 's feature creep .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The software bloat is different than the database growing.
The software bloat is all the "shiny" interface crap and such that all the products do that are only marginally related to virus scanning.
It's feature creep.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982</id>
	<title>I dont use...</title>
	<author>alexborges</author>
	<datestamp>1268941440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows.</p><p>So I cant "install" such a thing.</p><p>Whats this "antivirus" thing anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows.So I cant " install " such a thing.Whats this " antivirus " thing anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows.So I cant "install" such a thing.Whats this "antivirus" thing anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528858</id>
	<title>What Windows?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to have an answer to this.  Thankfully I have not used Windows in years (except for minimal development in a VM).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to have an answer to this .
Thankfully I have not used Windows in years ( except for minimal development in a VM ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to have an answer to this.
Thankfully I have not used Windows in years (except for minimal development in a VM).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528752</id>
	<title>Comodo</title>
	<author>mr\_than</author>
	<datestamp>1268906340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using Comodo Anti-virus (http://antivirus.comodo.com/) for a while now. Started with their firewall a while ago and then they bundled the AV. Good timing because AVG was bloating out at the time. I've had good experiences with this and most of my siblings now use it to and I pretty much get no support calls now.

I don't use the Defence+ thing most of the time though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Comodo Anti-virus ( http : //antivirus.comodo.com/ ) for a while now .
Started with their firewall a while ago and then they bundled the AV .
Good timing because AVG was bloating out at the time .
I 've had good experiences with this and most of my siblings now use it to and I pretty much get no support calls now .
I do n't use the Defence + thing most of the time though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Comodo Anti-virus (http://antivirus.comodo.com/) for a while now.
Started with their firewall a while ago and then they bundled the AV.
Good timing because AVG was bloating out at the time.
I've had good experiences with this and most of my siblings now use it to and I pretty much get no support calls now.
I don't use the Defence+ thing most of the time though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528028</id>
	<title>Avira's Antivir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have been using this for years -- free for home use:</p><p><a href="http://www.avira.com/en/pages/index.php" title="avira.com" rel="nofollow">antivir</a> [avira.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been using this for years -- free for home use : antivir [ avira.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been using this for years -- free for home use:antivir [avira.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526668</id>
	<title>What about AntiVir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.avira.com/en/pages/index.php</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.avira.com/en/pages/index.php</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.avira.com/en/pages/index.php</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>commodore64\_love</author>
	<datestamp>1268942220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I trust MSE about as much as I trust IE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I trust MSE about as much as I trust IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I trust MSE about as much as I trust IE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532000</id>
	<title>Digital signatures might be the future</title>
	<author>dannns</author>
	<datestamp>1268925240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like AVG and have sold it to most of my clients, but it is getting to the same level of bloatware as Norton and Mcafee that it is starting to not be competitive. The problem fer me is that now a days classic viruses are no longer the problem in fact I no longer find any value in an antivirus product for my personal use, Windows 7 and UAC have been great in controlling threads, and my laptop runs great without any antivirus software. I still don't get why all the antivirus software with all the bloat they bring can't properly fight malware which is really what is affecting our computers today. They seem to just want to collect subscription fees to fight threats that no longer exist. At the end what may fix all the problems is requiring digital signatures for all software available, and only allow white listed products to be installed. Obviously Microsoft will be attacked for doing this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like AVG and have sold it to most of my clients , but it is getting to the same level of bloatware as Norton and Mcafee that it is starting to not be competitive .
The problem fer me is that now a days classic viruses are no longer the problem in fact I no longer find any value in an antivirus product for my personal use , Windows 7 and UAC have been great in controlling threads , and my laptop runs great without any antivirus software .
I still do n't get why all the antivirus software with all the bloat they bring ca n't properly fight malware which is really what is affecting our computers today .
They seem to just want to collect subscription fees to fight threats that no longer exist .
At the end what may fix all the problems is requiring digital signatures for all software available , and only allow white listed products to be installed .
Obviously Microsoft will be attacked for doing this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like AVG and have sold it to most of my clients, but it is getting to the same level of bloatware as Norton and Mcafee that it is starting to not be competitive.
The problem fer me is that now a days classic viruses are no longer the problem in fact I no longer find any value in an antivirus product for my personal use, Windows 7 and UAC have been great in controlling threads, and my laptop runs great without any antivirus software.
I still don't get why all the antivirus software with all the bloat they bring can't properly fight malware which is really what is affecting our computers today.
They seem to just want to collect subscription fees to fight threats that no longer exist.
At the end what may fix all the problems is requiring digital signatures for all software available, and only allow white listed products to be installed.
Obviously Microsoft will be attacked for doing this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572</id>
	<title>Microsoft Security Essentials</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.microsoft.com/security\_essentials/" title="microsoft.com">Microsoft Security Essentials</a> [microsoft.com] is all you need for non-enterprise A/V.<br>It's free, it's unobtrusive and it works very well. What's more, commercial AV vendors, like Symantec, realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them.</p><p>The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essentials [ microsoft.com ] is all you need for non-enterprise A/V.It 's free , it 's unobtrusive and it works very well .
What 's more , commercial AV vendors , like Symantec , realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I 've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them.The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essentials [microsoft.com] is all you need for non-enterprise A/V.It's free, it's unobtrusive and it works very well.
What's more, commercial AV vendors, like Symantec, realise what a threat it is to their business model and have published a lot of FUD about you get what you pay for - however all the benchmarks I've seen have it ranking up there with the best of them.The only reason to go for a commercial AV package is if you need a management and reporting console to manage a large number of computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526300</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>BobMcD</author>
	<datestamp>1268942340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Me too!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Me too !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Me too!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531140</id>
	<title>The best anticirus is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268918340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>linux</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>linux</tokentext>
<sentencetext>linux</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527984</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Additionally, it is dead easy to stop that daily ad from appearing. They make the ad come up from a separate<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.exe, almost intentionally to make it easy to block it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Additionally , it is dead easy to stop that daily ad from appearing .
They make the ad come up from a separate .exe , almost intentionally to make it easy to block it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Additionally, it is dead easy to stop that daily ad from appearing.
They make the ad come up from a separate .exe, almost intentionally to make it easy to block it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526070</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Kelbear</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've found Avast registration to be even easier now. I don't even have to go back to the website to register and get a key from my e-mail address. I can just register right in the program itself.</p><p>It gets the job done for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found Avast registration to be even easier now .
I do n't even have to go back to the website to register and get a key from my e-mail address .
I can just register right in the program itself.It gets the job done for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found Avast registration to be even easier now.
I don't even have to go back to the website to register and get a key from my e-mail address.
I can just register right in the program itself.It gets the job done for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532740</id>
	<title>Re:I don't - What about key loggers?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268931660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was one that apparently waved a red flag under your nose.</p><p>What about the all your machines that have key loggers and email forwarders installed but don't wave flags?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was one that apparently waved a red flag under your nose.What about the all your machines that have key loggers and email forwarders installed but do n't wave flags ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was one that apparently waved a red flag under your nose.What about the all your machines that have key loggers and email forwarders installed but don't wave flags?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532106</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>toddestan</author>
	<datestamp>1268926200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have to disagree about the resource usage.  I tried Avira on an old 1Ghz P3 512MB running Windows 2000, and it nearly ground the computer to a halt.  I took Avira off and put AVG on the computer, and the computer was usable again.  Granted, on modern hardware you'd probably not notice the difference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have to disagree about the resource usage .
I tried Avira on an old 1Ghz P3 512MB running Windows 2000 , and it nearly ground the computer to a halt .
I took Avira off and put AVG on the computer , and the computer was usable again .
Granted , on modern hardware you 'd probably not notice the difference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have to disagree about the resource usage.
I tried Avira on an old 1Ghz P3 512MB running Windows 2000, and it nearly ground the computer to a halt.
I took Avira off and put AVG on the computer, and the computer was usable again.
Granted, on modern hardware you'd probably not notice the difference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531028</id>
	<title>Movie references</title>
	<author>zazenation</author>
	<datestamp>1268917560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the movie "The Treasure of Silicon Valley", Bill Gates in a bandito hat indignantly replies to Humphrey "Don't" Bogart:</p><p>"Antivirus? We ain't got no Antivirus. We don't need no Antivirus! I don't have to show you any stinkin' Antivirus!"</p><p>Often misquoted from "Blazing Windows" as<br>"We don't need no stinkin' Antivirus!"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the movie " The Treasure of Silicon Valley " , Bill Gates in a bandito hat indignantly replies to Humphrey " Do n't " Bogart : " Antivirus ?
We ai n't got no Antivirus .
We do n't need no Antivirus !
I do n't have to show you any stinkin ' Antivirus !
" Often misquoted from " Blazing Windows " as " We do n't need no stinkin ' Antivirus !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the movie "The Treasure of Silicon Valley", Bill Gates in a bandito hat indignantly replies to Humphrey "Don't" Bogart:"Antivirus?
We ain't got no Antivirus.
We don't need no Antivirus!
I don't have to show you any stinkin' Antivirus!
"Often misquoted from "Blazing Windows" as"We don't need no stinkin' Antivirus!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526408</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>MS Security Essentials pulled up suspected trojans in a couple of old keygens that I'd had sitting around on my machine for years (hadn't used them in a long long time). These are files that both Avast and AVG glossed over when I was using them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS Security Essentials pulled up suspected trojans in a couple of old keygens that I 'd had sitting around on my machine for years ( had n't used them in a long long time ) .
These are files that both Avast and AVG glossed over when I was using them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS Security Essentials pulled up suspected trojans in a couple of old keygens that I'd had sitting around on my machine for years (hadn't used them in a long long time).
These are files that both Avast and AVG glossed over when I was using them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526284</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>DrXym</author>
	<datestamp>1268942280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know if Security Essentials is a good antivirus app - probably not as good as some products but a lot better than nothing so long as you don't treat it as a substitute for common sense. It's incredibly unobtrusive which is a refreshing change compared to some of the bloatware out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if Security Essentials is a good antivirus app - probably not as good as some products but a lot better than nothing so long as you do n't treat it as a substitute for common sense .
It 's incredibly unobtrusive which is a refreshing change compared to some of the bloatware out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if Security Essentials is a good antivirus app - probably not as good as some products but a lot better than nothing so long as you don't treat it as a substitute for common sense.
It's incredibly unobtrusive which is a refreshing change compared to some of the bloatware out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527228</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avira for personal use (http://free-av.com/) set to scan only on write. No virus since ~2000.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira for personal use ( http : //free-av.com/ ) set to scan only on write .
No virus since ~ 2000 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira for personal use (http://free-av.com/) set to scan only on write.
No virus since ~2000.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532758</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>m85476585</author>
	<datestamp>1268931900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used NOD32 for a few years when I was on XP, and I liked it.  But when I installed it on my Windows 7 PC (32 bit, latest version of NOD), it made everything really slow.

Right now I'm running with no AV, which is probably bad even with Win7's improved security compared to XP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used NOD32 for a few years when I was on XP , and I liked it .
But when I installed it on my Windows 7 PC ( 32 bit , latest version of NOD ) , it made everything really slow .
Right now I 'm running with no AV , which is probably bad even with Win7 's improved security compared to XP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used NOD32 for a few years when I was on XP, and I liked it.
But when I installed it on my Windows 7 PC (32 bit, latest version of NOD), it made everything really slow.
Right now I'm running with no AV, which is probably bad even with Win7's improved security compared to XP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529478</id>
	<title>Immunet Protect + Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>
If you are looking for overall protection in terms of threats stopped your best is Avira Free with Immunet Protect. Avira has arguably the best detection rates in the industry, hands down. Immunet Protect is in beta but it's very light (less than 5 megs) and is starting to do very well on the detection side considering it's age. Immunet is also designed to run with other AV so it's win, win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are looking for overall protection in terms of threats stopped your best is Avira Free with Immunet Protect .
Avira has arguably the best detection rates in the industry , hands down .
Immunet Protect is in beta but it 's very light ( less than 5 megs ) and is starting to do very well on the detection side considering it 's age .
Immunet is also designed to run with other AV so it 's win , win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
If you are looking for overall protection in terms of threats stopped your best is Avira Free with Immunet Protect.
Avira has arguably the best detection rates in the industry, hands down.
Immunet Protect is in beta but it's very light (less than 5 megs) and is starting to do very well on the detection side considering it's age.
Immunet is also designed to run with other AV so it's win, win.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526120</id>
	<title>MSE</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft Security Essentials. It is less obtrusive than most of the other AV programs and is free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essentials .
It is less obtrusive than most of the other AV programs and is free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essentials.
It is less obtrusive than most of the other AV programs and is free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532868</id>
	<title>Free AV from Microsoft</title>
	<author>lsatenstein</author>
	<datestamp>1268933100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials

If is free, if you have a licensed copy of XP , or Vista or W7.    I find W7 with Office 2007 as tempting for the desktop as using linux.   And with free AV, there is something to learn from it's different architecture.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials If is free , if you have a licensed copy of XP , or Vista or W7 .
I find W7 with Office 2007 as tempting for the desktop as using linux .
And with free AV , there is something to learn from it 's different architecture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Check out Microsoft Security Essentials

If is free, if you have a licensed copy of XP , or Vista or W7.
I find W7 with Office 2007 as tempting for the desktop as using linux.
And with free AV, there is something to learn from it's different architecture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534498</id>
	<title>COMODO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269000900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use COMODO since 1 year for firewall and antivirus, and I'm really happy with it.</p><p>The updates take place automatically and did not have any issu so far.</p><p>Much better than my previous plan which was AVG antivirus and COMODO firewall</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use COMODO since 1 year for firewall and antivirus , and I 'm really happy with it.The updates take place automatically and did not have any issu so far.Much better than my previous plan which was AVG antivirus and COMODO firewall</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use COMODO since 1 year for firewall and antivirus, and I'm really happy with it.The updates take place automatically and did not have any issu so far.Much better than my previous plan which was AVG antivirus and COMODO firewall</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542248</id>
	<title>Re:A few options</title>
	<author>Brucutus</author>
	<datestamp>1269029640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Another good option I haven't seen mentioned is PC Tools Spyware Doctor Starter Edition.  You can get it free when you download Google Pack essentials.

The only problem I've had with it was when running simultaneously with Avira.  The Avira scanner would freeze randomly while scanning until I shutdown Spyware Doctor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Another good option I have n't seen mentioned is PC Tools Spyware Doctor Starter Edition .
You can get it free when you download Google Pack essentials .
The only problem I 've had with it was when running simultaneously with Avira .
The Avira scanner would freeze randomly while scanning until I shutdown Spyware Doctor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another good option I haven't seen mentioned is PC Tools Spyware Doctor Starter Edition.
You can get it free when you download Google Pack essentials.
The only problem I've had with it was when running simultaneously with Avira.
The Avira scanner would freeze randomly while scanning until I shutdown Spyware Doctor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526194</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530988</id>
	<title>Nah.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268917380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...The best way to protect yourself is to a) not browse for porn using IE and b) don't install wickedcoolscreensaver.exe.</p><p>Firefox is for porn, and who cares about screensavers?  Keep those things in mind, and never a virus will you see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...The best way to protect yourself is to a ) not browse for porn using IE and b ) do n't install wickedcoolscreensaver.exe.Firefox is for porn , and who cares about screensavers ?
Keep those things in mind , and never a virus will you see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...The best way to protect yourself is to a) not browse for porn using IE and b) don't install wickedcoolscreensaver.exe.Firefox is for porn, and who cares about screensavers?
Keep those things in mind, and never a virus will you see.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526642</id>
	<title>Over windows?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubuntu for personal use Debian or Centos for servers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubuntu for personal use Debian or Centos for servers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubuntu for personal use Debian or Centos for servers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528462</id>
	<title>Re:I don't use anything.</title>
	<author>Dr\_Barnowl</author>
	<datestamp>1268905200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Second this ; if you avoid risky behaviour and keep your computer behind a firewall, you can keep Windows infection free without installing software.</p><p>Alas, "risky behaviour" includes the use of several of the most popular bits of Windows software - to whit, Internet Explorer, Adobe Flash, Adobe Reader, and also includes "letting a noob use your computer".</p><p>My wife actually thought she'd infected my daughters netbook(*) with a bunch of trojans because a webpage showed her mocked up bitmaps from the Windows security dialogs alongside some ominous exclamation points and a "trojan counter". At least she asked. Many people would have installed the software that the page automatically downloaded which no doubt contained a trojan itself.</p><p>My wife also wonders why I don't tell her admin passwords.</p><p>(*) Not likely, because it's running Ubuntu Netbook Remix.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Second this ; if you avoid risky behaviour and keep your computer behind a firewall , you can keep Windows infection free without installing software.Alas , " risky behaviour " includes the use of several of the most popular bits of Windows software - to whit , Internet Explorer , Adobe Flash , Adobe Reader , and also includes " letting a noob use your computer " .My wife actually thought she 'd infected my daughters netbook ( * ) with a bunch of trojans because a webpage showed her mocked up bitmaps from the Windows security dialogs alongside some ominous exclamation points and a " trojan counter " .
At least she asked .
Many people would have installed the software that the page automatically downloaded which no doubt contained a trojan itself.My wife also wonders why I do n't tell her admin passwords .
( * ) Not likely , because it 's running Ubuntu Netbook Remix .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Second this ; if you avoid risky behaviour and keep your computer behind a firewall, you can keep Windows infection free without installing software.Alas, "risky behaviour" includes the use of several of the most popular bits of Windows software - to whit, Internet Explorer, Adobe Flash, Adobe Reader, and also includes "letting a noob use your computer".My wife actually thought she'd infected my daughters netbook(*) with a bunch of trojans because a webpage showed her mocked up bitmaps from the Windows security dialogs alongside some ominous exclamation points and a "trojan counter".
At least she asked.
Many people would have installed the software that the page automatically downloaded which no doubt contained a trojan itself.My wife also wonders why I don't tell her admin passwords.
(*) Not likely, because it's running Ubuntu Netbook Remix.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531708</id>
	<title>IF antiVirus is a security measure . . . .</title>
	<author>cjacobs001</author>
	<datestamp>1268922540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>there's a MS-sponsored paper that states that users are RATIONAL to reject all security advise like running updated antivirus.

see:  <a href="http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=3275&amp;tag=nl.e036" title="com.com" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=3275&amp;tag=nl.e036</a> [com.com]  which has a link to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdf of the paper</htmltext>
<tokenext>there 's a MS-sponsored paper that states that users are RATIONAL to reject all security advise like running updated antivirus .
see : http : //blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/ ? p = 3275&amp;tag = nl.e036 [ com.com ] which has a link to the .pdf of the paper</tokentext>
<sentencetext>there's a MS-sponsored paper that states that users are RATIONAL to reject all security advise like running updated antivirus.
see:  http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/security/?p=3275&amp;tag=nl.e036 [com.com]  which has a link to the .pdf of the paper</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527284</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>*sigh* Modded "troll" for speaking the truth, yet again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>* sigh * Modded " troll " for speaking the truth , yet again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*sigh* Modded "troll" for speaking the truth, yet again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528102</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>whitefox</author>
	<datestamp>1268904180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used Avast (okay), AVG (slow), and Vipre (annoying).</p><p>Compared to those, Microsoft Security Essentials has presented me with the fewest problems (none in fact), runs the quickest from an old, trusty, 1.4 GHz Pentium with XP Pro to a newer HP Laptop with Windows 7, and more importantly, has stopped several drive-by trojan installs (one came from MSNBC of all places).</p><p>Don't even get me started on Symantec.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Avast ( okay ) , AVG ( slow ) , and Vipre ( annoying ) .Compared to those , Microsoft Security Essentials has presented me with the fewest problems ( none in fact ) , runs the quickest from an old , trusty , 1.4 GHz Pentium with XP Pro to a newer HP Laptop with Windows 7 , and more importantly , has stopped several drive-by trojan installs ( one came from MSNBC of all places ) .Do n't even get me started on Symantec .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Avast (okay), AVG (slow), and Vipre (annoying).Compared to those, Microsoft Security Essentials has presented me with the fewest problems (none in fact), runs the quickest from an old, trusty, 1.4 GHz Pentium with XP Pro to a newer HP Laptop with Windows 7, and more importantly, has stopped several drive-by trojan installs (one came from MSNBC of all places).Don't even get me started on Symantec.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526872</id>
	<title>I know I'm safe though</title>
	<author>el3mentary</author>
	<datestamp>1268944020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use Windows Antivirus 2009.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Windows Antivirus 2009 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Windows Antivirus 2009.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530646</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268915160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clamwin doesn't have nearly as good coverage as Avast, it's not worth running.</p><p>While running it, I clicked a dodgy link on an out-dated browser which kindly rooted my pooter. Clam didn't notice, after which trojans started popping up and Clam didn't notice. But I did, so loaded AVG then Avast and Avast found 4 trojans and successively (over a month or two) picked up the rootkit loading several more trojans.</p><p>IMHO: Any updated virus scanner missing signatures for active exploits for several months isn't worth the bits to store it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clamwin does n't have nearly as good coverage as Avast , it 's not worth running.While running it , I clicked a dodgy link on an out-dated browser which kindly rooted my pooter .
Clam did n't notice , after which trojans started popping up and Clam did n't notice .
But I did , so loaded AVG then Avast and Avast found 4 trojans and successively ( over a month or two ) picked up the rootkit loading several more trojans.IMHO : Any updated virus scanner missing signatures for active exploits for several months is n't worth the bits to store it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clamwin doesn't have nearly as good coverage as Avast, it's not worth running.While running it, I clicked a dodgy link on an out-dated browser which kindly rooted my pooter.
Clam didn't notice, after which trojans started popping up and Clam didn't notice.
But I did, so loaded AVG then Avast and Avast found 4 trojans and successively (over a month or two) picked up the rootkit loading several more trojans.IMHO: Any updated virus scanner missing signatures for active exploits for several months isn't worth the bits to store it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527794</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1268903340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to the multiple websites I've seen that compared free AV software, MS Security Essentials is one of the best. I use it on all of my systems now.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the multiple websites I 've seen that compared free AV software , MS Security Essentials is one of the best .
I use it on all of my systems now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the multiple websites I've seen that compared free AV software, MS Security Essentials is one of the best.
I use it on all of my systems now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528324</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Comodo Anti-Virus is great http://www.comodo.com/home/internet-security/antivirus.php</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Comodo Anti-Virus is great http : //www.comodo.com/home/internet-security/antivirus.php</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comodo Anti-Virus is great http://www.comodo.com/home/internet-security/antivirus.php</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529428</id>
	<title>Couple of freebies for me!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268908860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a combination of OpenDNS and Cloud Antivirus. Haven't had a problem yet, and I hardly cruise the consumer interwebs! Bonus of also helping me remote in via OpenDNS, both are free and VERY low on resources!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a combination of OpenDNS and Cloud Antivirus .
Have n't had a problem yet , and I hardly cruise the consumer interwebs !
Bonus of also helping me remote in via OpenDNS , both are free and VERY low on resources !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a combination of OpenDNS and Cloud Antivirus.
Haven't had a problem yet, and I hardly cruise the consumer interwebs!
Bonus of also helping me remote in via OpenDNS, both are free and VERY low on resources!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534084</id>
	<title>ubuntu antivirus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268995380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>my machine has been clean as a whistle since my cousin installed ubuntu antivirus. i swear it makes the desktop look and run smoother too. And no nags! I can't recommend it highly enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>my machine has been clean as a whistle since my cousin installed ubuntu antivirus .
i swear it makes the desktop look and run smoother too .
And no nags !
I ca n't recommend it highly enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my machine has been clean as a whistle since my cousin installed ubuntu antivirus.
i swear it makes the desktop look and run smoother too.
And no nags!
I can't recommend it highly enough.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528660</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In my work computer I use COMODO Internet Security which is an AV and firewall (the personal free edition), is light and it works for me. In my personal laptop I use Linux Mint so I don't need AV.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In my work computer I use COMODO Internet Security which is an AV and firewall ( the personal free edition ) , is light and it works for me .
In my personal laptop I use Linux Mint so I do n't need AV .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In my work computer I use COMODO Internet Security which is an AV and firewall (the personal free edition), is light and it works for me.
In my personal laptop I use Linux Mint so I don't need AV.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527386</id>
	<title>A little known but great program:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1268945460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A friend recommended it to me. It&rsquo;s called Zebu/<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linus\_van\_Pelt" title="wikipedia.org">Linus</a> [wikipedia.org] or something like that. I forgot. Something with a cow and a penguin... weirdly.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A friend recommended it to me .
It    s called Zebu/Linus [ wikipedia.org ] or something like that .
I forgot .
Something with a cow and a penguin... weirdly. ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A friend recommended it to me.
It’s called Zebu/Linus [wikipedia.org] or something like that.
I forgot.
Something with a cow and a penguin... weirdly. ;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530566</id>
	<title>MSE</title>
	<author>axor1337</author>
	<datestamp>1268914620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft Security Essential- it is lighter on resources than AVG or AVAST, and does a better job than McAffe or Norton</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Security Essential- it is lighter on resources than AVG or AVAST , and does a better job than McAffe or Norton</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Security Essential- it is lighter on resources than AVG or AVAST, and does a better job than McAffe or Norton</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466</id>
	<title>I don't use anything.</title>
	<author>andi75</author>
	<datestamp>1268942760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>- I let windows check for updates, but install them manually.<br>- I mostly download my software from sourceforge / cygwin's mirrors (yes, I'm risking that those could be compromised).</p><p>I haven't noticed anything fishy yet, and my WoW account hasn't been hacked in 5 years<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>- I let windows check for updates , but install them manually.- I mostly download my software from sourceforge / cygwin 's mirrors ( yes , I 'm risking that those could be compromised ) .I have n't noticed anything fishy yet , and my WoW account has n't been hacked in 5 years : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>- I let windows check for updates, but install them manually.- I mostly download my software from sourceforge / cygwin's mirrors (yes, I'm risking that those could be compromised).I haven't noticed anything fishy yet, and my WoW account hasn't been hacked in 5 years :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527686</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can either delete avnotify.exe or use a tool similar to Comodo Firewall (or rather the Defense+ contained within) that, among other very useful security functions, can block files. Both ways work perfectly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can either delete avnotify.exe or use a tool similar to Comodo Firewall ( or rather the Defense + contained within ) that , among other very useful security functions , can block files .
Both ways work perfectly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can either delete avnotify.exe or use a tool similar to Comodo Firewall (or rather the Defense+ contained within) that, among other very useful security functions, can block files.
Both ways work perfectly.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31550016</id>
	<title>Re:Comodo</title>
	<author>Viperpete</author>
	<datestamp>1269106440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used ZoneAlarm and AVG for the last 2 years.  In the last month or so I noticed AVG using tons of resources at prime time for it's "optimization" (avgcsrvx.exe) and there was no way to schedule it for any other time.  Additionally, ZoneAlarm started causing resource problems with the recent update, when I was surfing the web it would be using 30-50\% of the processor.</p><p>I switched over to Comodo firewall/anti-virus and have enjoyed it's small foot print and speed at boot for a few weeks now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used ZoneAlarm and AVG for the last 2 years .
In the last month or so I noticed AVG using tons of resources at prime time for it 's " optimization " ( avgcsrvx.exe ) and there was no way to schedule it for any other time .
Additionally , ZoneAlarm started causing resource problems with the recent update , when I was surfing the web it would be using 30-50 \ % of the processor.I switched over to Comodo firewall/anti-virus and have enjoyed it 's small foot print and speed at boot for a few weeks now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used ZoneAlarm and AVG for the last 2 years.
In the last month or so I noticed AVG using tons of resources at prime time for it's "optimization" (avgcsrvx.exe) and there was no way to schedule it for any other time.
Additionally, ZoneAlarm started causing resource problems with the recent update, when I was surfing the web it would be using 30-50\% of the processor.I switched over to Comodo firewall/anti-virus and have enjoyed it's small foot print and speed at boot for a few weeks now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31581904</id>
	<title>I use Avira</title>
	<author>shnull</author>
	<datestamp>1269351360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It seems to detect stuff that AVG never detected, it's free and it doesn't require you to do shit, except download and install<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... try it , let us know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to detect stuff that AVG never detected , it 's free and it does n't require you to do shit , except download and install ... try it , let us know : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to detect stuff that AVG never detected, it's free and it doesn't require you to do shit, except download and install ... try it , let us know :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527188</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We use it at the small IT shop I work at, and I use it at home.<br>The real time scanner managed to pick up some malware on a flash-drive (Conficker), and the program is nice and light.<br>I would recommend it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We use it at the small IT shop I work at , and I use it at home.The real time scanner managed to pick up some malware on a flash-drive ( Conficker ) , and the program is nice and light.I would recommend it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We use it at the small IT shop I work at, and I use it at home.The real time scanner managed to pick up some malware on a flash-drive (Conficker), and the program is nice and light.I would recommend it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528192</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are using MSE in a business environment you are violating the license agreement and could be putting your university in legal risk. I would recommend you look at Microsoft Forefront which includes central management. Link: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/bb738009.aspx</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are using MSE in a business environment you are violating the license agreement and could be putting your university in legal risk .
I would recommend you look at Microsoft Forefront which includes central management .
Link : http : //technet.microsoft.com/en-us/bb738009.aspx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are using MSE in a business environment you are violating the license agreement and could be putting your university in legal risk.
I would recommend you look at Microsoft Forefront which includes central management.
Link: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/bb738009.aspx</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529140</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>GF678</author>
	<datestamp>1268907720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>At work (a university) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos. It is, well, crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources. So, instead we use Security Essentials on many systems.</p></div></blockquote><p>My company uses Sophos (and IT techs like myself deploy it elsewhere). I haven't had too many issues with it really, but I suppose it's all personal experience. One think I know is that it has central management of all computers on a domain, whereas MSE doesn't, so why did your IT department decide to go with Security Essentials despite the fact it's not designed for enterprise-level networks?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At work ( a university ) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos .
It is , well , crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources .
So , instead we use Security Essentials on many systems.My company uses Sophos ( and IT techs like myself deploy it elsewhere ) .
I have n't had too many issues with it really , but I suppose it 's all personal experience .
One think I know is that it has central management of all computers on a domain , whereas MSE does n't , so why did your IT department decide to go with Security Essentials despite the fact it 's not designed for enterprise-level networks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At work (a university) the central IT has chosen to license Sophos.
It is, well, crap to put it mildly and takes up amazing amounts of resources.
So, instead we use Security Essentials on many systems.My company uses Sophos (and IT techs like myself deploy it elsewhere).
I haven't had too many issues with it really, but I suppose it's all personal experience.
One think I know is that it has central management of all computers on a domain, whereas MSE doesn't, so why did your IT department decide to go with Security Essentials despite the fact it's not designed for enterprise-level networks?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527842</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>fuego451</author>
	<datestamp>1268903520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On the laptop I use most often, which belonged to my late wife, half the disk is Vista with all her files which I haven't the heart to remove. She allowed me to install the open source software we all know and love and after she passed away I kept the OS updated, installed MSE and backed up all her files. But I think the most important thing I did to protect this little piece of her life was to install Ubuntu on the other half of the disk where full access to the Vista side is just a click away without having to boot it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the laptop I use most often , which belonged to my late wife , half the disk is Vista with all her files which I have n't the heart to remove .
She allowed me to install the open source software we all know and love and after she passed away I kept the OS updated , installed MSE and backed up all her files .
But I think the most important thing I did to protect this little piece of her life was to install Ubuntu on the other half of the disk where full access to the Vista side is just a click away without having to boot it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the laptop I use most often, which belonged to my late wife, half the disk is Vista with all her files which I haven't the heart to remove.
She allowed me to install the open source software we all know and love and after she passed away I kept the OS updated, installed MSE and backed up all her files.
But I think the most important thing I did to protect this little piece of her life was to install Ubuntu on the other half of the disk where full access to the Vista side is just a click away without having to boot it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530750</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>ill1cit</author>
	<datestamp>1268915760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>MSE thirded.

Install, forgot. Love it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>MSE thirded .
Install , forgot .
Love it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MSE thirded.
Install, forgot.
Love it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526172</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ye. And Windows buyers should know its NOT free to run Windows<br>with friends.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ye .
And Windows buyers should know its NOT free to run Windowswith friends .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ye.
And Windows buyers should know its NOT free to run Windowswith friends.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529674</id>
	<title>Stick with AVG Free</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268909940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Switched my Father's computer to Avast recently and it was terrible, basically as bad as a virus constantly wanting you to buy the full version.  AVG Free might hide on their website in places where it's hard to get to, but it still exists at least and does its job, and you can tell it not to install some parts that might bloat it out.  I run AVG Free on my main computer, Windows 7, Ad-Aware, Spybot, etc  Rarely do I even have to run any of them with AVG always on in the background and I've never gotten a virus in the 2 years I've had it (had Vista before).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Switched my Father 's computer to Avast recently and it was terrible , basically as bad as a virus constantly wanting you to buy the full version .
AVG Free might hide on their website in places where it 's hard to get to , but it still exists at least and does its job , and you can tell it not to install some parts that might bloat it out .
I run AVG Free on my main computer , Windows 7 , Ad-Aware , Spybot , etc Rarely do I even have to run any of them with AVG always on in the background and I 've never gotten a virus in the 2 years I 've had it ( had Vista before ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Switched my Father's computer to Avast recently and it was terrible, basically as bad as a virus constantly wanting you to buy the full version.
AVG Free might hide on their website in places where it's hard to get to, but it still exists at least and does its job, and you can tell it not to install some parts that might bloat it out.
I run AVG Free on my main computer, Windows 7, Ad-Aware, Spybot, etc  Rarely do I even have to run any of them with AVG always on in the background and I've never gotten a virus in the 2 years I've had it (had Vista before).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526566</id>
	<title>Panda Antivirus</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Panda antivirus - Corwdourced antivirus that usses the cloud. it's two buzz words in one but it's actually quite effective. Been using it exclusivly since it came out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Panda antivirus - Corwdourced antivirus that usses the cloud .
it 's two buzz words in one but it 's actually quite effective .
Been using it exclusivly since it came out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Panda antivirus - Corwdourced antivirus that usses the cloud.
it's two buzz words in one but it's actually quite effective.
Been using it exclusivly since it came out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529314</id>
	<title>Re:I don't</title>
	<author>Dynedain</author>
	<datestamp>1268908380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering how many privileged escalation bugs there are.... that's a really bad idea.</p><p>Sure it was easy to remove that one specific virus. But it would have been safer if the virus didn't make it onto the machine in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how many privileged escalation bugs there are.... that 's a really bad idea.Sure it was easy to remove that one specific virus .
But it would have been safer if the virus did n't make it onto the machine in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how many privileged escalation bugs there are.... that's a really bad idea.Sure it was easy to remove that one specific virus.
But it would have been safer if the virus didn't make it onto the machine in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530904</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268916780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Registration is easier, but too many false positives ended up scaring me away from Avast, as well as the fact that the free license expires yearly. This prompts a slew of calls from friends and family complaining that either their 'free' Antivirus software is saying they have to pay (it's confusing to the PC challenged and they click the wrong option), or they simply ignore it and hope nothing bad happens. Both ends are undesirable.</p><p>I also found the CPU requirements seemed to be creeping up, especially with the last major update. It's starting to be a real issue on older XP era hardware., especially taxing on startup for some reason.</p><p>I ended up switching to AntiVir and disabling the launch of the ad that pops up once a day using a policy. Although they only pop up once a day, I still found it irritating. Other than that, it seems lighter weight than Avast, and I haven't heard as many horror stories about false positives trashing my mothers iTunes library and whatnot.</p><p>Instructions to disable popup here:  <a href="http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir" title="wikihow.com">http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir</a> [wikihow.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Registration is easier , but too many false positives ended up scaring me away from Avast , as well as the fact that the free license expires yearly .
This prompts a slew of calls from friends and family complaining that either their 'free ' Antivirus software is saying they have to pay ( it 's confusing to the PC challenged and they click the wrong option ) , or they simply ignore it and hope nothing bad happens .
Both ends are undesirable.I also found the CPU requirements seemed to be creeping up , especially with the last major update .
It 's starting to be a real issue on older XP era hardware. , especially taxing on startup for some reason.I ended up switching to AntiVir and disabling the launch of the ad that pops up once a day using a policy .
Although they only pop up once a day , I still found it irritating .
Other than that , it seems lighter weight than Avast , and I have n't heard as many horror stories about false positives trashing my mothers iTunes library and whatnot.Instructions to disable popup here : http : //www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir [ wikihow.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Registration is easier, but too many false positives ended up scaring me away from Avast, as well as the fact that the free license expires yearly.
This prompts a slew of calls from friends and family complaining that either their 'free' Antivirus software is saying they have to pay (it's confusing to the PC challenged and they click the wrong option), or they simply ignore it and hope nothing bad happens.
Both ends are undesirable.I also found the CPU requirements seemed to be creeping up, especially with the last major update.
It's starting to be a real issue on older XP era hardware., especially taxing on startup for some reason.I ended up switching to AntiVir and disabling the launch of the ad that pops up once a day using a policy.
Although they only pop up once a day, I still found it irritating.
Other than that, it seems lighter weight than Avast, and I haven't heard as many horror stories about false positives trashing my mothers iTunes library and whatnot.Instructions to disable popup here:  http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir [wikihow.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527012</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Vu1turEMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1268944380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On that one monthly test thingie where they compare all the antivirus apps, it apparently ranked pretty high in the last month. Which caused mass confusion and excitement, and why everyone here is recommending it. Including me.</p><p>It works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On that one monthly test thingie where they compare all the antivirus apps , it apparently ranked pretty high in the last month .
Which caused mass confusion and excitement , and why everyone here is recommending it .
Including me.It works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On that one monthly test thingie where they compare all the antivirus apps, it apparently ranked pretty high in the last month.
Which caused mass confusion and excitement, and why everyone here is recommending it.
Including me.It works.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31557760</id>
	<title>Avira AntiVir- Free version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269188400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might want to try Avira AntiVir Personal - FREE Antivirus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might want to try Avira AntiVir Personal - FREE Antivirus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might want to try Avira AntiVir Personal - FREE Antivirus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529856</id>
	<title>Re:Panda Cloud</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268910720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A cloud-based antivirus? So, you let them scan your entire hard drive on a remote machine? A remote machine owned by a company founded and ran by a Scientologist?</p><p>No chance in hell I'd ever use this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A cloud-based antivirus ?
So , you let them scan your entire hard drive on a remote machine ?
A remote machine owned by a company founded and ran by a Scientologist ? No chance in hell I 'd ever use this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A cloud-based antivirus?
So, you let them scan your entire hard drive on a remote machine?
A remote machine owned by a company founded and ran by a Scientologist?No chance in hell I'd ever use this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526234</id>
	<title>Avast</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been using Avast in it's various versions for many years now and while I agree that it has definitely increased it's footprint in terms of memory use, disk space, and even visual intrusion level, it's still my choice for AV.  As long as I have been using it, Avast has always required registration.  It's a simple form to fill out and the key arrives very quickly.  Also I use the same key across my home network with no problems.  As far as resource use it's inevitable that a newer version will require more power and such to run, but the recent optional update to version 5 is much more efficient, particularly on multiple cores, at running user initiated scans and the behavior shields.  I'm running Windows 7 Pro x64 and am very satisfied with Avast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Avast in it 's various versions for many years now and while I agree that it has definitely increased it 's footprint in terms of memory use , disk space , and even visual intrusion level , it 's still my choice for AV .
As long as I have been using it , Avast has always required registration .
It 's a simple form to fill out and the key arrives very quickly .
Also I use the same key across my home network with no problems .
As far as resource use it 's inevitable that a newer version will require more power and such to run , but the recent optional update to version 5 is much more efficient , particularly on multiple cores , at running user initiated scans and the behavior shields .
I 'm running Windows 7 Pro x64 and am very satisfied with Avast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Avast in it's various versions for many years now and while I agree that it has definitely increased it's footprint in terms of memory use, disk space, and even visual intrusion level, it's still my choice for AV.
As long as I have been using it, Avast has always required registration.
It's a simple form to fill out and the key arrives very quickly.
Also I use the same key across my home network with no problems.
As far as resource use it's inevitable that a newer version will require more power and such to run, but the recent optional update to version 5 is much more efficient, particularly on multiple cores, at running user initiated scans and the behavior shields.
I'm running Windows 7 Pro x64 and am very satisfied with Avast.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527038</id>
	<title>Forticlient</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268944440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've also used AVG and Avast, both of which are good... if a little slow at scanning and bloated.</p><p>As an IT consultant I've had the oportunity to deal with many security venders that most end users don't hear about. In the firewall appliance sector Fortinet puts out a very good enterprise level product that is reated in the top five appliances year after year.</p><p>Fortinet has released a software product called FortiClient that contains all of the capabilities of thier firewall product. This means anti virus, intrusion protection, anti spam, url filtering, and VPN client all in one package. They have two flavors, free and pay. They are really one flovor... both have the same features, but the pay version is manageable from thier hardware appliances. The install package allows you to install only the components you want to use.</p><p>Now when they say it's a free version, they really mean it; free for buisiness, home users, anybody.</p><p>I've been using it for about a year now and I find it much better than any other AV suite I've come across. Give it a try, you may even like it.</p><p>www.forticlient.com</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've also used AVG and Avast , both of which are good... if a little slow at scanning and bloated.As an IT consultant I 've had the oportunity to deal with many security venders that most end users do n't hear about .
In the firewall appliance sector Fortinet puts out a very good enterprise level product that is reated in the top five appliances year after year.Fortinet has released a software product called FortiClient that contains all of the capabilities of thier firewall product .
This means anti virus , intrusion protection , anti spam , url filtering , and VPN client all in one package .
They have two flavors , free and pay .
They are really one flovor... both have the same features , but the pay version is manageable from thier hardware appliances .
The install package allows you to install only the components you want to use.Now when they say it 's a free version , they really mean it ; free for buisiness , home users , anybody.I 've been using it for about a year now and I find it much better than any other AV suite I 've come across .
Give it a try , you may even like it.www.forticlient.com</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've also used AVG and Avast, both of which are good... if a little slow at scanning and bloated.As an IT consultant I've had the oportunity to deal with many security venders that most end users don't hear about.
In the firewall appliance sector Fortinet puts out a very good enterprise level product that is reated in the top five appliances year after year.Fortinet has released a software product called FortiClient that contains all of the capabilities of thier firewall product.
This means anti virus, intrusion protection, anti spam, url filtering, and VPN client all in one package.
They have two flavors, free and pay.
They are really one flovor... both have the same features, but the pay version is manageable from thier hardware appliances.
The install package allows you to install only the components you want to use.Now when they say it's a free version, they really mean it; free for buisiness, home users, anybody.I've been using it for about a year now and I find it much better than any other AV suite I've come across.
Give it a try, you may even like it.www.forticlient.com</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527910</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and if you remove the permission to execute avnotify.exe you don't even need to deal w/ the ads.</p><p><a href="http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir" title="wikihow.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir</a> [wikihow.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and if you remove the permission to execute avnotify.exe you do n't even need to deal w/ the ads.http : //www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir [ wikihow.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and if you remove the permission to execute avnotify.exe you don't even need to deal w/ the ads.http://www.wikihow.com/Remove-the-Popup-Ads-in-Avira-Antivir [wikihow.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527802</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268903400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if the price requirement is $0, then linux is what i would use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if the price requirement is $ 0 , then linux is what i would use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the price requirement is $0, then linux is what i would use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527360</id>
	<title>comodo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i have been using comodo with pretty good results.  http://antivirus.comodo.com/ - they have a free one with an optional firewall.  i would give it a look.  for home use there is also the home version of vipre - http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com - they have a "site license" for home.  they will cover 3 or more pcs for 49.95 not bad if you have 5 or more like i do.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i have been using comodo with pretty good results .
http : //antivirus.comodo.com/ - they have a free one with an optional firewall .
i would give it a look .
for home use there is also the home version of vipre - http : //www.sunbeltsoftware.com - they have a " site license " for home .
they will cover 3 or more pcs for 49.95 not bad if you have 5 or more like i do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i have been using comodo with pretty good results.
http://antivirus.comodo.com/ - they have a free one with an optional firewall.
i would give it a look.
for home use there is also the home version of vipre - http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com - they have a "site license" for home.
they will cover 3 or more pcs for 49.95 not bad if you have 5 or more like i do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528900</id>
	<title>Vipre</title>
	<author>Teunis</author>
	<datestamp>1268906880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using Vipre Antivirus since I started working as a computer tech.   90+\% of the machines I see every day are highly infected and that so far has caught and cleaned all but one type of infection - Alureon/TDSS.y (which it will stop and remove just fine).   Microsoft Security essentials gets that one (and cleans it out correctly, leaving a system capable of booting afterwards).   Microsoft Security Essentials otherwise is about 80\% as effective...  again, sufficient unless you're in a "toxic" environment as I am.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Vipre Antivirus since I started working as a computer tech .
90 + \ % of the machines I see every day are highly infected and that so far has caught and cleaned all but one type of infection - Alureon/TDSS.y ( which it will stop and remove just fine ) .
Microsoft Security essentials gets that one ( and cleans it out correctly , leaving a system capable of booting afterwards ) .
Microsoft Security Essentials otherwise is about 80 \ % as effective... again , sufficient unless you 're in a " toxic " environment as I am .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Vipre Antivirus since I started working as a computer tech.
90+\% of the machines I see every day are highly infected and that so far has caught and cleaned all but one type of infection - Alureon/TDSS.y (which it will stop and remove just fine).
Microsoft Security essentials gets that one (and cleans it out correctly, leaving a system capable of booting afterwards).
Microsoft Security Essentials otherwise is about 80\% as effective...  again, sufficient unless you're in a "toxic" environment as I am.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531126</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268918220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>its not asking for updates... it does them automatically and pops to ask you to buy it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>its not asking for updates... it does them automatically and pops to ask you to buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its not asking for updates... it does them automatically and pops to ask you to buy it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527096</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>The MAZZTer</author>
	<datestamp>1268944620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can test the scanning and real-time capabilities of your AV with this:</p><p>

<a href="http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm" title="eicar.org">http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm</a> [eicar.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can test the scanning and real-time capabilities of your AV with this : http : //www.eicar.org/anti \ _virus \ _test \ _file.htm [ eicar.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can test the scanning and real-time capabilities of your AV with this:

http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm [eicar.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531538</id>
	<title>Re:None...</title>
	<author>drfreak</author>
	<datestamp>1268920980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a co-worker (actually our senior network engineer) who refuses to run anti-virus at home. He instructs his family to not click on links they do not recognise the source of and not to open e-mail attachments.</p><p>Personally, I do run antivirus for my own home PCs for two reasons: Although I can instruct a teenager not to get click-happy, it is inevitable. Also, sometimes I want to visit the grey-areas of the internet, so I run Security Essentials even on my own PC.</p><p>I actually haven't had a virus in years, but my family has, so running it for them is "Essential" because the last thing I want to do is spend a weekend re-installing windows and all the previously installed software again on my kid's PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a co-worker ( actually our senior network engineer ) who refuses to run anti-virus at home .
He instructs his family to not click on links they do not recognise the source of and not to open e-mail attachments.Personally , I do run antivirus for my own home PCs for two reasons : Although I can instruct a teenager not to get click-happy , it is inevitable .
Also , sometimes I want to visit the grey-areas of the internet , so I run Security Essentials even on my own PC.I actually have n't had a virus in years , but my family has , so running it for them is " Essential " because the last thing I want to do is spend a weekend re-installing windows and all the previously installed software again on my kid 's PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a co-worker (actually our senior network engineer) who refuses to run anti-virus at home.
He instructs his family to not click on links they do not recognise the source of and not to open e-mail attachments.Personally, I do run antivirus for my own home PCs for two reasons: Although I can instruct a teenager not to get click-happy, it is inevitable.
Also, sometimes I want to visit the grey-areas of the internet, so I run Security Essentials even on my own PC.I actually haven't had a virus in years, but my family has, so running it for them is "Essential" because the last thing I want to do is spend a weekend re-installing windows and all the previously installed software again on my kid's PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532616</id>
	<title>Free Avast is difficult to find?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268930460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Registration isn't something that's new to Avast 5. I've been using Avast for at least a couple of years prior to switching to the Norton 360 that comes with my Comcast subscription. Registration was required for the couple of years that I used it. It wasn't really that big of a hassle and I believe they sent me an email a month or two before it was time to renew the free registration. I visit my mother more than once a month, so it wasn't a big deal to get her re-registered. The registration process is pretty simple anyway; she could probably do it herself if I didn't do it for her.</p><p>Regarding how difficult it is to locate; I was able to find it very easily. I typed "avast" into Google and the first link was www.avast.com. The first sub-link took me to the page to download the FREE version and the second sub-link leads to the registration page. The registration page is barely 1 page long and asks a small number of simple questions like "your computer ability" "do you already have antivirus" and "why did you choose avast". It couldn't be more simple really to find it or to register. The only personal info they ask for is your email and your name, which you can lie about if you feel the need. If you're really paranoid, use a throw away email address to get the registration code. They never spammed me though. The only email I ever got was the registration code and a notice about a month before the registration expired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Registration is n't something that 's new to Avast 5 .
I 've been using Avast for at least a couple of years prior to switching to the Norton 360 that comes with my Comcast subscription .
Registration was required for the couple of years that I used it .
It was n't really that big of a hassle and I believe they sent me an email a month or two before it was time to renew the free registration .
I visit my mother more than once a month , so it was n't a big deal to get her re-registered .
The registration process is pretty simple anyway ; she could probably do it herself if I did n't do it for her.Regarding how difficult it is to locate ; I was able to find it very easily .
I typed " avast " into Google and the first link was www.avast.com .
The first sub-link took me to the page to download the FREE version and the second sub-link leads to the registration page .
The registration page is barely 1 page long and asks a small number of simple questions like " your computer ability " " do you already have antivirus " and " why did you choose avast " .
It could n't be more simple really to find it or to register .
The only personal info they ask for is your email and your name , which you can lie about if you feel the need .
If you 're really paranoid , use a throw away email address to get the registration code .
They never spammed me though .
The only email I ever got was the registration code and a notice about a month before the registration expired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Registration isn't something that's new to Avast 5.
I've been using Avast for at least a couple of years prior to switching to the Norton 360 that comes with my Comcast subscription.
Registration was required for the couple of years that I used it.
It wasn't really that big of a hassle and I believe they sent me an email a month or two before it was time to renew the free registration.
I visit my mother more than once a month, so it wasn't a big deal to get her re-registered.
The registration process is pretty simple anyway; she could probably do it herself if I didn't do it for her.Regarding how difficult it is to locate; I was able to find it very easily.
I typed "avast" into Google and the first link was www.avast.com.
The first sub-link took me to the page to download the FREE version and the second sub-link leads to the registration page.
The registration page is barely 1 page long and asks a small number of simple questions like "your computer ability" "do you already have antivirus" and "why did you choose avast".
It couldn't be more simple really to find it or to register.
The only personal info they ask for is your email and your name, which you can lie about if you feel the need.
If you're really paranoid, use a throw away email address to get the registration code.
They never spammed me though.
The only email I ever got was the registration code and a notice about a month before the registration expired.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533124</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>therufus</author>
	<datestamp>1268935740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eee-Set, nod thirty two.</p><p>Not a real tongue twister if you ask me.</p><p>Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware is tougher. We just say Em-BAM though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Better yet, see how many people can't pronounce Kaspersky. I've heard "Gas-ber-skie", "Kas-ker-skee" and "Ka-per-skee". Last time I checked it was named after Eugene Kaspersky who pronounces his name "Kass-per-skee".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eee-Set , nod thirty two.Not a real tongue twister if you ask me.Malwarebytes ' Anti-Malware is tougher .
We just say Em-BAM though ; ) Better yet , see how many people ca n't pronounce Kaspersky .
I 've heard " Gas-ber-skie " , " Kas-ker-skee " and " Ka-per-skee " .
Last time I checked it was named after Eugene Kaspersky who pronounces his name " Kass-per-skee " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eee-Set, nod thirty two.Not a real tongue twister if you ask me.Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware is tougher.
We just say Em-BAM though ;)Better yet, see how many people can't pronounce Kaspersky.
I've heard "Gas-ber-skie", "Kas-ker-skee" and "Ka-per-skee".
Last time I checked it was named after Eugene Kaspersky who pronounces his name "Kass-per-skee".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526202</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>dsavi</author>
	<datestamp>1268942040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have heard good things about MSE from several people, but I haven't tried it myself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have heard good things about MSE from several people , but I have n't tried it myself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have heard good things about MSE from several people, but I haven't tried it myself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528842</id>
	<title>Re:buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268906700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, "buy a mac" is a great suggestion for someone who is not even willing to pay for antivirus software.
<br> <br>
Kudos to the mods who acknowledged your amazing insight!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , " buy a mac " is a great suggestion for someone who is not even willing to pay for antivirus software .
Kudos to the mods who acknowledged your amazing insight !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, "buy a mac" is a great suggestion for someone who is not even willing to pay for antivirus software.
Kudos to the mods who acknowledged your amazing insight!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534902</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Simulant</author>
	<datestamp>1269005460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I second both parents.   MSE is the best free AV at this time.  (and NOD32 is the best overall)</p><p>My criteria for AV is that it has to be reasonably accurate and unobtrusive, not necessarily in that order.</p><p>The only problem with MSE, recently introduced, is that it's now using Windows Updates for virus definitions, so you no have a Windows Update notification every single day.   In my experience, this means that most casual &amp; small business users will rarely be up-to-date.   It's funny, but half of them seem to think the little yellow shield icon is a scam these days and simply ignore it &amp; the other half just don't give a damn.  Many shut their machines off at night so even if I have them set to automatically update, it doesn't happen.</p><p>What was wrong with the automatic download of definitions by the client itself?</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I second both parents .
MSE is the best free AV at this time .
( and NOD32 is the best overall ) My criteria for AV is that it has to be reasonably accurate and unobtrusive , not necessarily in that order.The only problem with MSE , recently introduced , is that it 's now using Windows Updates for virus definitions , so you no have a Windows Update notification every single day .
In my experience , this means that most casual &amp; small business users will rarely be up-to-date .
It 's funny , but half of them seem to think the little yellow shield icon is a scam these days and simply ignore it &amp; the other half just do n't give a damn .
Many shut their machines off at night so even if I have them set to automatically update , it does n't happen.What was wrong with the automatic download of definitions by the client itself ?
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I second both parents.
MSE is the best free AV at this time.
(and NOD32 is the best overall)My criteria for AV is that it has to be reasonably accurate and unobtrusive, not necessarily in that order.The only problem with MSE, recently introduced, is that it's now using Windows Updates for virus definitions, so you no have a Windows Update notification every single day.
In my experience, this means that most casual &amp; small business users will rarely be up-to-date.
It's funny, but half of them seem to think the little yellow shield icon is a scam these days and simply ignore it &amp; the other half just don't give a damn.
Many shut their machines off at night so even if I have them set to automatically update, it doesn't happen.What was wrong with the automatic download of definitions by the client itself?
   </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526344</id>
	<title>GNU/Linux!</title>
	<author>Subm</author>
	<datestamp>1268942460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i> What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows?</i> </p><p>

GNU/Linux, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows ?
GNU/Linux , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  What Free Antivirus Do You Install On Windows?
GNU/Linux, of course.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529790</id>
	<title>Re:Avira</title>
	<author>rschuetzler</author>
	<datestamp>1268910480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK.</p></div><p>The only thing I have to deal with is a daily popup?!?! Seems like a virus would be less intrusive.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK.The only thing I have to deal with is a daily popup ? ! ? !
Seems like a virus would be less intrusive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only thing you have to deal with is a daily ad that you can dismiss by hitting OK.The only thing I have to deal with is a daily popup?!?!
Seems like a virus would be less intrusive.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531380</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268919960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Download the EICAR <a href="http://www.eicar.org/anti\_virus\_test\_file.htm" title="eicar.org" rel="nofollow">anti-virus test file</a> [eicar.org].  It's <b>not</b> a virus, but a delibrate test file that virtually all AV scanners will pick up as a virus as a dummy test.</p><p>(In fact, with Forefront running (the corporate version of Security Essentials - same engine, same definitions, just with some corporate reporting features), the box pops up straight away when I download it.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Download the EICAR anti-virus test file [ eicar.org ] .
It 's not a virus , but a delibrate test file that virtually all AV scanners will pick up as a virus as a dummy test .
( In fact , with Forefront running ( the corporate version of Security Essentials - same engine , same definitions , just with some corporate reporting features ) , the box pops up straight away when I download it .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Download the EICAR anti-virus test file [eicar.org].
It's not a virus, but a delibrate test file that virtually all AV scanners will pick up as a virus as a dummy test.
(In fact, with Forefront running (the corporate version of Security Essentials - same engine, same definitions, just with some corporate reporting features), the box pops up straight away when I download it.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531250</id>
	<title>Re:I don't (and you sir, are an idiot)</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268918940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines. I have been doing IT since 1992.</p></div><p>Congrats, welcome to being a Junior Systems Administator.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>When I am asked this question my answer is always this. None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth. First any new viruses will be undetected, second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.</p></div><p>The crimeware industry is collectively thanking you for spreading your fantastic and totally bogus advice.  Running a Windows box sans AV might be fine for you because you're so smart and have never found a rootkit on your machine, but I suspect your motivation for telling your less aware friends to use no AV whatsoever on a Windows machine is so you can generate some more side work.  News Flash:  Running a non-admin account will not even slow down some of the major botnet penetration rates - Depending upon what other apps you have loaded on your machine, Zeus can pwn non-admin run machines too, smart guy - Google "privilege escalation".  At least with some freebie AV, you might be able to catch the variant that came out yesterday, but probably not the one that came out an hour ago...better then nothing at all which is what your advice amounts to...but telling them to run something that's even free, or simply educating them about defensive internet use is too much trouble for you, in your mind.  A screen door and a clue is better then no damned door and at all.</p><p>Your security insights to the those who don't know any better then to listen to you is dangerous, and your suspect motivation is even worse.  You'd be better off with the standard "Install Linux and you don't need AV" or "Get a Mac" spiel or better yet, take your advice back to 1993-1994 (and you were in IT then, so you say) when it was last actually correct.....that's about the last time Windows was safe from *requiring* some sort of AV.  You've probably never seen what happens to someone who's great at what they do in the outside world (IE rather intelligent), and has a semi-clue with computers, have to put their lives back together after their identity was sold for a pittance (the going rate for a stolen identity is around $15.00 USD) after opening a well engineered landmine of a mail.  All that horseshit you see about LifeLock and whatnot....Doesn't do jack squat after you've had your life pwnd.  It's pretty sad that one little click on an email with a zipped EXE masked as a PDF attachment that was on a up to date XP machine with Automatic Updates on with an exipred licensed AV client and an older version of Acrobat Reader installed run with non-admin rights can have such ugly consequences....an up to date freebie AV client would probably have caught this little piece of trash....or have you told friends that Acrobat 7.0 Reader isn't really all that safe?  I was told about it afterwards "when I clicked on the PDF it didn't do anything or launch Acrobat so I didn't think anything of it", she not knowing it had done its silent install and began mining away on her machine and was happy to report back her banking details to the C&amp;C server.  Her understanding of a virus was it would immediately alert her that she caught something like spring porn pop-ups all over the place (this isn't 2004 anymore) or change her background and tell her she was infected (she must have caught SpyFalcon or one of those fake AV types of rogue scareware once before) - do you educate your friends and users that these new viruses do whatever they can to not announce their presence, or is that also too much trouble for you?  You were the hero with your free online tool and caught the one that did, congrats...here's your cookie.  Did you get all of it.......?</p><p>We live in a crime filled world, where some smart folks want to do as little as possible to make the fat bank and don't give a shit who's lives they ruin.  Your identity sells for next-to-nothing on the underground network.....and it will cost you a giant shit-pile more to get it back.  Up to date AV is by no means a catch-all-you-won't-get-infected-if-you're-running-our-wizzbang-AV-software and anyone fooling themselves thinking it will protect you as you surf for porn or warez online, or blindly click on mail attachments is in for a surprise, not IF but WHEN.  Even if you don't do surf for porn/warez/etc you can still run across a drive-by download on compromised or malicious websites that you could at worst end up with the epic fail.  The key to mitigation of the proliferation is education...something that is far too much for you, so you take the easy out...guess that generates somoe more revenue for you.....hopefully nobody listens to you.</p><p>Do us all a favor and become a Linux or Mac zealot tomorrow and tell everyone you've ever given your advice to you really don't know anything about Windows - or security - it's less work for you, and hopefully your previous sage-like thoughts on AV will hopefully be forgotten like a bad internet chain letter and hopefully they'll start listening to someone who's seen more horror stories from the trenches then you've ever get to experience in the little high-horse box you live in.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Between my job , some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines .
I have been doing IT since 1992.Congrats , welcome to being a Junior Systems Administator.When I am asked this question my answer is always this .
None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth .
First any new viruses will be undetected , second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.The crimeware industry is collectively thanking you for spreading your fantastic and totally bogus advice .
Running a Windows box sans AV might be fine for you because you 're so smart and have never found a rootkit on your machine , but I suspect your motivation for telling your less aware friends to use no AV whatsoever on a Windows machine is so you can generate some more side work .
News Flash : Running a non-admin account will not even slow down some of the major botnet penetration rates - Depending upon what other apps you have loaded on your machine , Zeus can pwn non-admin run machines too , smart guy - Google " privilege escalation " .
At least with some freebie AV , you might be able to catch the variant that came out yesterday , but probably not the one that came out an hour ago...better then nothing at all which is what your advice amounts to...but telling them to run something that 's even free , or simply educating them about defensive internet use is too much trouble for you , in your mind .
A screen door and a clue is better then no damned door and at all.Your security insights to the those who do n't know any better then to listen to you is dangerous , and your suspect motivation is even worse .
You 'd be better off with the standard " Install Linux and you do n't need AV " or " Get a Mac " spiel or better yet , take your advice back to 1993-1994 ( and you were in IT then , so you say ) when it was last actually correct.....that 's about the last time Windows was safe from * requiring * some sort of AV .
You 've probably never seen what happens to someone who 's great at what they do in the outside world ( IE rather intelligent ) , and has a semi-clue with computers , have to put their lives back together after their identity was sold for a pittance ( the going rate for a stolen identity is around $ 15.00 USD ) after opening a well engineered landmine of a mail .
All that horseshit you see about LifeLock and whatnot....Does n't do jack squat after you 've had your life pwnd .
It 's pretty sad that one little click on an email with a zipped EXE masked as a PDF attachment that was on a up to date XP machine with Automatic Updates on with an exipred licensed AV client and an older version of Acrobat Reader installed run with non-admin rights can have such ugly consequences....an up to date freebie AV client would probably have caught this little piece of trash....or have you told friends that Acrobat 7.0 Reader is n't really all that safe ?
I was told about it afterwards " when I clicked on the PDF it did n't do anything or launch Acrobat so I did n't think anything of it " , she not knowing it had done its silent install and began mining away on her machine and was happy to report back her banking details to the C&amp;C server .
Her understanding of a virus was it would immediately alert her that she caught something like spring porn pop-ups all over the place ( this is n't 2004 anymore ) or change her background and tell her she was infected ( she must have caught SpyFalcon or one of those fake AV types of rogue scareware once before ) - do you educate your friends and users that these new viruses do whatever they can to not announce their presence , or is that also too much trouble for you ?
You were the hero with your free online tool and caught the one that did , congrats...here 's your cookie .
Did you get all of it....... ? We live in a crime filled world , where some smart folks want to do as little as possible to make the fat bank and do n't give a shit who 's lives they ruin .
Your identity sells for next-to-nothing on the underground network.....and it will cost you a giant shit-pile more to get it back .
Up to date AV is by no means a catch-all-you-wo n't-get-infected-if-you 're-running-our-wizzbang-AV-software and anyone fooling themselves thinking it will protect you as you surf for porn or warez online , or blindly click on mail attachments is in for a surprise , not IF but WHEN .
Even if you do n't do surf for porn/warez/etc you can still run across a drive-by download on compromised or malicious websites that you could at worst end up with the epic fail .
The key to mitigation of the proliferation is education...something that is far too much for you , so you take the easy out...guess that generates somoe more revenue for you.....hopefully nobody listens to you.Do us all a favor and become a Linux or Mac zealot tomorrow and tell everyone you 've ever given your advice to you really do n't know anything about Windows - or security - it 's less work for you , and hopefully your previous sage-like thoughts on AV will hopefully be forgotten like a bad internet chain letter and hopefully they 'll start listening to someone who 's seen more horror stories from the trenches then you 've ever get to experience in the little high-horse box you live in .
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>Between my job, some side work and friends and family I manage close to 70 Windows machines.
I have been doing IT since 1992.Congrats, welcome to being a Junior Systems Administator.When I am asked this question my answer is always this.
None. I think antivirus is more trouble than it is worth.
First any new viruses will be undetected, second the pain of actually running anti virus outweighs any marginal benefit received from it.The crimeware industry is collectively thanking you for spreading your fantastic and totally bogus advice.
Running a Windows box sans AV might be fine for you because you're so smart and have never found a rootkit on your machine, but I suspect your motivation for telling your less aware friends to use no AV whatsoever on a Windows machine is so you can generate some more side work.
News Flash:  Running a non-admin account will not even slow down some of the major botnet penetration rates - Depending upon what other apps you have loaded on your machine, Zeus can pwn non-admin run machines too, smart guy - Google "privilege escalation".
At least with some freebie AV, you might be able to catch the variant that came out yesterday, but probably not the one that came out an hour ago...better then nothing at all which is what your advice amounts to...but telling them to run something that's even free, or simply educating them about defensive internet use is too much trouble for you, in your mind.
A screen door and a clue is better then no damned door and at all.Your security insights to the those who don't know any better then to listen to you is dangerous, and your suspect motivation is even worse.
You'd be better off with the standard "Install Linux and you don't need AV" or "Get a Mac" spiel or better yet, take your advice back to 1993-1994 (and you were in IT then, so you say) when it was last actually correct.....that's about the last time Windows was safe from *requiring* some sort of AV.
You've probably never seen what happens to someone who's great at what they do in the outside world (IE rather intelligent), and has a semi-clue with computers, have to put their lives back together after their identity was sold for a pittance (the going rate for a stolen identity is around $15.00 USD) after opening a well engineered landmine of a mail.
All that horseshit you see about LifeLock and whatnot....Doesn't do jack squat after you've had your life pwnd.
It's pretty sad that one little click on an email with a zipped EXE masked as a PDF attachment that was on a up to date XP machine with Automatic Updates on with an exipred licensed AV client and an older version of Acrobat Reader installed run with non-admin rights can have such ugly consequences....an up to date freebie AV client would probably have caught this little piece of trash....or have you told friends that Acrobat 7.0 Reader isn't really all that safe?
I was told about it afterwards "when I clicked on the PDF it didn't do anything or launch Acrobat so I didn't think anything of it", she not knowing it had done its silent install and began mining away on her machine and was happy to report back her banking details to the C&amp;C server.
Her understanding of a virus was it would immediately alert her that she caught something like spring porn pop-ups all over the place (this isn't 2004 anymore) or change her background and tell her she was infected (she must have caught SpyFalcon or one of those fake AV types of rogue scareware once before) - do you educate your friends and users that these new viruses do whatever they can to not announce their presence, or is that also too much trouble for you?
You were the hero with your free online tool and caught the one that did, congrats...here's your cookie.
Did you get all of it.......?We live in a crime filled world, where some smart folks want to do as little as possible to make the fat bank and don't give a shit who's lives they ruin.
Your identity sells for next-to-nothing on the underground network.....and it will cost you a giant shit-pile more to get it back.
Up to date AV is by no means a catch-all-you-won't-get-infected-if-you're-running-our-wizzbang-AV-software and anyone fooling themselves thinking it will protect you as you surf for porn or warez online, or blindly click on mail attachments is in for a surprise, not IF but WHEN.
Even if you don't do surf for porn/warez/etc you can still run across a drive-by download on compromised or malicious websites that you could at worst end up with the epic fail.
The key to mitigation of the proliferation is education...something that is far too much for you, so you take the easy out...guess that generates somoe more revenue for you.....hopefully nobody listens to you.Do us all a favor and become a Linux or Mac zealot tomorrow and tell everyone you've ever given your advice to you really don't know anything about Windows - or security - it's less work for you, and hopefully your previous sage-like thoughts on AV will hopefully be forgotten like a bad internet chain letter and hopefully they'll start listening to someone who's seen more horror stories from the trenches then you've ever get to experience in the little high-horse box you live in.
   
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535924</id>
	<title>My 2 cents</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269009600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(sorry, AC b/c I'm at work)</p><p>Free AV: Avast Home<br>Free Anti-Malware: MBAM &amp; Spybot<br>Paid AV/Firewall/Anti-Malware: NIS 2010 (read some reviews and try it out if you don't believe me. That suite is rock-solid, and crushes stuff that Avast STILL doesn't detect.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( sorry , AC b/c I 'm at work ) Free AV : Avast HomeFree Anti-Malware : MBAM &amp; SpybotPaid AV/Firewall/Anti-Malware : NIS 2010 ( read some reviews and try it out if you do n't believe me .
That suite is rock-solid , and crushes stuff that Avast STILL does n't detect .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(sorry, AC b/c I'm at work)Free AV: Avast HomeFree Anti-Malware: MBAM &amp; SpybotPaid AV/Firewall/Anti-Malware: NIS 2010 (read some reviews and try it out if you don't believe me.
That suite is rock-solid, and crushes stuff that Avast STILL doesn't detect.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31536186</id>
	<title>My Virus Experiences</title>
	<author>MightyDrunken</author>
	<datestamp>1269010320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a professional cheapskate I have been using free antivirus programs for years, here are my recent experiences. tl;dr version: Avast or MS Security Essentials are the best choices on a Windows machine.<br> <br>
<b>Avast</b> <br>
Virus Detection: Medium to good<br>
Resource Use: Medium<br>
<br>
This is my antivirus of choice, they have recently updated the
interface at long last. A friend had a bunch of malicious software only
a few months back. I ran multiple antivirus and antimalware programs
until nothing was found. Then I installed Avast as his antivirus was
way out of date. Avast's email scanner was going crazy and I realised
the computer was sending out spam. I would never have noticed if it was
not for the email scanner.<br>
<br>
<b>Avira AntiVir</b> <br>
Virus Detection: Don't know<br>
Resource Use: Medium to light<br>
<br>
Seems OK though it does harass you with a window to buy their products.<br>
<br>
<b>AVG</b> <br>
Virus Detection: Don't know<br>
Resource Use: Medium <br>
<br>
Last year I had problems on two different machines. For some reason the
AVG browser plugins were blocking access to the Internet. This took me
ages to track down the problem. On another machine a few months before
that it started causing all sorts of problems and crashing. I will
avoid it for now but it seems to be only me who has had these problems.<br>
<br>
<b>MS Security Essentials</b> <br>
Virus Detection: Good<br>
Resource Use: Light<br>
<br>
MS Security Essentials is very similar to Windows Defender and uses the
same framework and engine which probably accounts for its small
footprint. A great leave and forget solution, I tend to install this on
friends machines.<br>
<br>
<b>Symentec Endpoint
Protection</b> <br>
Virus Detection: Good<br>
Resource Use: Double decker bus size.<br>
<br>
OK it's not a free program but this is what I have to put up with at work. I
hate it! I hate it! From the 20Gb files it used to create to the recent
problem where they screwed up their date settings. It increases boot
time no end and the weekly scan cripples every computer in the company.
Arrggghh!</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a professional cheapskate I have been using free antivirus programs for years , here are my recent experiences .
tl ; dr version : Avast or MS Security Essentials are the best choices on a Windows machine .
Avast Virus Detection : Medium to good Resource Use : Medium This is my antivirus of choice , they have recently updated the interface at long last .
A friend had a bunch of malicious software only a few months back .
I ran multiple antivirus and antimalware programs until nothing was found .
Then I installed Avast as his antivirus was way out of date .
Avast 's email scanner was going crazy and I realised the computer was sending out spam .
I would never have noticed if it was not for the email scanner .
Avira AntiVir Virus Detection : Do n't know Resource Use : Medium to light Seems OK though it does harass you with a window to buy their products .
AVG Virus Detection : Do n't know Resource Use : Medium Last year I had problems on two different machines .
For some reason the AVG browser plugins were blocking access to the Internet .
This took me ages to track down the problem .
On another machine a few months before that it started causing all sorts of problems and crashing .
I will avoid it for now but it seems to be only me who has had these problems .
MS Security Essentials Virus Detection : Good Resource Use : Light MS Security Essentials is very similar to Windows Defender and uses the same framework and engine which probably accounts for its small footprint .
A great leave and forget solution , I tend to install this on friends machines .
Symentec Endpoint Protection Virus Detection : Good Resource Use : Double decker bus size .
OK it 's not a free program but this is what I have to put up with at work .
I hate it !
I hate it !
From the 20Gb files it used to create to the recent problem where they screwed up their date settings .
It increases boot time no end and the weekly scan cripples every computer in the company .
Arrggghh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a professional cheapskate I have been using free antivirus programs for years, here are my recent experiences.
tl;dr version: Avast or MS Security Essentials are the best choices on a Windows machine.
Avast 
Virus Detection: Medium to good
Resource Use: Medium

This is my antivirus of choice, they have recently updated the
interface at long last.
A friend had a bunch of malicious software only
a few months back.
I ran multiple antivirus and antimalware programs
until nothing was found.
Then I installed Avast as his antivirus was
way out of date.
Avast's email scanner was going crazy and I realised
the computer was sending out spam.
I would never have noticed if it was
not for the email scanner.
Avira AntiVir 
Virus Detection: Don't know
Resource Use: Medium to light

Seems OK though it does harass you with a window to buy their products.
AVG 
Virus Detection: Don't know
Resource Use: Medium 

Last year I had problems on two different machines.
For some reason the
AVG browser plugins were blocking access to the Internet.
This took me
ages to track down the problem.
On another machine a few months before
that it started causing all sorts of problems and crashing.
I will
avoid it for now but it seems to be only me who has had these problems.
MS Security Essentials 
Virus Detection: Good
Resource Use: Light

MS Security Essentials is very similar to Windows Defender and uses the
same framework and engine which probably accounts for its small
footprint.
A great leave and forget solution, I tend to install this on
friends machines.
Symentec Endpoint
Protection 
Virus Detection: Good
Resource Use: Double decker bus size.
OK it's not a free program but this is what I have to put up with at work.
I
hate it!
I hate it!
From the 20Gb files it used to create to the recent
problem where they screwed up their date settings.
It increases boot
time no end and the weekly scan cripples every computer in the company.
Arrggghh!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528044</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I checked the log on mine just last night and saw that it had stopped two attacks from web pages my daughter had been to just in the last week.  As a user since October, I've been very pleased with MSE so far.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I checked the log on mine just last night and saw that it had stopped two attacks from web pages my daughter had been to just in the last week .
As a user since October , I 've been very pleased with MSE so far .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I checked the log on mine just last night and saw that it had stopped two attacks from web pages my daughter had been to just in the last week.
As a user since October, I've been very pleased with MSE so far.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527154</id>
	<title>Re:Ars technica review of MSE</title>
	<author>mxh83</author>
	<datestamp>1268944740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>pics or it didn't happen..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>pics or it did n't happen. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pics or it didn't happen..</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529922</id>
	<title>I support what I use</title>
	<author>markdavis</author>
	<datestamp>1268911080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; for friends/relatives who run Windows.....<br>&gt; I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?"</p><p>I feel for you.</p><p>I am the only computer geek in my whole extended family and many of my friends.  I refuse to support MS-Windows at all.  Period.  They all know I use Linux exclusively, and I can honestly say that I have no idea how to deal with or remove virii/malware.  I will offer general advice about brands, equipment, peripherals, etc, but will not touch their machines nor walk them through anything.  I will even give them the phone number of a nice, local shop that does computer work for reasonable prices (and I like the people and trust them; plus I like supporting the local economy and small shops that also offer Linux systems and support too).</p><p>But I also offer 100\% support for any of them who want to run Linux.  And four of them do, and I do everything I can to make sure their systems are setup properly, backed up regularly, work the best possible, answer questions, perform updates, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; for friends/relatives who run Windows..... &gt; I can entrust to keep the 'my computer 's doing weird things ' calls to a minimum ?
" I feel for you.I am the only computer geek in my whole extended family and many of my friends .
I refuse to support MS-Windows at all .
Period. They all know I use Linux exclusively , and I can honestly say that I have no idea how to deal with or remove virii/malware .
I will offer general advice about brands , equipment , peripherals , etc , but will not touch their machines nor walk them through anything .
I will even give them the phone number of a nice , local shop that does computer work for reasonable prices ( and I like the people and trust them ; plus I like supporting the local economy and small shops that also offer Linux systems and support too ) .But I also offer 100 \ % support for any of them who want to run Linux .
And four of them do , and I do everything I can to make sure their systems are setup properly , backed up regularly , work the best possible , answer questions , perform updates , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; for friends/relatives who run Windows.....&gt; I can entrust to keep the 'my computer's doing weird things' calls to a minimum?
"I feel for you.I am the only computer geek in my whole extended family and many of my friends.
I refuse to support MS-Windows at all.
Period.  They all know I use Linux exclusively, and I can honestly say that I have no idea how to deal with or remove virii/malware.
I will offer general advice about brands, equipment, peripherals, etc, but will not touch their machines nor walk them through anything.
I will even give them the phone number of a nice, local shop that does computer work for reasonable prices (and I like the people and trust them; plus I like supporting the local economy and small shops that also offer Linux systems and support too).But I also offer 100\% support for any of them who want to run Linux.
And four of them do, and I do everything I can to make sure their systems are setup properly, backed up regularly, work the best possible, answer questions, perform updates, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531848</id>
	<title>Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268923680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bugger to install but no problems with viruses ever since.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bugger to install but no problems with viruses ever since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bugger to install but no problems with viruses ever since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526794</id>
	<title>http://www.malwarebytes.org/</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1268943780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>MalwareBytes has been effective for the few WinXP boxes I have to deal with.<br>http://www.malwarebytes.org/</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>MalwareBytes has been effective for the few WinXP boxes I have to deal with.http : //www.malwarebytes.org/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MalwareBytes has been effective for the few WinXP boxes I have to deal with.http://www.malwarebytes.org/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526934</id>
	<title>Re:Microsoft</title>
	<author>Cillian</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Admittedly, keygens are probably among the most likely software to contain a trojan or something.  However, that sort of hand-hacked code does quite often throw up false positives.  I've quite often found AVG complaining about cygwin executables or scene demos (Which usually have convoluted compressed executables, probably similar to trojans)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Admittedly , keygens are probably among the most likely software to contain a trojan or something .
However , that sort of hand-hacked code does quite often throw up false positives .
I 've quite often found AVG complaining about cygwin executables or scene demos ( Which usually have convoluted compressed executables , probably similar to trojans )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Admittedly, keygens are probably among the most likely software to contain a trojan or something.
However, that sort of hand-hacked code does quite often throw up false positives.
I've quite often found AVG complaining about cygwin executables or scene demos (Which usually have convoluted compressed executables, probably similar to trojans)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072</id>
	<title>Install through ninite.com</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Both Avast and AVG are on that site.  Using there installer avoids all of the searching through six layers of pages, and it avoids all of the crapware.  And you can bundle installers for multiple apps into one file.  Quick and easy.  You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it.  I don't know though as I haven't tried it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Both Avast and AVG are on that site .
Using there installer avoids all of the searching through six layers of pages , and it avoids all of the crapware .
And you can bundle installers for multiple apps into one file .
Quick and easy .
You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it .
I do n't know though as I have n't tried it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Both Avast and AVG are on that site.
Using there installer avoids all of the searching through six layers of pages, and it avoids all of the crapware.
And you can bundle installers for multiple apps into one file.
Quick and easy.
You may be able to make an installer and mail it to your relatives and have them run it.
I don't know though as I haven't tried it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527418</id>
	<title>Yes, Avira</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avira won "Best of 2008" in the VB100 testing.    ESET won best of 2006 and 2007.   Haven't seen the rundown on 2009, but ESET and Avira are tops.<br>ESET does not have a free version but it has a free online scan.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira won " Best of 2008 " in the VB100 testing .
ESET won best of 2006 and 2007 .
Have n't seen the rundown on 2009 , but ESET and Avira are tops.ESET does not have a free version but it has a free online scan .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira won "Best of 2008" in the VB100 testing.
ESET won best of 2006 and 2007.
Haven't seen the rundown on 2009, but ESET and Avira are tops.ESET does not have a free version but it has a free online scan.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>junglee\_iitk</author>
	<datestamp>1268944500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are you sure it was Avast? Because it is Avira that gives popups asking for update.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are you sure it was Avast ?
Because it is Avira that gives popups asking for update .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are you sure it was Avast?
Because it is Avira that gives popups asking for update.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526116</id>
	<title>Comodo</title>
	<author>beakerMeep</author>
	<datestamp>1268941800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Comodo has always had a wonderful firewall, and lately I have been thinking of trying their AV for my less than tech savvy relatives on windows.  Avast has bothered me lately with their voice updates, though generally I still like Avast.  AVG is the only one I think is not so good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Comodo has always had a wonderful firewall , and lately I have been thinking of trying their AV for my less than tech savvy relatives on windows .
Avast has bothered me lately with their voice updates , though generally I still like Avast .
AVG is the only one I think is not so good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Comodo has always had a wonderful firewall, and lately I have been thinking of trying their AV for my less than tech savvy relatives on windows.
Avast has bothered me lately with their voice updates, though generally I still like Avast.
AVG is the only one I think is not so good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527070</id>
	<title>Malwarebytes</title>
	<author>Yeknomaguh</author>
	<datestamp>1268944500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the one I use and reccomend to my not so tech savvy friends. It's very simple to use, free (for the basic version, which includes everything but scheduled scanning), and doesn't require registration. Its the only thing that got rid of that annoying fake windows security virus, so I've been really happy with it.

www.malwarebytes.org</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the one I use and reccomend to my not so tech savvy friends .
It 's very simple to use , free ( for the basic version , which includes everything but scheduled scanning ) , and does n't require registration .
Its the only thing that got rid of that annoying fake windows security virus , so I 've been really happy with it .
www.malwarebytes.org</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the one I use and reccomend to my not so tech savvy friends.
It's very simple to use, free (for the basic version, which includes everything but scheduled scanning), and doesn't require registration.
Its the only thing that got rid of that annoying fake windows security virus, so I've been really happy with it.
www.malwarebytes.org</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528704</id>
	<title>My Anti Virus</title>
	<author>teknosapien</author>
	<datestamp>1268906160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is either Linux or FreeBSD</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is either Linux or FreeBSD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is either Linux or FreeBSD</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530786</id>
	<title>Couple Points</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268916060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hasn't Avast needed to register once a year for years now?</p><p>AVG Free is easy to find if you point family/friends to <a href="http://free.avg.com/" title="avg.com" rel="nofollow">http://free.avg.com/</a> [avg.com] not <a href="http://www.avg.com/" title="avg.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.avg.com/</a> [avg.com]</p><p>Personally, I'm considering scrapping an AV product altogether.  How common are "viruses" these days anyway?  It's all spyware/malware these days.  Granted free and runs in the background don't come together often (Would you really give spybot to your grandmother?)</p><p>I'm just trying to ingrain Malwarebytes into people's heads.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has n't Avast needed to register once a year for years now ? AVG Free is easy to find if you point family/friends to http : //free.avg.com/ [ avg.com ] not http : //www.avg.com/ [ avg.com ] Personally , I 'm considering scrapping an AV product altogether .
How common are " viruses " these days anyway ?
It 's all spyware/malware these days .
Granted free and runs in the background do n't come together often ( Would you really give spybot to your grandmother ?
) I 'm just trying to ingrain Malwarebytes into people 's heads .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hasn't Avast needed to register once a year for years now?AVG Free is easy to find if you point family/friends to http://free.avg.com/ [avg.com] not http://www.avg.com/ [avg.com]Personally, I'm considering scrapping an AV product altogether.
How common are "viruses" these days anyway?
It's all spyware/malware these days.
Granted free and runs in the background don't come together often (Would you really give spybot to your grandmother?
)I'm just trying to ingrain Malwarebytes into people's heads.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530982</id>
	<title>Radialpoint Security Suite (Powered by BitDefender</title>
	<author>spac</author>
	<datestamp>1268917320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Radialpoint actually provides a really good security suite (Anti-Virus, Anti-Spyware, Parental Control + loads of other features) for free through its "user community" program: <a href="http://radialpoint.net/home/" title="radialpoint.net">http://radialpoint.net/home/</a> [radialpoint.net]</p><p>This is the same security software that ISPs like Verizon, Rogers, Bell Canada, Virgin, etc... charge their customers anywhere from 8$-12$ a month to use.They give away a limited number of copies for free in order to collect crash data and improve the product that's ultimately delivered to ISPs, kind of like a perpetual beta test. The software itself is powered by the latest BitDefender engine for real-time, on-demand and scheduled scanning. It also lets you use WebSense to do parental controls.</p><p>They even have a Mac version that's freely available through their site. Check it out!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Radialpoint actually provides a really good security suite ( Anti-Virus , Anti-Spyware , Parental Control + loads of other features ) for free through its " user community " program : http : //radialpoint.net/home/ [ radialpoint.net ] This is the same security software that ISPs like Verizon , Rogers , Bell Canada , Virgin , etc... charge their customers anywhere from 8 $ -12 $ a month to use.They give away a limited number of copies for free in order to collect crash data and improve the product that 's ultimately delivered to ISPs , kind of like a perpetual beta test .
The software itself is powered by the latest BitDefender engine for real-time , on-demand and scheduled scanning .
It also lets you use WebSense to do parental controls.They even have a Mac version that 's freely available through their site .
Check it out !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Radialpoint actually provides a really good security suite (Anti-Virus, Anti-Spyware, Parental Control + loads of other features) for free through its "user community" program: http://radialpoint.net/home/ [radialpoint.net]This is the same security software that ISPs like Verizon, Rogers, Bell Canada, Virgin, etc... charge their customers anywhere from 8$-12$ a month to use.They give away a limited number of copies for free in order to collect crash data and improve the product that's ultimately delivered to ISPs, kind of like a perpetual beta test.
The software itself is powered by the latest BitDefender engine for real-time, on-demand and scheduled scanning.
It also lets you use WebSense to do parental controls.They even have a Mac version that's freely available through their site.
Check it out!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529190</id>
	<title>Re:i stopped using avast because of popups</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268907900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avira is actually perfect as a free AV imo. simple UI, no annoying obligation to register, updates regularly and warns you if you haven't updated in a while, Heuristics, antirootkit...etc..<br>any "pop ups" you get are either the warning to update, the message that says it's updated automatically or their own ad to promote the paid version (which is legitimate and not annoying at all)<br>I use Windows Live Mail on my pc so when it collects my emails it scans them too and tells me when I get a suspected Phishing or scam email (this should be proof enough that it works fine HelloKitty! =D )</p><p>ACTUALLY..for a while I digressed to Comodo which is a full virus suite all for free...but I don't care much for the annoying firewall they put on it..apparently it's one of the best free AV suites around but I didn't like the usability of it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira is actually perfect as a free AV imo .
simple UI , no annoying obligation to register , updates regularly and warns you if you have n't updated in a while , Heuristics , antirootkit...etc..any " pop ups " you get are either the warning to update , the message that says it 's updated automatically or their own ad to promote the paid version ( which is legitimate and not annoying at all ) I use Windows Live Mail on my pc so when it collects my emails it scans them too and tells me when I get a suspected Phishing or scam email ( this should be proof enough that it works fine HelloKitty !
= D ) ACTUALLY..for a while I digressed to Comodo which is a full virus suite all for free...but I do n't care much for the annoying firewall they put on it..apparently it 's one of the best free AV suites around but I did n't like the usability of it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira is actually perfect as a free AV imo.
simple UI, no annoying obligation to register, updates regularly and warns you if you haven't updated in a while, Heuristics, antirootkit...etc..any "pop ups" you get are either the warning to update, the message that says it's updated automatically or their own ad to promote the paid version (which is legitimate and not annoying at all)I use Windows Live Mail on my pc so when it collects my emails it scans them too and tells me when I get a suspected Phishing or scam email (this should be proof enough that it works fine HelloKitty!
=D )ACTUALLY..for a while I digressed to Comodo which is a full virus suite all for free...but I don't care much for the annoying firewall they put on it..apparently it's one of the best free AV suites around but I didn't like the usability of it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531806</id>
	<title>Comodo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268923260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have heard http://www.comodo.com/ recommend a lot recently as a free AV Suite, i haven't checked it out as i run Linux and don't need such silly things as Anti-Virus software (well, i do run ClamAV) anyway, i understand its light weight, has a small footprint, is very effective... and yes, FREE... idk about nag screens and such though. Good Luck!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have heard http : //www.comodo.com/ recommend a lot recently as a free AV Suite , i have n't checked it out as i run Linux and do n't need such silly things as Anti-Virus software ( well , i do run ClamAV ) anyway , i understand its light weight , has a small footprint , is very effective... and yes , FREE... idk about nag screens and such though .
Good Luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have heard http://www.comodo.com/ recommend a lot recently as a free AV Suite, i haven't checked it out as i run Linux and don't need such silly things as Anti-Virus software (well, i do run ClamAV) anyway, i understand its light weight, has a small footprint, is very effective... and yes, FREE... idk about nag screens and such though.
Good Luck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526826</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1268943840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>http://www.clamwin.com/<br>Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minus</p></div></blockquote><p>I could live without an on-access scan (tell your download manager to scan downloaded files), but Clamwin is completely unusable, IMHO, because it uses up much more system memory, and <b>takes 4X as long to scan</b> compared to the more common Free AVs.</p><p>If you want real, free antivirus, go with MoonSecure (v2.x), which is GPL, does on-access scanning, and uses the ClamAV database.  It does (momentarily) use up a lot of memory, and slow down the system, but only when first starting up, or updating definitions.  Other than that, it's no more of a dog than any other free AV.  Free for commercial purposes, likely to have definitions available forever, etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.clamwin.com/Although it is missing an on access scan , I am not sure if that is a plus of a minusI could live without an on-access scan ( tell your download manager to scan downloaded files ) , but Clamwin is completely unusable , IMHO , because it uses up much more system memory , and takes 4X as long to scan compared to the more common Free AVs.If you want real , free antivirus , go with MoonSecure ( v2.x ) , which is GPL , does on-access scanning , and uses the ClamAV database .
It does ( momentarily ) use up a lot of memory , and slow down the system , but only when first starting up , or updating definitions .
Other than that , it 's no more of a dog than any other free AV .
Free for commercial purposes , likely to have definitions available forever , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.clamwin.com/Although it is missing an on access scan, I am not sure if that is a plus of a minusI could live without an on-access scan (tell your download manager to scan downloaded files), but Clamwin is completely unusable, IMHO, because it uses up much more system memory, and takes 4X as long to scan compared to the more common Free AVs.If you want real, free antivirus, go with MoonSecure (v2.x), which is GPL, does on-access scanning, and uses the ClamAV database.
It does (momentarily) use up a lot of memory, and slow down the system, but only when first starting up, or updating definitions.
Other than that, it's no more of a dog than any other free AV.
Free for commercial purposes, likely to have definitions available forever, etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526378</id>
	<title>Re:Uh...Avast?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know what the authors problem is.  With Avast the first time you install it you don't have to register, eventually you'll have to register, but that is not for a few months.  After that you will have to re-register something like every 6 or 9 months.  Hell, its not like you even have to give them valid information.</p><p>I just installed version 5, absolutely no issues.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know what the authors problem is .
With Avast the first time you install it you do n't have to register , eventually you 'll have to register , but that is not for a few months .
After that you will have to re-register something like every 6 or 9 months .
Hell , its not like you even have to give them valid information.I just installed version 5 , absolutely no issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know what the authors problem is.
With Avast the first time you install it you don't have to register, eventually you'll have to register, but that is not for a few months.
After that you will have to re-register something like every 6 or 9 months.
Hell, its not like you even have to give them valid information.I just installed version 5, absolutely no issues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526968</id>
	<title>A better way of asking the question</title>
	<author>Ukab the Great</author>
	<datestamp>1268944260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which antivirus package do you infect Windows with?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which antivirus package do you infect Windows with ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which antivirus package do you infect Windows with?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531458</id>
	<title>Re:Registration isn't new</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268920500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used the free AVAST anti-virus software for several years and actually signed up for the pay version (Top end one, 3 machines 3 years) 'cause it was pretty cheap for coverage of 3 machines and has some nice features such as sandboxing apps and the free version has worked well for me, so a vote for the free AVAST from me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used the free AVAST anti-virus software for several years and actually signed up for the pay version ( Top end one , 3 machines 3 years ) 'cause it was pretty cheap for coverage of 3 machines and has some nice features such as sandboxing apps and the free version has worked well for me , so a vote for the free AVAST from me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used the free AVAST anti-virus software for several years and actually signed up for the pay version (Top end one, 3 machines 3 years) 'cause it was pretty cheap for coverage of 3 machines and has some nice features such as sandboxing apps and the free version has worked well for me, so a vote for the free AVAST from me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</id>
	<title>Why free?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268941680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I should think "friends/relatives who run Windows" would be exactly the type to appreciate the convenience of a low-impact reliable AV package, which means they may have to pay a few bucks.  It's fine to play FOS yourself or with trivial office or audio stuff, and I do it myself.  But I still give ESET a few shekels/year for each windows PC in my house.  It just makes sense to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I should think " friends/relatives who run Windows " would be exactly the type to appreciate the convenience of a low-impact reliable AV package , which means they may have to pay a few bucks .
It 's fine to play FOS yourself or with trivial office or audio stuff , and I do it myself .
But I still give ESET a few shekels/year for each windows PC in my house .
It just makes sense to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I should think "friends/relatives who run Windows" would be exactly the type to appreciate the convenience of a low-impact reliable AV package, which means they may have to pay a few bucks.
It's fine to play FOS yourself or with trivial office or audio stuff, and I do it myself.
But I still give ESET a few shekels/year for each windows PC in my house.
It just makes sense to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528004</id>
	<title>Shadowmagic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avira Antivir is my first choice</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira Antivir is my first choice</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira Antivir is my first choice</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531622</id>
	<title>Avira is the best free av</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268921700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can say that avira free-av is the best free one, it has one of the highest detection rates and is one of the fastes in the bunch. Read the av test websites...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can say that avira free-av is the best free one , it has one of the highest detection rates and is one of the fastes in the bunch .
Read the av test websites.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can say that avira free-av is the best free one, it has one of the highest detection rates and is one of the fastes in the bunch.
Read the av test websites...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533676</id>
	<title>Re:I dont use...</title>
	<author>tuxgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269030960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My laptop has vista on it. <br>I don't connect it to the tubes at all. <br>It still does weird shit all the time.<br>Does this mean vista is one large steaming pile of malware?</htmltext>
<tokenext>My laptop has vista on it .
I do n't connect it to the tubes at all .
It still does weird shit all the time.Does this mean vista is one large steaming pile of malware ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My laptop has vista on it.
I don't connect it to the tubes at all.
It still does weird shit all the time.Does this mean vista is one large steaming pile of malware?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526644</id>
	<title>Posted anonymously, so I don't get fired.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I run a network of -- well, it peaked at 70 XP SP3 workstations on a domain.</p><p>IE(7) is hidden and FF3.0 or 3.5 on all desktops, with AdBlock Pro.</p><p>Spybot 1.6 Teatimer in startup.</p><p>Users are all non-administrator under domain control.</p><p>In almost a year -- with *no* AV realtime at all -- we got bit exactly once, by Antivirus2009.  Spot manual scans come up clean, done with a current Windows<br>Ultimate Boot CD.  No untoward flows seen out through the firewall.</p><p>It may not be *about* viruses, anymore, per se, guys...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I run a network of -- well , it peaked at 70 XP SP3 workstations on a domain.IE ( 7 ) is hidden and FF3.0 or 3.5 on all desktops , with AdBlock Pro.Spybot 1.6 Teatimer in startup.Users are all non-administrator under domain control.In almost a year -- with * no * AV realtime at all -- we got bit exactly once , by Antivirus2009 .
Spot manual scans come up clean , done with a current WindowsUltimate Boot CD .
No untoward flows seen out through the firewall.It may not be * about * viruses , anymore , per se , guys.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I run a network of -- well, it peaked at 70 XP SP3 workstations on a domain.IE(7) is hidden and FF3.0 or 3.5 on all desktops, with AdBlock Pro.Spybot 1.6 Teatimer in startup.Users are all non-administrator under domain control.In almost a year -- with *no* AV realtime at all -- we got bit exactly once, by Antivirus2009.
Spot manual scans come up clean, done with a current WindowsUltimate Boot CD.
No untoward flows seen out through the firewall.It may not be *about* viruses, anymore, per se, guys...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526950</id>
	<title>None - Too much of a performance cost</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1268944200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've found that anti-virus software is almost always more annoying than malware.  In almost every instance the performance cost of anti-virus software quickly out weight the time it takes me to restore from a backup image.</p><p>I've found this to be true of any software package (commercial or otherwise) that does on access scanning, which without on-access scanning theres no point to use the software for me since our servers can handle background scheduled scans using clam.</p><p>I guess you could say I use clam running on FreeBSD accessing files via SMBFS on my Windows machines.</p><p>With the exception of the BootCamp partition I have for gaming, my personal Windows instances are all VMs with lots of snapshots that I can roll back to should I come to a problem.  Its just easier for me to use snapshots and virtual machines than to deal with av software.  I have a method of creating new snapshot thats relatively safe (restore to a known good snapshot, install updates/known safe new software, immediately shut down and take a snapshot to work from in the future.</p><p>AV would be easier, but all the time I spend waiting on compiles because the retarded AV software has to scan ever binary I make  and probably is retarded enough to scan all the source files each access to just makes it too inefficient for my tastes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've found that anti-virus software is almost always more annoying than malware .
In almost every instance the performance cost of anti-virus software quickly out weight the time it takes me to restore from a backup image.I 've found this to be true of any software package ( commercial or otherwise ) that does on access scanning , which without on-access scanning theres no point to use the software for me since our servers can handle background scheduled scans using clam.I guess you could say I use clam running on FreeBSD accessing files via SMBFS on my Windows machines.With the exception of the BootCamp partition I have for gaming , my personal Windows instances are all VMs with lots of snapshots that I can roll back to should I come to a problem .
Its just easier for me to use snapshots and virtual machines than to deal with av software .
I have a method of creating new snapshot thats relatively safe ( restore to a known good snapshot , install updates/known safe new software , immediately shut down and take a snapshot to work from in the future.AV would be easier , but all the time I spend waiting on compiles because the retarded AV software has to scan ever binary I make and probably is retarded enough to scan all the source files each access to just makes it too inefficient for my tastes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've found that anti-virus software is almost always more annoying than malware.
In almost every instance the performance cost of anti-virus software quickly out weight the time it takes me to restore from a backup image.I've found this to be true of any software package (commercial or otherwise) that does on access scanning, which without on-access scanning theres no point to use the software for me since our servers can handle background scheduled scans using clam.I guess you could say I use clam running on FreeBSD accessing files via SMBFS on my Windows machines.With the exception of the BootCamp partition I have for gaming, my personal Windows instances are all VMs with lots of snapshots that I can roll back to should I come to a problem.
Its just easier for me to use snapshots and virtual machines than to deal with av software.
I have a method of creating new snapshot thats relatively safe (restore to a known good snapshot, install updates/known safe new software, immediately shut down and take a snapshot to work from in the future.AV would be easier, but all the time I spend waiting on compiles because the retarded AV software has to scan ever binary I make  and probably is retarded enough to scan all the source files each access to just makes it too inefficient for my tastes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526926</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>Vu1turEMaN</author>
	<datestamp>1268944140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IIRC it's the lightest, free antivirus with an on-access/on-demand scanner already installed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IIRC it 's the lightest , free antivirus with an on-access/on-demand scanner already installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IIRC it's the lightest, free antivirus with an on-access/on-demand scanner already installed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528530</id>
	<title>Re:buy a mac or install linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268905560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, you have drunk the apple Kool-Aid!<br>You think macs don't have viruses? Think again. The truth is Macs have fewer viruses than pc's, but they still have them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , you have drunk the apple Kool-Aid ! You think macs do n't have viruses ?
Think again .
The truth is Macs have fewer viruses than pc 's , but they still have them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, you have drunk the apple Kool-Aid!You think macs don't have viruses?
Think again.
The truth is Macs have fewer viruses than pc's, but they still have them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530040</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>chekk4</author>
	<datestamp>1268911560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>NOD32 version 2.7 was good, but all versions since are notably slower and more bloated.  Version 4 is automatically antivirus AND antispyware with no option to turn off the antispyware.
I tried Avira Personal (free) and then ponied up for Premium.  On sale, it cost $22CAD.  Cheap, effective and light on resources.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NOD32 version 2.7 was good , but all versions since are notably slower and more bloated .
Version 4 is automatically antivirus AND antispyware with no option to turn off the antispyware .
I tried Avira Personal ( free ) and then ponied up for Premium .
On sale , it cost $ 22CAD .
Cheap , effective and light on resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NOD32 version 2.7 was good, but all versions since are notably slower and more bloated.
Version 4 is automatically antivirus AND antispyware with no option to turn off the antispyware.
I tried Avira Personal (free) and then ponied up for Premium.
On sale, it cost $22CAD.
Cheap, effective and light on resources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527304</id>
	<title>Re:clam</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268945220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not good at all. Too many false positives. For instance, ClamWin just deleted my Mom's userinit.exe on a false positive. Yes, that means you can't get into windows without a BartPE boot disk or similar. Then you have to find another userinit.exe and replace it and get ClamWin off before it does it again. Anyway, that is just ridulously sloppy. I had hoped ClamWin wouldn't be crap. I didn't need something mind-bogglingly great, just serviceable. ClamWin is not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not good at all .
Too many false positives .
For instance , ClamWin just deleted my Mom 's userinit.exe on a false positive .
Yes , that means you ca n't get into windows without a BartPE boot disk or similar .
Then you have to find another userinit.exe and replace it and get ClamWin off before it does it again .
Anyway , that is just ridulously sloppy .
I had hoped ClamWin would n't be crap .
I did n't need something mind-bogglingly great , just serviceable .
ClamWin is not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not good at all.
Too many false positives.
For instance, ClamWin just deleted my Mom's userinit.exe on a false positive.
Yes, that means you can't get into windows without a BartPE boot disk or similar.
Then you have to find another userinit.exe and replace it and get ClamWin off before it does it again.
Anyway, that is just ridulously sloppy.
I had hoped ClamWin wouldn't be crap.
I didn't need something mind-bogglingly great, just serviceable.
ClamWin is not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528038</id>
	<title>Re:Why free?</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1268904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there ANY reason to believe the for-pay versions perform better than the free ones?  According to EVERY comparitive ive ever seen, its a wash, with the lead many times going to a free AV.<br> <br>

That argument doesnt work with software, compare Norton with MSE or Avast, or Roxio with CDBurnerXP, or IE to chrome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there ANY reason to believe the for-pay versions perform better than the free ones ?
According to EVERY comparitive ive ever seen , its a wash , with the lead many times going to a free AV .
That argument doesnt work with software , compare Norton with MSE or Avast , or Roxio with CDBurnerXP , or IE to chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there ANY reason to believe the for-pay versions perform better than the free ones?
According to EVERY comparitive ive ever seen, its a wash, with the lead many times going to a free AV.
That argument doesnt work with software, compare Norton with MSE or Avast, or Roxio with CDBurnerXP, or IE to chrome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530066</id>
	<title>Re:That's what we use</title>
	<author>captbob2002</author>
	<datestamp>1268911740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is a shame to hear.  I used Sophos for our Windows/Mac/Solaris/Linux machines  for almost ten years.  (the two later b/c the hosted windows files via Samba)  And found it to be quick and light weight.  NEVER had a virus issue on a machine running Sophos.  The the edict came down from on high that we MUST use McAfee like the rest of the university.  What utter crap.  It rendered older machines unusable, would claim that it was updating when it wasn't, and had the feature that it kept missing viruses.</p><p>I must admit that toward the end I was getting annoyed with Sophos - needing an MS Windows machine to act as the "Manager" for the enterprise install of Sophos.  At the time we didn't *have* any windows servers, nor did we want them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is a shame to hear .
I used Sophos for our Windows/Mac/Solaris/Linux machines for almost ten years .
( the two later b/c the hosted windows files via Samba ) And found it to be quick and light weight .
NEVER had a virus issue on a machine running Sophos .
The the edict came down from on high that we MUST use McAfee like the rest of the university .
What utter crap .
It rendered older machines unusable , would claim that it was updating when it was n't , and had the feature that it kept missing viruses.I must admit that toward the end I was getting annoyed with Sophos - needing an MS Windows machine to act as the " Manager " for the enterprise install of Sophos .
At the time we did n't * have * any windows servers , nor did we want them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is a shame to hear.
I used Sophos for our Windows/Mac/Solaris/Linux machines  for almost ten years.
(the two later b/c the hosted windows files via Samba)  And found it to be quick and light weight.
NEVER had a virus issue on a machine running Sophos.
The the edict came down from on high that we MUST use McAfee like the rest of the university.
What utter crap.
It rendered older machines unusable, would claim that it was updating when it wasn't, and had the feature that it kept missing viruses.I must admit that toward the end I was getting annoyed with Sophos - needing an MS Windows machine to act as the "Manager" for the enterprise install of Sophos.
At the time we didn't *have* any windows servers, nor did we want them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537804</id>
	<title>Avira AntiVir</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269014460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Avira AntiVir Personal Edition. It's free and it only shows a popup when updates it's signatures (can be sheduled). It has extensive options and you can turn on/off the resident portion (the guard) temporarily, add exceptions etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Avira AntiVir Personal Edition .
It 's free and it only shows a popup when updates it 's signatures ( can be sheduled ) .
It has extensive options and you can turn on/off the resident portion ( the guard ) temporarily , add exceptions etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Avira AntiVir Personal Edition.
It's free and it only shows a popup when updates it's signatures (can be sheduled).
It has extensive options and you can turn on/off the resident portion (the guard) temporarily, add exceptions etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278</id>
	<title>None</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268942280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, no antivirus. But then, I only use Windows occasionally to play games. I'm surprised I only had one (1) virus problem over the last 5 years in Windows, which I fixed thanks to a targeted tool. Apart from that, I practice Safe Computing, and that appears to have kept me out of trouble.</p><p>However, for all that I know, my windows system may be part of a few botnets that don't cause me any problems<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:\</p><p>On my family's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could, and left the others to fend for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , no antivirus .
But then , I only use Windows occasionally to play games .
I 'm surprised I only had one ( 1 ) virus problem over the last 5 years in Windows , which I fixed thanks to a targeted tool .
Apart from that , I practice Safe Computing , and that appears to have kept me out of trouble.However , for all that I know , my windows system may be part of a few botnets that do n't cause me any problems : \ On my family 's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could , and left the others to fend for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, no antivirus.
But then, I only use Windows occasionally to play games.
I'm surprised I only had one (1) virus problem over the last 5 years in Windows, which I fixed thanks to a targeted tool.
Apart from that, I practice Safe Computing, and that appears to have kept me out of trouble.However, for all that I know, my windows system may be part of a few botnets that don't cause me any problems :\On my family's computers... I forced Ubuntu upon those I could, and left the others to fend for themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526744</id>
	<title>Re:GNU/Linux!</title>
	<author>Corson</author>
	<datestamp>1268943600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Really! And how do you run Delphi on Linux? DVDFab? DVDLabPro? Camtasia? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R. videogames? Vector NTI? There is no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel, at least not on Ubuntu 9.10 (i.e., the Linux distro that I run on one computer and two Windows machines in VirtualBox). How do I hook-up my Sony HD videocamera and my canon camera to a GNU/Linux machine? I know, it's sad.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really !
And how do you run Delphi on Linux ?
DVDFab ? DVDLabPro ?
Camtasia ? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R .
videogames ? Vector NTI ?
There is no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel , at least not on Ubuntu 9.10 ( i.e. , the Linux distro that I run on one computer and two Windows machines in VirtualBox ) .
How do I hook-up my Sony HD videocamera and my canon camera to a GNU/Linux machine ?
I know , it 's sad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really!
And how do you run Delphi on Linux?
DVDFab? DVDLabPro?
Camtasia? The S.T.A.L.K.E.R.
videogames? Vector NTI?
There is no support for my Logitech webcams in the Linux kernel, at least not on Ubuntu 9.10 (i.e., the Linux distro that I run on one computer and two Windows machines in VirtualBox).
How do I hook-up my Sony HD videocamera and my canon camera to a GNU/Linux machine?
I know, it's sad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528422</id>
	<title>The only winning move is not to play.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268905080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's pointless to try to keep Windows clean. It can't be just the market share, there must be something fundamentally wrong in the way it is designed. The family's PC was always full of malware. The antivirus would always ring alerts with warnings, yet fail to fix a thing. I got so tired of this shit that I pretty much forced dad to move to Linux. He adapted very quickly, and I heard no more complains ever since.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's pointless to try to keep Windows clean .
It ca n't be just the market share , there must be something fundamentally wrong in the way it is designed .
The family 's PC was always full of malware .
The antivirus would always ring alerts with warnings , yet fail to fix a thing .
I got so tired of this shit that I pretty much forced dad to move to Linux .
He adapted very quickly , and I heard no more complains ever since .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's pointless to try to keep Windows clean.
It can't be just the market share, there must be something fundamentally wrong in the way it is designed.
The family's PC was always full of malware.
The antivirus would always ring alerts with warnings, yet fail to fix a thing.
I got so tired of this shit that I pretty much forced dad to move to Linux.
He adapted very quickly, and I heard no more complains ever since.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531426</id>
	<title>the best free anti-virus s/w for a pc?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268920260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>linux:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>linux : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>linux:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526590</id>
	<title>Test web site would be great</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There should exist a test site where you would be able to go to to evaluate your anti virus software.<br>It would attempt to install some harmless malware/virus known by the tools<br>using some of the shady methods used by malware/viruses etc.</p><p>That way you could safely evaluate your machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There should exist a test site where you would be able to go to to evaluate your anti virus software.It would attempt to install some harmless malware/virus known by the toolsusing some of the shady methods used by malware/viruses etc.That way you could safely evaluate your machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There should exist a test site where you would be able to go to to evaluate your anti virus software.It would attempt to install some harmless malware/virus known by the toolsusing some of the shady methods used by malware/viruses etc.That way you could safely evaluate your machine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528020</id>
	<title>Dude :) It's slashdot here. use linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268904060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>slashdot users are allergic to windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>slashdot users are allergic to windows : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>slashdot users are allergic to windows :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529366</id>
	<title>Re:None...</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1268908560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Note that I'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do, as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall.</p></div><p>I see a lot of people claim things like this. The question I ask every one of them, especially if they run XP (an outdated OS missing a number of modern security features, like application sandboxing and ASLR), is whether they run as Administrator or not. 95\% still say Yes (beats the approximately 99.9\% otherwise, but... still too high). Running as Admin is a *terrible* idea - you might as well be running Windows ME, in terms of security - yet far too many people do so anyhow.</p><p>I'll grant you that running as a non-admin on XP or older is a pain - it was that pain which drove me to Linux in the first place. Now I dual-boot Win7 and Linux (Vista and Linux on my older machine) and things have worked out very well. I don't have any continuous monitoring AV running (I keep a copy of ClamAV for on-demand scans), I don't disable UAC or Protected Mode (in fact, I tweak the UAC settings and remove FlashPlayer's exemption regarding Protect Mode). A few UAC or sudo prompts a month is easily worth the extra protection that not running as Admin provides. Security is all about defense in depth, and relying solely on anti-intrusion methods is stupid.</p><p>Yes, there's still a lot of harm that can be done with standard user permissions. However, most malware authors, especially for Windows, assume that their code will run as Admin/root, and therefore it would fail on my system anyhow. Furthermore, without Admin, malware can't make itself un-removable. It might send spam or DDOS attempts, but it couldn't edit my firewall settings, hide itself from task manager, install kernel-mode code, or prevent me from deleting it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Note that I 'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do , as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall.I see a lot of people claim things like this .
The question I ask every one of them , especially if they run XP ( an outdated OS missing a number of modern security features , like application sandboxing and ASLR ) , is whether they run as Administrator or not .
95 \ % still say Yes ( beats the approximately 99.9 \ % otherwise , but... still too high ) .
Running as Admin is a * terrible * idea - you might as well be running Windows ME , in terms of security - yet far too many people do so anyhow.I 'll grant you that running as a non-admin on XP or older is a pain - it was that pain which drove me to Linux in the first place .
Now I dual-boot Win7 and Linux ( Vista and Linux on my older machine ) and things have worked out very well .
I do n't have any continuous monitoring AV running ( I keep a copy of ClamAV for on-demand scans ) , I do n't disable UAC or Protected Mode ( in fact , I tweak the UAC settings and remove FlashPlayer 's exemption regarding Protect Mode ) .
A few UAC or sudo prompts a month is easily worth the extra protection that not running as Admin provides .
Security is all about defense in depth , and relying solely on anti-intrusion methods is stupid.Yes , there 's still a lot of harm that can be done with standard user permissions .
However , most malware authors , especially for Windows , assume that their code will run as Admin/root , and therefore it would fail on my system anyhow .
Furthermore , without Admin , malware ca n't make itself un-removable .
It might send spam or DDOS attempts , but it could n't edit my firewall settings , hide itself from task manager , install kernel-mode code , or prevent me from deleting it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Note that I'm a smart computer user who keeps everything patched and up to do, as well as knows how to configure a hardware router/firewall.I see a lot of people claim things like this.
The question I ask every one of them, especially if they run XP (an outdated OS missing a number of modern security features, like application sandboxing and ASLR), is whether they run as Administrator or not.
95\% still say Yes (beats the approximately 99.9\% otherwise, but... still too high).
Running as Admin is a *terrible* idea - you might as well be running Windows ME, in terms of security - yet far too many people do so anyhow.I'll grant you that running as a non-admin on XP or older is a pain - it was that pain which drove me to Linux in the first place.
Now I dual-boot Win7 and Linux (Vista and Linux on my older machine) and things have worked out very well.
I don't have any continuous monitoring AV running (I keep a copy of ClamAV for on-demand scans), I don't disable UAC or Protected Mode (in fact, I tweak the UAC settings and remove FlashPlayer's exemption regarding Protect Mode).
A few UAC or sudo prompts a month is easily worth the extra protection that not running as Admin provides.
Security is all about defense in depth, and relying solely on anti-intrusion methods is stupid.Yes, there's still a lot of harm that can be done with standard user permissions.
However, most malware authors, especially for Windows, assume that their code will run as Admin/root, and therefore it would fail on my system anyhow.
Furthermore, without Admin, malware can't make itself un-removable.
It might send spam or DDOS attempts, but it couldn't edit my firewall settings, hide itself from task manager, install kernel-mode code, or prevent me from deleting it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526660</id>
	<title>The best ive found</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268943360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>is GNU/Linux.</htmltext>
<tokenext>is GNU/Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is GNU/Linux.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526470
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31560914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526934
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533606
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530364
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530320
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527494
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_136</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534716
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526172
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527464
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526202
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31536928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528192
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526826
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530934
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533676
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531674
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31548074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526744
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527418
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535768
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31538960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_135</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31550016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527262
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530988
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541664
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526232
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526330
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532154
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530904
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_18_1831246_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527360
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526364
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533676
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541664
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528530
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526138
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527354
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526450
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530364
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527418
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526562
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31560914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534816
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529314
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527820
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526808
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527046
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531126
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529190
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31541092
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526278
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526528
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528394
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527276
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527284
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527022
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534638
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31542682
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31538960
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535768
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529556
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528000
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526492
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526072
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526930
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528692
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531288
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527734
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31548074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526826
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530934
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531674
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526448
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527312
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526116
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31550016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527098
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526744
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527380
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534904
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526330
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527262
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528038
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31525996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526284
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535262
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31532758
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528278
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529382
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533124
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31534902
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527316
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528192
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31529140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530066
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526926
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526348
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526172
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526202
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31536928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527096
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526408
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526934
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31530898
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31535296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526886
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528044
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527188
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526320
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526878
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537074
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527810
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527214
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526872
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526502
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31537196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31531704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31533606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527468
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31528326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31526556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_18_1831246.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_18_1831246.31527070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
