"Tim Vander Kooi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 01/04/2008 11:14:46 AM:

> The fact REALLY is that Symantec buys up good software and 
> makes it bad.

That may be, but it appears NOD (the current list favorite) just shot 
themselves in the foot too.

I find that ironic and amusing at the same time.   Perhaps it's just me.

Now, I'm no Symantec apologist (far from it) but I think if anything, it's 
important to point out that there isn't any one program or vendor out 
there that is perfect, and that simply changing software vendors isn't 
always the magic bullet.  I fight that battle all the time - sometimes it 
is better to grunt it out and make your current solution work then 
investing the time and resources into completely redeploying an new 
solution and re-training everyone.  Obviously, if you only have a couple 
of hundred PC's it's far easier to rip and replace then when you have 
70,000 - but there are still costs (at least in time and productivity) 
that should be considered.

I have been watching the discussions of AV products over the past few 
months pretty closely because Symantec clients are such a pain to 
maintain.  But it looks like with their new product, there is finally some 
hope after all.  And their management console *is* very nice, even if 
maintaining the 9.x, 10.x and 11.x clients are a total PITA.  So far I 
haven't seen enough pro's/con's from other products discussed to convince 
me to try to gear up for a change in my organization.  I freely admit some 
of that is the difficulties of doing so politically vs. product 
capabilities - not technical reasons, but it's still part of the equation.

Eric Eskam
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The contents of this message are mine personally and do not reflect any 
position of the U.S. Government
"The human mind treats a new idea the same way the body treats a strange 
protein; it rejects it."
-  P. B. Medawar
~ Upgrade to Next Generation Antispam/Antivirus with Ninja!    ~
~ <http://www.sunbelt-software.com/SunbeltMessagingNinja.cfm>  ~

Reply via email to