"martin" wrote in message
...
Microsoft occasionally anticipate problems before they happen whereas
Symantec react to problems. For example Microsoft provided a patch to
prevent Blaster type worms in July 2003, before Blaster attacks
started.
It's safer to take the input from both companies,BUT if I could only
chose one I would chose Symantec :-)
--

Guys, you're missing the point! Symantec and Microsoft do different
things - MS to my knowledge have *never* released anything to do with a
virus. If you don't update both, you either don't understand what you're
doing (which is fine) or you're a misguided fool (which is not!).

Microsoft update Windows and Office. Symantec update their own anti-virus
and other products. Having one or the other up to date only will never be
secure. MS didn't provide a patch to prevent the Blaster worm (it is not a
virus), they released a patch to fix a vulnerability in their software. The
worm happens to exploit this and companies like Symantec, McAfee, etc.
release DATs to detect (and hopefully prevent if you got the DAT before the
worm tried to infect).

It's not "safer" to update both - it's absolutely necessary.


a