🚀 go-pugleaf

 John McAfee writes:

 >This is news to the alleged vendor.  Since McAfee Associates is the
 >only vendor of the McAfee products I assume Ross means us.  We have
 >never refused to sell our products to anyone, and our policies will
 >not change.  It's a strange comment considering that 99.9% of all of
 >our users use our products without telling us or paying us anyway (one
 >of the side effects of shareware).  How would we ever know?

This is not true. As the college virus tracker, I try to keep
up-to-date copies of most anti-viral products. Of course, I can obtain
copies of McAfee'ssoftware but when I try to pay the fee, I get back a
form letter saying they will not sell a single copy to a college -- we
must spend thousands to obtain a site license for ALL our PC's,
whether we would install the programs or not. If this is not a refusal
to sell, I would not know what else to call it.

We have a site license from another vendor which was considerably
cheaper.  Even that one is quite expensive considering that we don't
actually use the product on all the college computers. We are also
looking into a site license for F-PROT, since that is certainly the
cheapest site license around.

I did notice the inaccuracy in VSUM's Joshi listing. I, too, did not
want to nitpick a document that obviously requires great time and
effort to produce. I have tested several products with the Joshi virus
and all can now remove it. I have not been keeping up with my VIRUS-L
reading or I would have responded to that posting. CPAV, Vi-Spy and
F-PROT will all find and remove it. My copy of Virex-PC did not but
the dates on the files are over a year old, even though we purchased
from Egghead only 4 months ago. (I have never received any update
info). I do not remember if NAV removed it or not. I rarely use it any
more in tests since it performed poorly when first tried.

 Bonnie Scollon
 Oakland Community College
 (in Oakland County MICHIGAN, not California)