
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
"Robert L. Bass" wrote: > > > The vendors who deliver books in a non-executable format avoid > > all these risks. > > I think you've got it around the wrong way, Chuck. Honest vendors who use > executables are not exposing themselves or their clients to risks. Jerks > who imbed spyware and such in their executables are a problem but that > doesn't make executables as a group less safe. Yes, executables are less safe. It is IMPOSSIBLE to imbed anything, virus or spyware, in a PDF. The same is not true of an exe. How do you know the "honest" vendor from the one who might be deciding to use spyware, or who accidently ends up with a virus? > > Anyone who uses due diligence can usually remain virus free. For the most part, agreed. > I update my > anti-virus software regularly and I only DL from vendors I know and trust. Me too, but I have still ended up with two viruses. And how can you really know who to trust? > Whenever a hole is discovered in my OS or any of the SW I use I install the > appropriate patch. While no system is truly perfect, I feel I'm reasonably > safe. Yes, reasonably, unless you are running windows, and then all bets are off :-) > > Getting back to the subject, if you don't want to DL an EXE, then don't. > But that doesn't mean that the author has done something wrong. It just > means that you are nervous about executables. That's nothing to object to > IMO. This is a free forum, right? People are permitted to voice an opinion, right? It is perfectly reasonable to comment on and object to the use of an exe to deliver a book. It's also perfectly reasonable for others, such as yourself, to voice counter opinions. If the author is listening, he might choose to keep using an exe in the future, or perhaps not... Chuck
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |