本帖最后由 Dizziness2929 于 2024-4-28 09:59 编辑
首先，多个杀软并不一定会冲突蓝屏（更有可能是引发完全不知道该怎么解决的问题），EMSISOFT专门写过文章澄清这一点：https://www.emsisoft.com/en/blog/29265/do-not-run-multiple-antivirus/
Modern antivirus/antimalware software acts like an extra layer that sits between the base of the operating system and the apps and programs that run on it. Developing this type of software isn’t trivial and requires many years of experience due to the sheer number of variables to consider. Protection programs are created in many different ways and often developers don’t stick to recommended coding standards. In particular, the use of undocumented operating system interfaces often cause unexpected crashes or freezes that are very difficult to resolve.
现代防病毒/反恶意软件软件就像一个额外的层，位于操作系统基础与在其上运行的应用程序和程序之间。开发此类软件并非易事，由于需要考虑的变量数量巨大，因此需要多年的经验。保护程序可以通过多种不同的方式创建，并且开发人员通常不遵守推荐的编码标准。特别是，使用未记录的操作系统接口通常会导致难以解决的意外崩溃或冻结。
Sometimes it’s difficult to tell whether some vendors don’t have the required expertise to create their products in a way that makes them compatible with others, or if they simply don’t care and expect their customers to sort the problems out on their own.
有时很难判断某些供应商是否不具备所需的专业知识来创建与其他供应商兼容的产品，或者他们是否根本不关心并期望客户自行解决问题。
We at Emsisoft always try to make our product compatible with as many others as possible and as some of our early users may still remember, our products were once even sold as ‘additional protection’ to classic antivirus products.c
Emsisoft 始终努力使我们的产品与尽可能多的其他产品兼容，我们的一些早期用户可能还记得，我们的产品甚至曾经作为经典防病毒产品的“附加保护”出售。
而关于Windows Defender，我引用一句话：击败反作弊最好的方法，就是犯罪分子不断地声称此反作弊机制没有用、制造系统崩溃等等。这是犯罪分子常见的战术（极端的放大真实存在的缺陷，引导其他人放弃使用此技术）。因此这话是不是用户说的都得打个问号。
就像在公司里一样，强人是可以共存的，但是相互离间的事情也避免不了
如果说公司里两个强人闹到了你在我走，我在你走的二选一的情况，就是领导压不住，镇服不了多人
我不知道你说这个是什么意思，但我想说一件事：Palo Alto就是从CheckPoint分出去的，原因就是PA（原CP的CTO/首席技术官）觉得CP的领导是个纯（友好度）。
你用的比喻完全是错的，确切的比喻是：你把几个互相都不会和对方好好说话交流的大手子聚在了一个地方，那么结果就是看上去你招了一堆大手子，实际上提升的效率只有不到一半（而且极大的提升了这几个人互相不对付造成重大业务损失的可能）——这在行政管理上是一个大灾难。
引用EMSISOFT的话：
4. More isn’t always more: Little advantage for high resource cost
4. 更多并不总是更多：高资源成本优势不大
This is actually the strongest reason against running two full protection systems simultaneously. Virus/malware protection products today are rather complex and the exponentially growing number of threats (it doubles every year) requires a lot of code to keep the computer safe. This naturally results in a relatively high usage of computer resources, especially its memory (RAM). By running two full antivirus programs all the time, you’re basically wasting resources, because 90 percent or more of their functionality will be the same. All available protection products of reputable vendors today operate on very high quality standards and detection rates often only differ by about 1-2 percent according to test labs.
这实际上是反对同时运行两个完整保护系统的最有力原因。当今的病毒/恶意软件防护产品相当复杂，威胁数量呈指数级增长（每年翻倍），需要大量代码来保证计算机安全。这自然会导致计算机资源的使用率相对较高，尤其是内存（RAM）。一直运行两个完整的防病毒程序基本上是在浪费资源，因为它们 90% 或更多的功能是相同的。如今，信誉良好的供应商提供的所有可用防护产品都按照非常高的质量标准运行，根据测试实验室的数据，检测率通常仅相差约 1-2%。
So, you might end up spending 0.5 to 1 GB or more of your available RAM to bring your detection rate up from, say, 98 percent to 99 percent. But is this minuscule improvement really worth it? Every new file on the computer would need to be scanned by both products, triggering two complex sets of code that use a lot of your CPU time, which could undoubtedly be better used for other tasks – you know, stuff you actually want to do on the computer.
因此，您最终可能会花费 0.5 到 1 GB 或更多的可用 RAM 来将检测率从 98% 提高到 99%。但这种微小的改进真的值得吗？计算机上的每个新文件都需要由这两种产品扫描，从而触发两组复杂的代码，这些代码会占用大量 CPU 时间，这无疑可以更好地用于其他任务 - 你知道，你真正想做的事情电脑。
The better option is to go for one product that comes with multiple scanning engines that are tuned to work together seamlessly, or a product that uses a layered protection approach with different technologies, or, better still, a product that implements both.
更好的选择是选择一款配备多个扫描引擎的产品，这些扫描引擎经过调整可以无缝协同工作，或者使用采用不同技术的分层保护方法的产品，或者更好的是，选择同时实现这两种引擎的产品。
|
楼主: 驭龙
[复制链接]
发表于 2024-3-19 17:29:26
楼主
