The offline installer debate
I've read the several message threads around the offline installer thing, and I think I see both sides.
Seems to me the provision of an offline installer is justified, it's just complicated.
Say, for instance, a support engineer from a reseller is asked to replace an old, u/s or FUBARed AV on a machine. Don't know about you, but I'd FAR rather do as much cleaning as possible, followed by the install of a trusted system disconnected from the network, even if the engine I was installing was only up-to-date a month ago: once it's on and the system is at least reasonably (if not certifiably) okay, I'd hope that the updates would be enough to do the last bit without massive network requirements of a (maybe rural) client site?
I get that F-Secure would rather ensure the most up-to-date everything if at all possible, but it it really impossible to come up with a compromise that could be said to be "good enough"?