Has the AV World Marketing gone mad!?

Once upon a time there was McAfee & Norton, they must have bred or something because now theres hundreds of the damn things, all shapes, sizes and colours

 

There's money to be had.

 

Company after company promising one suite that does it all, when the real solution is

Pick 1 blacklist measure (aka an AV, not a suite)

Chose 2 whitelist measures, preferably non-administrator + SRP or Sandboxie or Defensewall

Enable Windows Firewall

Your set.

 

I wish the solution were so simple....

 

I couldn't be more happy that those are not our only 2 choices.

 

Amen.

 

ot posts removed. stay on subject please. Thank you

 

And there's nothing wrong with it. Competition brings development.

 

It's no different to seeing various kinds of cars for example; it would be boring if there were only two brands available.

 

A world Norton and Mcafee only existed, and Norton ruled #1 without competition? I cannot imagine it.

 

Well look at what the other products have done (ie kaspersky, eset, avast, etc) they pushed the big two to make a better product. Competition is good, comusmers have choices as it should be.

 

Not long time ago there were a few millions using the internet, now they are billions. The next decades will be very interesting in the computer security domain.

 

LOL! Too right squire!

 

You'd be surprised how many companies actually existed back then and were not called McAfee or Norton. For example avast! (former ALWIL) dates back to mid 80's. Same for AVIRA which used to be called H+BEDV. Trend Micro also exists for ages. Basically all companies that mean something today were founded in mid to late 80's.

 

Fair enough everyone, however your missing the point I was making, way back when there were a few choices to be had, now its all out war! in the shape of dare I say it A vs B/C/D/E/F etc etc...It's ridiculous! for some Companies, if they don't deliver it's Corporate Suicide

 

And what development has that been, pray tell? Apart from very few developments that arguably have improved detection, AV software still operates on the same basis it did in the 90s. I also don't understand the thread too well. It's implying that there are hundreds of good choices to choose from, when in reality it's less than 100.

 

And why is that bad? Back then if you didn't like any of the offerings, you had to pick something. But today you have a wide selection of quality products so really, pretty much anyone can find something that suits him well. Don't like the interface, pick some other product. Don't like the detection anymore, pick something else. Don't like their support? There is always someone that does that better. It's nothing bad for as long as they all work for the same good cause.

 

I'm not splitting security software as pure avs or such, I'm looking at overall choices.

Development of sandboxes (i.e. Kaspersky, comodo), reputation based analysis (i.e. Norton), fingerprinting for quicker scan times (i.e. Kaspersky), behavioral analysis (i.e. almost all), competitive prices, promos,phishing protection, better self protection, automated analysis and cloud for quicker signature pushing.... are some what I consider improvements.

 

I'm not sure if this is straying off-topic a tad (or not), but I am interested in how the bundling of MSE (Defender?) with Win 8 is going to affect marketing strategies.

Many computers, particularly laptops/netbooks, have trial versions pre-installed (often Sophos, McAfee or BullGuard) & many stores often include prepaid AVs in the 'deal' so to speak.

If MS market the fact that you don't actually need to purchase an additional AV program on top of the price of the machine/OS itself, I can see this definitely affecting the way other AV companies market their own products.

I'm not so sure how this scenario is going to affect security nerds Wilders Security Forum members, like ourselves, who are usually a bit more informed than your average computer user.

What I am trying to say, hopefully without being too patronising to the average user, is that many of the people that I know personally, including quite computer-literate colleagues, is that they have absolutely no idea that there are even freeware AV alternatives. Most of them, even when I inform them about this, seem incredulous to the fact that a freeware AV program can have the same efficacy as a vendor version. They just bought the computer with Norton/McAfee (or other) didn't give it a second thought & just annually paid their respective dues.

Imagine what will happen when MS advertises the fact that you can buy Win 8 with a built in anti-virus program.

 

Making people pay more for your product is a nice way to convince them it's "premium."

And I think 3rd party AV's will just start marketing that they protect better or have more features.

 

LOL Yeah, but how many really fall for it?

And how many average punters will buy Windows with its own AV & never take any notice of 3rd party AVs?

 

I hear so many people say that a free AV will never be as good as a paid AV. No evidence to back it up, it just "sounds right."

Unfortunately we'll have to wait a few years for Win8 to become mainstream for us to find out.

 

Many people do seem to have an irrational fear of freeware, that's for sure.

 

The marketing is that if you pay for something it must be better. The old adage applies "Nothing is ever free", of course that's what a lot of people feel. Free AV's can't be as good as paid ones. Why would they give it away for free then?