Discussion in 'other software & services' started by rolarocka, Jun 11, 2009.
It doesn't surprise me. When one reads articles like this Microsoft puts the kibosh on Facebook worm Koobface stating:
and see the present Families Cleaned by the Malicious Software Removal Tool, those who religiously update their systems during the monthly Patch Tuesdays, have been helping MS develop their free AV all along! I see it as a good thing.
IMO the goal of M$'s freebies is & always has been to bankrupt its competitors in order to further expand its monopoly.
Free Antivirus of M$, I still doubt that it will be truly free, I also doubt that it will be competitive against established avs.
Does anybody follow Windows Licence scams', M$ origally wanted a pay as you go type of deal on windows XP and just recently MS wanted to limit the number of applications to three in the Windows 7 starter Edition but just Back off on that. Since when does M$ make a AV or ANYTING that someone else doesn't make better.
I'll never use it,period.
I wouldn't be so cynical, and for once it would break somebody else's monopoly on new PCs: Symantec's omnipresence.
I won't lose any sleep wondering about Microsft vs. Symantec or McAfee.
As long as there are other free options that is.
IF its uses the same engine as forefront,is light and reliable then maybe symantec,mcafee etc will have to improve so people pay for there products.
more compotition the better IMO.
It will be another flop show.Rather Microsoft can hire companies like kaspersky, nod32 , which have advanced virus detection.
Not that I'm against Microsoft shipping a free AV together with their O.S, or even a standalone application, only. But, I'd rather see Microsoft "offering" group policy editor in every Windows version, rather than just in the most expensive ones.
But, in what matters to the AV, if it comes shipped with Windows 7, then I hope this will end with those trial versions that come already installed, and most people believe they have a full version, and of course, updated antivirus, when the opposite happens.
All of you that bash Microsoft have the right not to use their products if you so choose. But at least they are offering the new AV as a free product. And their AV product has been improving with time. I was useing most of the established security products when they they first started out and none of them were doing any better than Microsoft in their their early offerings either. I think I will keep an open mind and give them the benefit of the doubt until they have had a chance to prove the worth of their new AV one way or the other.
I get a lot of laughs from threads like this... what ever did Microsoft did to you? Did they kill your babies or rape your women?! What? I'd like to know the cause for so much hate. It's a bloody software company, and above all, it's a business. They exist to make money.
They offer something for free and you all moan and whine and throw wild and irrational accusations into the air like it's some conspiracy to destroy the "Free World". It's a FREE product. Don't like it, don't use it. In fact, don't like MS? Don't use their products! Go use bloody Linux and stop acting like a bunch of immature trolls. And typing M$ only makes you look stupid.
Don't like Microsoft? Go Linux, go Apple, go IBM, go Sun, go whine somewhere else where people care about your "struggle". No one forces you to use their products. Get over it.
Good or bad (I personally think it's a good thing), if it comes bundled with the OS on new PCs, it will most certainly steal away a lot of the Symantec and McAfee type business.
Sounds like something from the last century.
They exist not only to make money, they also exist for control and they love all sorts of restrictions. Windows is a very special hell which surely makes fun because of the huge software library and the comfortable handling but also because of these millions of vulnerabilities and secrets that one can unhide but on the other hand the hate sermons are understandable because there is so much diabolic in it preserved.
One of the many negative aspects often attributed to MS OSs (particularly the early versions of XP) was a sort of indifference from the MS programmers to code security oriented systems favoring a user friendly approach instead.
This trend has changed with Vista, being totally designed with security in mind, providing processes like UAC and Windows Defender, a good firewall, and according to this thread a free antivirus.
It seems to me that MS has been reacting constructively to criticism about security in the past. For some strange reasons instead of harvesting some kind of positive consensus, a lot people seem to look at them only as a money making machine especially in a country (the United States) where capitalism has always been the only way of life since its inception.
Well said. MS bashing contributes nothing to the discussion.
It wont come bundled because of anti-trust issues. It may be less effective bundled as well because if it is on all Win7 computers, virus makers will be sure to test their viruses against Morro. The one benefit is that with MS behind a free AV, it will force the other security companies to offer more in their paid services. I know there are already 3 free products on the market but they arent extremely well known and havent been applying much pressure to the heavy weights.
Strange thing isn´t it.
They are a money making machine. Just like Apple or any other public company, it has a legal duty to deliver shareholder value. I agree with your sentiment though the insanely childish responses to Microsoft are annoying and shallow. They doubtless spring from their virtual monopoly. People used to resent IBM in the same way, and before that NCR and their cash registers monopoly.
Microsoft has been:
1. Hardening Windows
2. Adding anti-malware features
both of which are positive steps forward.
This latest move will probably not be welcomed by AV companies (except possibly Kaspersky) however I for one believe that as long as the option to replace it with an alternative exists and that equal access to the OS is provided to all trusted antivirus vendors then it can only be a good thing.
My dad only uses his PC about 3 times a year. That makes antivirus relatively expensive when I build a PC for him. Free MS AV would be ideal for him.
The reason why I think a more enlightened professional may welcome this competition is that it should reduce the noise produce by zombies and make large DDOS and spam attacks more difficult for criminals to launch.
The price is that nobody wants vista and all scream for windows xp
with unrestricted kernel access. Nobody likes this wooden mallet security through obscurity style (patchguard, audiodg..)
which is only a desperate reaction. IMHO Vista was invented to harass humanity, especially those 14 GB sysfiles, whereas 60% of them are virtually useless garbage.
Personally I like Vista, never had a problem with it
Not sure patchguard is really security through obscurity. It is just a warning to developers that MS will be changing the way windows will work especially with privileges. It is a precursor to having a hypervisor which will be a solid defense to rootkits.
The problem with Microsoft is that its policy is NOT customer-centric i.e to satisfy their customers as much as possible with every means (which in turn, the customers would make the company successful), but to make money and gain power as much as possible with every means.
There is a huge difference in this and some don't get it.
But soon or later, the customer feels this difference and start feeling hate too.
BTW, everything free should be welcomed, whether it "steals" the market from other companies or not (the general good is always of higher priority) but there is nothing really "free" offered from companies with such policies and tactics. There is always a hidden cost that the customer will pay soon or later most likely without knowing it.
You won´t if you don´t look to deep into it. But my nature is to look very deep into the things and to tweak to make matters go faster and then you find barriers and see events you dislike and in case of vista there are a lot of those "dislikes".
Another one unpleasant appearance is slsvc service, if you disable it you will see once again a yucky and restrictive side of m$.
This is the good point of a bad story.
I 've had XP for as long as I can remember on one laptop (which is now used occasionally by my wife). I've also discovered recently that I was given an illegal version of Windows Vista which worked perfectly. Still, I'm one of those guys who can't live with it, and rushed to buy a sealed boxed version of ... Vista. I can assure you it was a lot more expensive than any of the XP versions but I personally could never go back to XP.
Whether you like it or not Windows 7 (which I tested ) seems to be the natural offspring from Vista, only lighter. Nobody wants Vista as you say, but it is the most popular OS after XP, only because Vista is young. When you talk about 'garbage' you should realize that thousands of very talented people worked on it, and that only makes you look as a fool. Last but not least, why are you using Windows if you are so negative about them?
Separate names with a comma.