- Related Stories
-
Microsoft shakes up security fray
June 7, 2006 -
Microsoft puts its stamp on e-mail security
June 6, 2006 -
Beware the Microsoft 'monoculture'
May 18, 2006 -
Microsoft buys VPN specialist
May 18, 2006 -
Microsoft repackages FrontBridge service
March 29, 2006 -
Microsoft set to test security software
October 6, 2005 -
Microsoft to provide security strategy update
October 4, 2005 -
Microsoft to buy e-mail security firm FrontBridge
July 20, 2005
(continued from previous page)
And there are those who feel the software giant is trying to turn lemons into lemonade with its move into the security fray.
"The idea of Microsoft coming up with antivirus software is a sham," said Frank Seichal of Old Bridge, N.J., who works in IT at a financial institution. "Why should I purchase software from Microsoft to stop the operating system vulnerabilities created by Microsoft? I can not believe Microsoft is getting away with this."
Another factor to overcome are the high-quality products sold by incumbent security vendors. McAfee, for example, has earned high marks from its customers with the ePolicy Orchestrator, a central security management tool, Jaquith said.
"Microsoft needs to prove reliability, stability and predictability. They need some success stories," Jaquith said. "Just saying that they're better integrated and that they make the operating system is not going to cut it."
In its Forefront documentation, Microsoft promises products that work well together and with existing IT systems. Additionally, the software will be simple to install and can be centrally managed, it says. However, they will protect only Microsoft software and not Linux servers or SAP applications, for example.
"That is perhaps their greatest disadvantage," Blum said. "They tend to have this somewhat myopic strategy centered around their own products and ignoring other products, even those that run on Windows."
Rivals and regulators
Antitrust concerns also lurk. Microsoft may promote Forefront products as better integrated, but if it has used hooks into its operating system that are kept secret from rivals, regulators might be all over the software giant, analysts said.
In fact, some small Microsoft competitors are already complaining about the company's security pricing strategy. In a blog posting this week, Alex Eckelberry, president of Clearwater, Fla.-based anti-spyware toolmaker Sunbelt Software, said Microsoft is engaging in predatory pricing with its OneCare and Antigen products.
By undercutting its rivals on price, Microsoft is pushing the competition out of business, after which it will increase its prices, Eckelberry wrote.
Jaquith dismissed that complaint. "I think they are being creative and aggressive, but I don't think they are being predatory. There is plenty of room for pricing innovation in this space," he said.
It was about time that Microsoft fleshed out its security strategy and shared it with the public, Jaquith said. "Finally we're hearing what they are doing," he said. "It is a 'damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead' strategy."
See more CNET content tagged:
Microsoft SharePoint, enterprise security, business security, margin, content filtering
This whole Microsoft security effort feels like paying protection money to the mafia.
If they give the onecare product for free then it is more like using their monopoly to kill symantec and macafee.
onecare is more than just a security product. It has more functionality than just scanning and elimination virus, adware/spyware.
Ultimately it is the people that are going to make a decison.
It also provides lots of functionality and its all free.
mafias rarely provide help this way :)
I am no microsoft fanboy but it is always good to get a complete story.
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
(i.e., it's more profitable for Microsoft to make an insecure operating system that requires it's new security services.)
In addition, the early reviews of Windows Live OneCare are mediocre at best. They should fix that, before they get into business security services.
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more MS will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
It's like a car manufacturer selling lemons, then offering extended service and warranties to the buyers.
If the MS OS is such a piece of Swiss cheese, why should we have to pay MS for measures to clean it up and keep it secure? Isn't this their OBLIGATION?!
This is why our shop has gone to a Linux enviroment, but the whole Windows thing still cheeses me off
The car analogy is lame. Car makers never used to include any kind of theft protection devices....there was and still is a big after market for ant-theft devices for cars. Of course you can get all of that stuff right the auto maker for a PRICE!!
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
I am going to bet its going to be cheaper to move off of Symantec for my windows enviroment and Exchange as well.
It cant come out fast enough.
Open source will be king only when it have lot os driver support from hardware vendors. There are many vendors who do not have drivers for linux.
It also needs good software support. There are many applications that users use on windows and those application have scaled down functionality in linux.
It is true that there are many vendors behind the linux bandwagon, but still support from commercial vendors is less than what it is for microsoft platform (unfortunately this is true).
And for a vendor to support linux, it may be a nightmare because there are so many linux distributions out there and making sure the software/device driver works on all the distributions is a nightmare (probably not).
Though linux os is superior in many ways, it doesn't have the same kinda support microsoft enjoys.
Nuff said.
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
Currently, with a stagnant 3.x% market share, Apple is no threat to Microsoft.
FWIW
"For Microsoft, it's simpler to create security add-ons than to build security into its products, an approach that would also make it harder for the company to make extra money, at least one analyst said."
They are rewarding themselves - and charging us -for their poor security designed products.
"For Microsoft, it's simpler to create security add-ons than to build security into its products, an approach that would also make it harder for the company to make extra money, at least one analyst said."
They are rewarding themselves - and charging us -for their poor security designed products.
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more MS will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
You would have to be a complete idiot to trust MS on anything, especially in regards to security.
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
run LAMP, my desktops are Mac,... viruses to date... zero, spyware
to date... zero, malware to date... zero
Ah the microsoft free life, im lovin it!
Why would individuals of a publicly traded company form an organization or business group and spend hours and resources on NOT making money? I thought he was an analyst...
do do it.
I'm a Capitalist and have no problem with people making lots of
money. But in this case (and others) Microsoft makes mediocre
products and in effect creates a whole industry to support their
poorly designed products and then usurps that third party market
to fix thier own damn product!
If the general customer for the now coming Vista wants "x amount of security upgrade", Microsoft will deliver it and have it built in the Vista version. MS makes all sorts of things to make the Vista more attractive. Why? The more attractive Vista is, the higher the price and the more will they sell. So, if then the general customer wants mentioned security upgrade, the Vista will be more attractive, the price will be higher and MS will sell more of them. But if the general customers do not want this upgrade, then MS will sell those upgrades only to those that want them. This is very good. We must accept that the customers do not always want the best security. Not everyone is like we are! The demand for security changes and the internet changes, and now MS is also a bit changing there services because of that. Best regards, Björn Lundahl, Gothenburg, Sweden
- Well don't buy OneCare then, and compute safely instead
- by gordonf4cnet June 26, 2006 9:52 AM PDT
- Windows had better security in it since Win2K. In fact, over WinME's and Win2K's mainstream support period, Win2K was slightly less expensive:
- Reply to this comment
-
(54 Comments)http://www.antiwindowscatalog.com/?mode=rant&id=31
That's not including savings from preventing downtime.
OneCare was obsolete the moment they launched it, so don't buy it if you don't want it.