A man is known by the company he keeps - Aesop
|
|
|
Microsoft submits to free security option
MICROSOFT ANNOUNCED today that it will stop the sale of its PC security subscription service next year in favour of a free... yes free... security package.
This move comes as no surprise as Microsoft has to compete with the likes of McAfee and Symantec in order to supply a free security service to protect computers from viruses, spyware and any other hazardous bugs.
The sales of Microsoft’s current security offering, Windows Live OneCare are to be stopped on June 30 next year – in the time this service has been available, it has captured a measly two percent of the anti-virus market.
Windows Live OneCare service currently covers up to three PCs and will set you back $49.95 a year.
By the second half of 2009 users will be able to make use of “Morro” which will be available as a free download.
Microsoft not only aims to boost its popularity by offering this service free of charge, but is also aiming it at a wider audience as Morro is designed with smaller, less powerful computers in mind.
Although Microsoft seems to think this will work, McAfee is one company that believes this is a desperate act of surrender by the company. It says that, " Microsoft is giving up, they are now defaulting to a dressed-down free model that doesn't meet consumer security needs."
In the past Microsoft has been accused of creating OS servers like Vista in order to deny security companies such as McAfee and Symantec access to certain areas of the OS which need protecting.
This had to be stamped out pretty sharpish as Microsoft realised these areas needed protecting by strong security, and so were forced to hand over the information needed.
We wish Microsoft all the best in making this new security option a success, however based on its past experiences in this sector, it’ll need all the help it can get. µ
L'Inq
Yahoo?
Tags: Microsoft
Share this:
Share
Well no change there then.
MS has never delivered anything, for free or not, that met consumer security needs.
Unfortunately the "average" user I don't think is really aware of the antivirus ratings and just buy what they are most familiar with. M$ uses this give away for "free" tactic all the time, unfortunaly with often good results. An average user might say why the heck spend $50 bucks on symantec or mcafee when it is free in Widows already. With the winds changing toward increased regulation I'm hoping regulators don't let them get away with such anti-competitive behavior.
Wouldn't this be considered an oxymoron?

And I agree with Deimios. Stop trying to cover the entire market MS and concentrate on giving consumers the better OS without the security holes or exploitable features and more of us will buy it.
If this is the same engine as the current Microsoft antivirus (that struggles to get a 'standard' rating on av-comparatives.org) then I say you're better off with Avira, Avast or AVG.

Also I doubt that anti trust regulators will appreciate the move. So lemme put it this way: You sell a boat that is full of holes. They you offer to fix some of the holes for free, while fixing more of the holes for extra money. Put your damn resources into making a boat that doesn't have holes!