REPORTS COMING IN from Microsoft's BUILD conference showcasing Windows 8 to software developers this week claim that the upcoming operating system will bundle in an antivirus feature.
According to ZDNet, the Redmond software giant plans to implement anti-malware functions of its Microsoft Security Essential (MSE) product into Windows Defender, the anti-spyware component that has been enabled by default in Windows ever since Vista.
Microsoft has not yet confirmed this rumour, but if it's true the decision will cause a lot of controversy and probably lead to fresh antitrust allegations against Microsoft, as happened with Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player.
From a consumer's perspective, the move could have both good and bad consequences. Security experts agree that any antivirus protection is better than none.
"Anything which encourages Joe User to run up-to-date anti-virus software has to be a positive thing. There are too many poorly protected home computers out there, which have been commandeered into botnets," said Graham Cluley, a senior technology consultant at antivirus vendor Sophos.
On the other hand, bundling a free antivirus solution with Windows could discourage users from trying out other, possibly better, products. If this happens, it's not only a matter of antivirus companies losing customers, but also the risks created by having many computers running the same antivirus product.
"If most budget-conscious home users stick with Microsoft's built-in offering, then surely the first thing the bad guys will do is make sure their latest creation can slip past Microsoft's scanner," points out Cluley. The end result will be a large number users who believe they are protected, but are in fact easy targets.
However, it's unlikely that other antivirus vendors will stand by and let this happen without a fight. If Microsoft does go forward with this idea, it will probably be forced to implement a system similar to the web browser choice screen that is shown to users in Europe. But displaying all options could be problematic, because there is a lot of diversity in the antivirus world.
Update
Microsoft has confirmed that Windows 8 will be able to detect all forms of malware out of the box.
"We have made many investments in security in Windows 8, building upon the work done to improve security in Windows 7.
"This work included engineering system changes to find and prevent defects, low-level security features such as Secured Boot to help defeat classes of threats, and user facing features including Windows Defender and SmartScreen. All of these investments give us great confidence that Windows 8 will be the most secure operating system we've produced," a Microsoft spokesperson told The INQUIRER. µ
Is already interated to Windows7, server-2008, server-2008-R2 as part of "Desktop Experience" integrated feature. Appears as "Windows Defender" service (services.msc). Service startup configured "manual" as default.
The biggest pile of steaming crap possible with modern technology. Windows is FAR from the vision of ease and integration that seemed possible in the 80's, because it actually hasn't changed much from version 1, only infected more hosts now.
Windows is a crime against humanity. The number of hours spent just installing and updating is apalling. M$ is a constant tax by its plague of mediocrity. But hordes of Windows fanboys can't even conceive that better might be had.
The reason people buy real Operating Systems like Windows is because real companies make real good software for it.
Why don't these same companies make software programs for Ubunto and the other Linux flavors? Because Linux users won't buy it, they want everything for free.
Windows is expensive and unsave.
Linux is free and save.
Ubuntu is miles ahead of any Windows.
I do not understand why people don't try it.
Provided they keep an option to uninstall it (like they didn't do with IE), it's ok.
One thing I'm sure. MSE is a good antivirus, easily on par with any other solution, and yet it's for free.
For the consumer is a win-win.
Microsoft has a big problem here. As soon as they try to add or improve something in Windows, some company is bound to start screaming and complaining about monopoly abuse. It's normal, because somebody is making software already for anything you can imagine.
But what about Microsoft's right to innovate? If they are not allowed to add new features, why would anybody ever upgrade their Windows? And what about consumer rights? If Microsoft's new OS costs as much as the previous one but saves me $50 in antivirus costs, that's great news for me.
I think the correct solution here is to let Microsoft add whatever it pleases in its own product. If some company is threatened by it, let it develop something better than Microsoft's. If it's really better, people will buy it.
If it's not, let that company go compete in other domains, where competition is less competent and it may have an easier time. More competition may be bad for these companies, but it's good for consumers.