| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Microsoft's Anti-Virus Strategy Keeps Users Guessing | |
|
||
| Time: 11:28 EST/16:28 GMT | News Source: eWeek | Posted By: Brian Kvalheim | ||
|
One year after it surprised rivals and partners by jumping into the anti-virus market, Microsoft Corp. still has no clear AV strategy, and users are still hanging on to the promise of integrated Windows protection. The company's sluggish AV development is a far cry from the plans Microsoft trumpeted when it acquired the Romanian company GeCAD Software Srl. last June. At the time, officials in Redmond, Wash., said they planned to use GeCAD's technology to develop new products and enhance the security protections in Windows. The news enticed some users but worried others. And it was especially disturbing to anti-virus vendors such as Computer Associates International Inc., Symantec Corp. and Network Associates Inc. The vendors, all major Microsoft partners, along with some enterprise security managers, were concerned that building AV into Windows would force users to accept the company's solution and abandon third-party tools. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 482 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:29:11 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 8556 (12.217.161.21) at 6/21/2004 6:30:01 PM |
| I'd be surprised if Microsoft incorporates the lame RAV Anti-virus they purchased last year from GeCad into Windows. It was a very user-unfriendly program. When a virus would be found RAV would tell you to do a complete scan to remove it. Huh? The purchase was a mystery to me then and still is. The price was right, apparently. However, I doubt that MS wants to fork over big bucks to Symantec, Trend Micro, McAfee and whoever else sues them should they blend RAV into Windows. Maybe, just maybe, the purchase somehow will help MS understand Windows security better. |
| #2 By 1643 (64.73.227.129) at 6/21/2004 8:10:18 PM |
|
#1 It obviously won't be MSAV v2, and it won't necessarily wait till longhorn...you should read some more stuff out there on the internet outside of linuxinsiders and /.
#2 They probably will intergrate the RAV IP with their own. #3 It will be released as a seperate product right now (and priced as an extra)...MS likes to keep it's long time partners in business unless they stop innovating. humor |
| #3 By 1643 (64.73.227.129) at 6/21/2004 8:52:07 PM |
|
#6 Who said they are? Don't believe everything MSSUCKS says...it's normally the opposite of reality.
http://www.activewin.com/outbound.asp?HeadlineIndex=24877&URL=http%3A%2F%2Fstory%2Enews%2Eyahoo%2Ecom%2Fnews%3Ftmpl%3Dstory%26cid%3D569%26ncid%3D738%26e%3D1%26u%3D%2Fnm%2F20040615%2Ftc%5Fnm%2Ftech%5Fmicrosoft%5Fsecurity%5Fdc #7 I completely disagree, it is MS best interests to keep a huge developer and partner ecosystem. Now, sometimes technology has reached a level of maturity where it needs to be integrated (IE, WMP for example). |
| #4 By 1643 (64.73.227.129) at 6/21/2004 9:32:32 PM |
|
Whatever they do, I'm sure they won't make money on it if it's integrated in the OS. Having it as an add-on could be possibility...but I prefer having third parties handle AV when it's released.
However, with MS being bashed for having an insecure OS that propagate viruses...it might make sense from a strategic point of view to eliminate the 'open window". We all know that most viruses are spread by inexperienced users with no AV...so this would help them out. It's why I'm mixed on not giving SP2 to pirates...i don't want them getting free support when i pay for it...but having those unpatched boxes isn't that good for MS or consumers. humor |
| #5 By 1643 (204.210.30.241) at 6/21/2004 10:36:42 PM |
|
"Not necessarily. MS may not have made any money from IE directly,"
I agree "but they certainly depended on it to attain their position in the market. " I think most people would argue that at the time of the "integration" the web was a standard interface and required integration with the OS. But we'll save that argument for another time. I understand your view. "In the future, MS may make money off IE by including it only with Longhorn, and if users want the new IE they also have to buy the new Windows, giving MS customers an excuse to upgrade and give MS more money. " Exactly, sounds like a popular model in the software business. "Also, MS plans on delivering .NET applications over the web, perhaps IE is integral in keeping this tied into the Windows platform. " Agreed IE is part of the core platform to develop innovative solutions...just like I can use WMP api to play sounds and media in my application. "As for pirates, they will get SP2 one way or another. They managed to get SP1, Windows XP, Windows 2000 SP1/2/3/4, Windows ME, Windows 98SE, Windows 98, Windows 95... " Probably, but how bout all those end users that got their OS upgrades from a "friendly" computer neighbor. They won't know what to do :( I think it's a bad idea on MS's part...but they can always change their mind i guess. humor This post was edited by humor on Monday, June 21, 2004 at 22:55. |
| #6 By 1643 (204.210.30.241) at 6/22/2004 3:22:55 AM |
|
The number one reason that worms attack systems...unpatched systems!! With automatic updates turned on (one registry key)...windows become the most reliable, stable, easy to mange OS out there. Now, Microsoft willt turn it on automatically...way too late IMHO.
BTW, SP2 also adresses the ease which activex controls and spyware would present itself to an unsuspecting user is another great reason to install it. But honestly, sometimes I hope the pirates get a virus. http://nick.typepad.com/blog/2004/06/feeddemon_crack.html This post was edited by humor on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 03:56. |
| #7 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 6/22/2004 8:14:26 AM |
|
We do NOT need Microsoft in the Anti-Spam business.
We DO need them in the Anti-Spyware business, by securing their damned open-ended, hole infested web browser, at least to the point where my Golden Retriever couldn't write an exploit for it. Please! TL |
| #8 By 1643 (64.73.227.129) at 6/22/2004 1:00:16 PM |
|
#15 Well, they need to work with other large ISP (AOL, comcast, earthlink, etc.) to get some form of SMTP authentication method and integrate that into hotmail/msn/exchange server products.
Turning off new Active X controls (after downloading flash and shockwave) will solve almost all your problems. As for bugs and exploits, all browsers have them. XP SP2 will help make it harder to install, but remember, 1,000 of businesses use ActiveX for their operations. I was in a large package company and they FREAKED when the Win2000 default "Users" group could not install them automatically (like NT4) and wanted MS to change the default security settings. Instead we just modified a few registry permissions, or we could have made them "Power Users"....but that was not the best solution. humor This post was edited by humor on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 at 14:47. |
| #9 By 2960 (156.80.64.137) at 6/22/2004 1:12:47 PM |
|
I support a business with tens of thousands of users. I know the pain from this all too well right now.
TL |
| #10 By 1643 (204.210.30.241) at 6/22/2004 10:41:56 PM |
| Actually, Linux is more bloated, slower in GUI, doesn't run 90 of applications%. These are facts...do you have any #19? |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 482 Last | Next |
The time now is
10:29:11 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
