Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 113952	2010-11-11 22:17:00	Velly Interesting	wainuitech (129)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1152062	2010-11-11 22:17:00	From the Win7news Letter: Is Microsoft Going Too Far to Protect Us? It's a fine line to walk for an operating system vendor. If your OS is compromised by viruses or malware, it's called insecure and you get the blame. But if you build too much security into the operating system, you're called over-controlling and you might even get slapped with an anti-trust lawsuit. How far is too far to go in pushing your own particular brand of protection onto your users? In the olden days (MS DOS), the OS was basically just an OS. If you wanted to actually do anything with it, you had to install applications. Windows (which in its first incarnations wasn't an OS at all, but a shell that ran on top of MS DOS) added more and more basic built in applications - simple word processor, calculator, games, communications apps, etc. It was the inclusion of the Internet Explorer web browser that really raised the hackles of third party software vendors and resulted in anti-trust suits in the U.S. and the Europe Union. Later the same issues were raised over the inclusion of Windows Media Player. By the time we got to Windows XP, there were all sorts of apps included - even a rudimentary firewall - but one category of software that you still had to buy separately was anti-virus and anti-malware software. Microsoft started moving in that direction when they included Windows Defender, an anti-spyware product, in Vista and Windows 7. Meanwhile, in 2009 they released Microsoft Security Essentials, a free anti-virus program that could be downloaded from the Microsoft web site for XP, Vista and Windows 7. But the user still had to seek it out and install it. Now that's about to change. Well, sort of. Microsoft has announced that they will begin delivering Security Essentials through the Microsoft Update service. That got some folks upset, thinking they were going to have Microsoft's anti-virus forced on them whether they wanted it or not. The good news is that Security Essentials will only pop up as an optional update. You'll still have to check the box if you want to accept and install it. And it will only show up there if Windows detects that you aren't currently running another anti-virus program. So if you have your own favorite anti-virus, as so many of us do, you should never even see it as an option. There may be some cases where your anti-virus doesn't communicate with Windows and so isn't detected, but again, it will only be offered as an option and you don't have to accept it. Given those conditions, the intent seems pretty obvious: to prod those who are running unprotected systems into installing an anti-virus solution. However, some see this as only the first step toward including anti-virus in Windows, just as anti-spyware and the firewall are now included. Some view that end as a good thing, others as not so good. Ed Bott sees it as another potential anti-trust suit: www.win7news.net The free security software that Microsoft offers is pretty basic, and those "in the know" generally buy and install more full featured products, but does the average consumer know (or care about) the difference? You can argue that, regardless of whether there is an anti-virus program bundled with the OS, users are always free to disable it and install one of their own choosing. On the other hand, many people are basically lazy, and/or want to save money, and so will stick with the built-in solution. Will this pose a threat to vendors of other anti-virus products? I think the key is for those vendors to show how their products are better. If users can see what the differences are, and see the value that makes it worth paying a little extra and taking a little time to install and configure, they'll do it - just as many users make the extra effort to download and install Firefox or Chrome or some other alternate web browser even though Internet Explorer comes with Windows. and the pending Anti-trust crap. (www.zdnet.com)	wainuitech (129)
1152063	2010-11-11 22:37:00	I don't know how many of you have read the licensing agreement when you install a microsoft O/S, it basically says that microsoft can take over you system when ever they like, so essentially you're agreeing to Microsoft spying on you... Perhaps this is why Windows always has certain holes in it and ordinary hackers and virus makers find these holes and manipulate them, I dunno I can only speculate.	dubpir8 (16040)
1152064	2010-11-11 23:09:00	Yeah I would rather a vendor installed AV alongside some updates for clients that don't have it, than for them to have nothing at all.	Chilling_Silence (9)
1152065	2010-11-11 23:19:00	Yeah I would rather a vendor installed AV alongside One swear word -- :D NORTON Personally I think it wouldn't be a bad Idea, as long as its an optional; install - possibly some sort of option when first starting the PC-- Do you want to install Microsoft Security Essentials ? , but I can see all the AV's companies kicking up hell. When buying from the Toaster shops the person has NO option, Norton,McAfee or Trend are pre installed - you have to remove them.	wainuitech (129)
1152066	2010-11-11 23:30:00	I personally think it is a good idea for MS to offer it as an optional update so long as it always stays that way. However the way Norton buy their reviews would nullify anything MS do anyway	gary67 (56)
1152067	2010-11-12 00:12:00	However the way Norton buy their reviews would nullify anything MS do anyway People know they have to pay for Norton, so if Microsoft make it clear that Security Essentials is free, it just might work.	pcuser42 (130)
1152068	2010-11-12 00:56:00	Norton is a perfect match for Vista.	R2x1 (4628)
1152069	2010-11-12 01:47:00	Norton is a perfect match for Vista. An oxymoron in my world. ;)	pcuser42 (130)
1152070	2010-11-12 04:45:00	Security essentials is a pretty good anti-virus app. I wish compaq etc. would give users the option of installing that instead of the norton/mcafee trial	Greven (91)
1152071	2010-11-12 05:53:00	An oxymoron in my world. ;) Quite possibly there's an OS e-moron in your world ;) Get it exorcised right away before it permanently blights your life.	R2x1 (4628)
1 2