Will Microsoft Control the Anti-Spyware Market? 77
jasondubya asks: "With all the recent publicity of Microsoft's new Anti-Spyware product, I wonder if there will be any room in the market for other companies? After recent comparisons between with current market leaders showed large failings in their products, do they stand a chance against the behemoth that is Microsoft?"
BRILLIANT! (Score:2, Interesting)
Distribute said beta anti-spyware software with windows updates.... BRILLIANT!!!!!
Hook clueless users on our anti-spyware software... BRILLIANT!!!!
Sell the software as a subscription.... BRILLIANT!!!!!
Sell advertising company's the ability to have us take their software out of our spyware definitions.... BRILLIANT!!!!
with apologies to Guinness
Re:BRILLIANT! (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want it taken care pay us an additional fee and you'll be "safe". Protection fee?
Not hard to control the anti-spyware market (Score:1)
What's next? Microsoft and antivirus?
Not that M$ shouldn't have a role in prevention of these problems. It would be more genuine of them to have a part by opening/improving the OS rather than profiting off of the widespread use of their weak product(s).
Re:Not hard to control the anti-spyware market (Score:1)
Back in the MS-DOS days, they had MSAV which did exactly that. I'm not sure why they ditched it when they made Windows 95 tho.
Re:Not hard to control the anti-spyware market (Score:2)
Clearly, Windows95 was so advanced, it didn't need antivirus software.
Re:Two things (Score:1)
I use Microsoft products. I live in the same world as everyone else, with the same rules of business. And I wouldn't pretend that Linux/FreeBSD/MacOSX are ready to be the next alternative to 90% of the computing free world.
But to make a product
Re:Two things (Score:1)
Re:Not hard to control the anti-spyware market (Score:2)
M$ has been tooting their own horn about lower TCO (and completely ignoring the facts). Now, if there is a subscription fee thrown in for this new anti-spyware tool, that drives up the TCO -> good for Linux.
Of course, I am sure that M$ will skew the numbers so that they still have a lower TCO ("Linux causes your server to catch on fire, so you will need a new $2000 server every week -- Microsoft wins"). But this will make it harder.
Frankly... (Score:5, Insightful)
This'll be no different from the Browser Wars. In that case, Microsoft bought Spyglass and used its browser, offering it as a free download. In this case, they bought someone else and used their AV products, offering it as a free download.
So far, there's not much evidence of any change in strategy. Enough so that several AV vendors are getting definitely twitchy. I'm not surprised. If they survive as long as Netscape did, it would be impressive.
Oh, and don't expect the regulators to step in, any time soon. It was hard enough getting them to do anything when the Democrats were in office. There is absolutely sod all reason for them to do anything now.
Finally, look at it from Microsoft's standpoint. They lost a court case in Europe, which harmed their share value and took a small nibble out of their pockets. With security being the current "watch-word", here is their big chance to take back some of that lost value. It'll also hamper European efforts to regulate them, as they can chown() technologies faster than the EU can ban them from doing so.
Re:Frankly... (Score:1)
Re:Frankly... (Score:1)
When Microsoft's Anti-Virus product is free...
Your whole post is about Anti-Virus products, while the story has nothing to do with Anti-Virus products. Yay moderators.
Re:Frankly... (Score:2)
Re:Frankly... (Score:3, Insightful)
MS gets killed for being vulnerable everyday here on slashdot. Now they are trying to put some tools in place to help the standard user and they get beat on for using their monopoly.
This is a bit different than debating MS adding a media player or even a browser.
Re:Frankly... (Score:2)
Second, there's nothing to stop them "locking-down" any installed binary, such that the OS would prohibit ANY changes to those binaries unless the user specifically granted permission. That would kill any viruses that spread by infecting binaries, although embedded code would not be protected this way.
Third, there's nothing to st
and then.... (Score:2)
Microsoft used to bundle a virus checker back in the DOS days. Where is it now? Gone. I expect this product to destroy most of the ecosystem and then get dropped for some business reason.
In this case... (Score:3, Interesting)
The real debate is whether Microsoft will still dominate the market if a competitor gets its act together and produces a product that works better than Microsoft AntiSpyware.
I think the answer is yes - look at the success of Firefox. Even mainsteam users are slowly learning that there are superior alternatives to Microsoft products. I don't think any new Microsoft product that's worse than the competition will be able to survive long.
Re:In this case... (Score:2)
Re:In this case... (Score:2)
When M$ kicks things into high gear, they can add a lot of nice features to a product in a short period of time (meanwhile ignoring security and standards). Browsers are not somthing that they show an interest in right now (but that may change again if IE looses too much share). Spyware IS something that they are obviously interested in. Therefore, they should be a
Why not? (Score:4, Funny)
Seriously, if MS's Antispyware app DOESN'T fail just as bad as the other products in the long run, then that's some pretty good conspiracy fodder..
1) Become market leader in desktop and workstation software, but allow tons of security problems to get exploited until the problem reaches epedemic proportions
2) Develop (or in this case, aquire and modify) additional software to fix the problem you created in the first place
3) Profit!
=Smidge=
Answer by example (Score:2)
Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus market (Score:3, Insightful)
Consequently even if you have MS Anti-Spyware running, you will double check with at least one or two other programs just to be sure.
Let's not forget that MS even had anti-virus built into an OS at one time, and it disappeared, had backup software built into an OS, and it disappeared, and has at various times tried to undercut outside vendors without success.
As well, it seems pretty obvious that the Bad Guys are going to find the security holes in the MS product very fast, and begin tailoring their products to exploit them. How fast can MS play catch up?
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
I run zero. Never had a problem with spyware.
The only time I've ever had it is from a Kodak photo-CD that the wife used while in my admin account.
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
I'm actually a Windows user and don't have spyware problems though. I just stay out of the back alley of the internet and actually pay attention if I get an installation dialog out of the blue.
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
Re:Yup, just like they control the Anit-Virus mark (Score:1)
But even if most of us in the
I have seen this first hand for a residence co
They already have near total control. (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft provides the avenues through which most spyware operates. By definition, therefore, they have total control over most of the anti-spyware (and spyware) market. Were they to remove the vulnerabilities in their software that allow spyware to be installed (unbeknownst to the computer's owner) they would eliminate the market for anti-spyware. If a user knowingly permits spyware on their machine it should, on a well-constructed system, be simple to monitor and remove.
Buying risk-control software
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:2)
Yes, I tried the beta and it does have (by far) the best interface of all the anti-spyware products. That doesn't make it an instant winner though. Do people trust Microsoft to protect them? And if so, why didn't they protect us with Windows in the first place?
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
Like AOL's new Anti-virus shtick, It gives the average user a feature that they can wrap their head around. A system task that lets them feel like they have control over their computing environment.
holes in
I'd also like to point out that even precious Linux has security holes.
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:2)
Yes, but isn't that tantamount to admitting they wrote something that is broken?
If I buy RHEL, Red Hat doesn't try to SELL me a product whose sole purpose is to make sure their own poor design decisions are covered. They give me access to their up2date servers.
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
Unless you've managed to purchase some odd windows license/software that doesn't allow you to access the Microsoft's Windows Update servers.
You even have the option of not installing the updates if you wish.(at this point)
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
As I said before, no software is perfect. Thus, no operating system is totally secure.
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
It's the conflict of interest that's blatantly disgusting about it, not merely the fact that windows is the most insecure operating system out there (since lispire is catching up on holes).
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:2)
You're wrong if you think security holes are they main way this stuff gets installed. Spyware usually comes bundled with freeware programs (Kazaa etc) or is installed by social engineering (Your computer may be broadcasting an IP Address!!).
Re:WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?! (Score:1)
I'm sure Microsoft could do something about that if they wanted to, but their new pop-up blocker really doesn't help all that much.
Only Anti-Spyware? (Score:1)
Microsoft's Responsibility (Score:1)
I wondered how long it would take. (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft taking a stand on spyware because everyone griped about it.
-and-
Someone griping about it because they are abusing their monopoly by taking a stand on spyware.
??
Wouldn't it be nice if your grandma's computer had a firewall, antivirus and anti-spyware when she took it out of the box? It might give the back of my firewall a break. It probably won't happen though. People will get sue happy as usual with MS. I'm surprised ZoneAlarm and Blackice and those guys
Re:I wondered how long it would take. (Score:1)
It's not about spyware, stupid. (Score:5, Insightful)
One nugget of info can be gleaned by going through the process of installing their Spyware removal software. They mention that you have a chance to verify your Microsoft Software is genuine, and they *also* mention that in the future doing so may be *required*.
Think about that for a second. How many illegal copies of Windows are out there? How much money does Microsoft *not* make on those copies of Windows? They discovered a must-have software product (that I expect they won't charge for, other than the price of a copy of Windows if you're running unlicensed) that they can use to solve most of their piracy woes. It's clever, but I suppose it's fair.
The diabolical part is that once you install their Spyware removal tool, they have a perfect way to scare the clueless into removing software that they (Microsoft) don't especially like. When I ran it the first time, it identified winPcap and WinVNC (the *client*, for crying out loud!) as spyware and gave me scary warnings about wanting to remove them. It's only a matter of time before OpenOffice makes the list, and a lot of people will either accept the defaults and delete whatever Microsoft Tells them to, or will be unsure about how safe it is to run a given piece of software and reluctantly delete it.
There are a few companies I trust to give me a decent list of spyware apps to detect, and Microsoft isn't one of them. They don't want to control the AV market or the Spyware market, they want to decide for you about *any* programs you install on your PC.
Re:It's not about spyware, stupid. (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't even mind them listing 'potentially' unsafe programs as long as they allow the user to select which programs are to remain untouched.
"Safe" software is a very subjective term. If I noticed winPcap o
+1 insightful +1 informative (Score:2)
Re:It's not about spyware, stupid. (Score:1)
From their website: XBConnect is "Next Generation" Game Console Tunnel Software for Windows that allows you to play Microsoft XBox System link, and Sony PSP games over the internet.
Re:It's not about spyware, stupid. (Score:2)
So let me see if I understand this... (Score:3, Insightful)
If they *give away* a solution, they're being monopolistic against the existing or potentially soon-to-exist anti-spyware vendors (Norton, CA, et. al).
If they *charge* for a solution, they're being greedy/capitalistic/whatever by charging for something they should be giving away.
Sounds like a no-win situation to me.
But, consider the Firewall situation. MS ships a *basic* firewall, blocks only inbound, not very configurable, but does support Group Policy settings and is thus enterprise friendly.
This *seems* to have left a market for both corporate and consumer firewall software. Granted, there are both free and pay solutions out there for both.
Maybe that would please everyone? If MS's solution was free, and reasonably effective, but not quite 'everything to everyone'? It would really NEED to be enterprise-friendly, IMHO, since I really think MS should be on the hook to provide at least some form of protection/removal as part of the OS (like the ICF in XP, the disk defragmenter, hopefully some future Anti-Virus solution as well).
But, and the end of the day, if Company X can't make a cheap product that does Anti-Spyware better than MS's, there really ISN'T a market that people should be crying about the loss of. Remember, MS didn't drop a billion+ dollars into developing what appears to be one of the better solutions out there; they bought one of the existing product companies.
Players like Norton and CA (should) be able to compete if there's anything there worth competing over -- be it breadth of coverage (signatures, mutation detection, etc.), ease of use (particularly where removing the nasty self-healing malware is concerned), time to updates when new threats surface, ability to block/blunt new/unknown threats, etc.
Xentax
Re:So let me see if I understand this... (Score:2)
Re:So let me see if I understand this... (Score:2)
The problem with that solution - according to some - is that other companies (like Norton and Computer Associates) *sell* software to solve the problem; if MS gives it away, that's "anti-competitive".
That MS's solution is fixing MS's problem is apparently lost on some people.
Xentax
A few remarks... (Score:1)
Microsoft ain't what it used to be. (Score:2)
Re:Microsoft ain't what it used to be. (Score:1)
Sure, why not (Score:1)
They facilitated the whole spyware market, so why should we stop them from reaping the rewards? Go Microsoft!
Cringely's opinion (Score:2)
Malicious Software Removal Tool - January 2005 (Score:1)
"This tool checks your computer for infection by specific, prevalent malicious software (including Blaster, Sasser, and Mydoom) and helps remove any variants found. You should also use an antivirus product to remove other malicious software that may be present. This tool helps maintain your computer, and its appearance does not indicate that y
They Should own the market (Score:2)
I think it's nuts that Windows is so vulnerable out of the box that it cannot reasonably be connected to the Internet without a slew of 3rd party software JUST to make to do what it's supposed to do: be an operating system.
If Microsoft can own the markets, then they will also own the responsibility o
Microsoft created this market (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm surprised it took them so long to become a player in it, not just the progenitor.
Integrated with the Operating System (Score:2)
Take over spybot (Score:1)
Re:Take over spybot (Score:1)
The more you tighten your grip, Gates,... (Score:2, Funny)
The Linux installer. The ultimate remover for malicious spyware.
Bob-
Call me synical... (Score:2)
It's their rubbish software that lets the malware in. Having a tool to remove it after the fact is kinda missing the point.
Maybe I'm just blind, but .. (Score:1)
So they expect average folks to use this how?
Re:Maybe I'm just blind, but .. (Score:1)
The Anti-Spyware tool can be found here [microsoft.com].
Of course they will!! (Score:2)
Sorry, I couldn't resist.
Cheers,
Adolfo