Microsfts new security product?? OneCare

[eeyrjmr]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5032832.stm

now since this is selling at $50 and since it is ment to secure their OS it just doesn't seem right somehow.



Don't get me wrong it is good for MS to be securing the OS, BUT to do it with a solution that papers over the issue is, for lack of a better word, criminal.
Why should we have to pay for security from the provider of the OS, if they know what needs to be protected then surly they know where to look in the OS to stop it being exploited


The price of a Microsoft OS and now to pay for the security is getting close to the price of Office. I was tempted with buying Vista BUT if it seems you have to pay extra (a yearly fee no less) to ensure you are protected I am very glad I am more then upto speed with Linux

Linux + Nintendo:Wii is more then enough

[MajorDomo]

I ran the Beta for many months and finally uninstalled the damn thing. It doesn't play nice with some of the other malware app I run like Spybot, etc. It would be a good product for Joe Blow who runs nothing and wants complete coverage without having to think about it, but for the computer savvy, it's another piece of bloated software.

[Digital-Vortex]

I tend to agree with the OP. this is really stupid.

especially when people using pirate versions of windows still get security updates and they dont pay a penny!

So people who pay their hard earned money get some extra software, most of which sucks.

but for more they will tell you its secure...?

I dont get their logic!

[nst6563]

I dont get their logic!

Corporate logic revolves around nothing but making more $$$.

[SJConsultant]

Don't get me wrong it is good for MS to be securing the OS, BUT to do it with a solution that papers over the issue is, for lack of a better word, criminal.
Why should we have to pay for security from the provider of the OS, if they know what needs to be protected then surly they know where to look in the OS to stop it being exploited

It is all really simple, You can't stop an end user from infecting a system, if a user wants to see that screensaver, video, or download music, then the system will eventually get infected with something.

Try as anyone might, but you simply cannot prevent joe avg computer user from screwing up their own system.

[Langford]

There will probably be some people who will buy it because the product will be pushed somehow in Windows. M$ may be surprised by how many people will avoid something that wants to be subscribed to. I would avoid the product because it is new and untested, while I have software that I already know works; Having to pay protection money for a PC that one already owns is something that is universally disliked.

95% of the systems people bring to me have nothing physically wrong with them, what they have wrong with them is that the system came with a subscription based anti-virus program that was never subscribed to. On top of that, the users don't really know how to use what they have. Even if the price sounds cheap, most people won't pay for what they don't understand. Some people might use it if it came with their PC, and was paid-up for a couple of years, but the moment it asks for credit card information, it's over.

From another viewpoint, isn't it putting all of ones eggs in one basket. M$ has been very secretive about Windows venerabilities in the past, and have even started scheduling the updates as a way of disguising how many are still being produced. Can they really be trusted to secure their own OS? On top of that, a virus author would only have to know the software from a single company to compromise as many systems as possible.

Having said that, I am sure that there are tech support vendors who will by into M$ services. The services may not be worth having, but if a company knew anything about their systems they wouldn't have been going to a vendor to begin with. These services, because of the integration with Windows, will allow these vendors to hire fewer employees, and maximize profits. No matter how well a techie performs their job, the vendor they work for is constantly seeking way to eliminate their job position.

[Phoenix86]

now since this is selling at $50 and since it is ment to secure their OS it just doesn't seem right somehow.
Blame the EU ala Media Player fiasco. If it was an add-in for free they would be sued under monopoly rules.

You can't have it both ways and MS isn't going to have a new version of windows for each add-on they develop like the N versions for media player in the EU. We'd have N, O, P, Q, R, S versions and various combinations. It's bad enough with the 11ty billion versions already out there.

The end result is we are going to have to pay for each add-on separately, especially if there's an existing competitive market.