Microsoft cooking up free antivirus

[Matthew DeCarlo]

In addition to squashing fake antivirus software, Microsoft has announced that it is preparing to show its anticipated free AV service, Morro. The software will compete with Symantec and McAfee products and will be free for Windows users. Although investors and analysts see it as a long-term threat, officials at the two antivirus makers do not fear Morro.

After failing to deliver with OneCare, I have to wonder how Morro will fare. The announcement is attributed with contributing to a recent .5% and 1.3% drop in Symantec and McAfee shares. All the while, Microsoft’s stock has risen 2.1%. Precisely how much insight that provides in terms of Morro’s potential success is certainly open to interpretation.

Redmond’s latest attempt at sweeping up the antivirus market should begin by the end of the year. It’s no secret that Microsoft has earned a monopolistic aura and is frequently slammed with antitrust suits. That said, I can’t help but question whether or not AV companies will eventually react similarly to those which attacked Microsoft over Internet Explorer.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/35056-microsoft-cooking-up-free-antivirus.html

 

[Guest]

Not trusing microsoft patches, it's impartial nature (blocks competitive processes)

routing all my traffic to MS for Processing is insane.

MS can't get a clean product off the shelf, makes ram hog programs and DOES NOT think for one second about older PC's and how the "new" programming will impact them.

We have seen Vista, we have seen countless Wix exploits.

MS should keep making the garbage that they are now and not add to expansion into a marketplace where we don't believe them anyway.

if they fixed 1/2 of the holes, then we would not need the AV

 

[mflynn]

10-4 to that Guest! Well said!

Mike

 

[JDoors]

At least MS could make a better case for providing an anti-virus app than they did for including IE exclusively as a part of the operating system (which I had no problem with either). Not that that'll deter the lawsuits once it's successful.

... waiting for the first "day one" exploit of their anti-virus software.

 

[anthonywilliam]

Why do you say MS failed to deliver with Onecare. It looks after my little network quite admirably. Yes it has its moments but what program doesn't.

 

[Guest]

Well, I think that Microsoft`s approach to annouce a new/free AV is but another step in trying to dominate the computing market.. their policy is clear now (at least for me!), if they cannot own certain company/product, they will definitely try to make their own!

We have seen SilverLight, OneCare and other products which was developed either to compete or replace current market products but that was another failure! and in most cases left end-users frustrated..

Few days ago, I woke up to see Bing.com! they call it a decision engine ( they claim that they built a new search technology from scratch) ..I claim that it was a waste of time! Google is still the worlds popular search engine...

I think that MS should focus on OS market, build a creative, SECURE, fast, reliable Operating Systems and just leave the market as it is..we dont want to read later that MS has decided to creat an AutoCAD suite or even trying to compete with Adobe PhotoShop!

Thanks.

 

[JeddyB]

Umm...

Mr Guest person, you say that Microsoft should build a more SECURE operating system. Umm, well, wouldn't creating a free, powerful anti-virus count as exactly that? I mean you can't really make an operating system secure without integrating some sort of security...

 

[Guest]

@JeddyB Security in terms of inherant os security, as apposed to security in terms of a 3rd party firewall/scanner.

 

[Guest]

Thanks JeddyB for clearing this out..

Actually, what I meant by SECURE OS is that MS should focus on the built-in security of the OS and the security should be a core service in the OS rather than creating separate AV modules.

Dont you notice that giving a name to the AV make it some how competitive to other names?
at the begining OneCare and now Morro, if their intentions was to deliver a secure OS they would just fix the backdoors in the OS!

Three years ago, they launched VISTA and was accounced as the most SECURE OS ever, it took them 11 years to create (as they said) ..later and within a very short period in compare to XP SPs, they launced the first service pack, in additional to severat security patches and updates... now we are expecting Windows7, which agian they promised to be most secure, at the same time they are announcing a new/free AV, for me this is suspicious about the level of confidence they are putting in their new OS.

 

[foxrox]

Why wouldn't we want to read later that MS is producing an alternative to AutoCad or Adobe products. Maybe then their ludicrously overpriced software would become affordable due to competition. It's easy to demonize a company like MS, but the bottom line is competition is ALWAYS a good thing in a free market.

What's the worst thing that can happen? A worst, MS product might not work as well. At best, it would work as good or better, and come at an affordable price. How could that be bad?

 

[LinkedKube]

Its not bad foxrox, imo at least. Competition creates better products for you and I, and even Guest too.

 

[Guest]

I think you both missed the point!

Wouldnt it be weird to hear that Adobe is working out a new OS? and why they donot do it? because they already have a great product and instead of competing others they are focusing on their own product and are doing well...very well

Micorosft are also doing well.. in OS they are dominant so let them focus and deliver good and realiable OS before entering AV or other markets...

Iam not agianst MS to do AutoCAD or photoshop similars but before doing so, let them first satisfy Windows OS end users

 

[Rick]

if their intentions was to deliver a secure OS they would just fix the backdoors in the OS!

Microsoft has put a REALLY low priority on security in the past and rather than starting from scratch, they've just been trying to fill the holes. Ultimately though, there's nothing you can do to fix the *user*.

I see MS bashing is still fashionable, even where it might irrational.

It's probably also worth noting the most critical comments are always by unnamed "Guests". I wonder why?

 

[JDoors]

@Guest: "I think that MS should focus on OS market, build a creative, SECURE, fast, reliable Operating Systems and just leave the market as it is."

I can certainly see your point. However, Windows is so popular it's the target of every nitwit with a computer, so there's NO WAY to make it 100% secure (try making your house 100% secure, or your car). After they release ANY product the morons of the world will get busy trying to crack it, to find any flaw, exploit any bug, so no matter what they do, no matter how much time and money they spend, we're still screwed.

Like I said though, I see your point. How much more secure could Windows be if they spent ALL their money on it rather than trying to expand their product line? Then again, with cloud computing, Unix, etc., maybe they see the handwriting on the wall and feel it's necessary to create an alternative to being the major OS provider to the world?

 

[tomrice32]

I hope they're not going to include this with Windows 7! They're going to have to provide the option of Norton, McAfee, AVG, NOD32, Avast, Trend Micro, Kaspersky and AntiVir if they do that or us poor Europeans will be victims of anti-trust and what then? :-o

 

[JeddyB]

Re: reply thing

Thanks JeddyB for clearing this out..
Actually, what I meant by SECURE OS is that MS should focus on the built-in security of the OS and the security should be a core service in the OS rather than creating separate AV modules.....

I see where your coming from now sorry if I was rude about it.

 

[spyda]

Guest.. it might be worth considering that the nature of IT is that the software drives the hardware. Also understand that users with old computers are in the minority of sales for major corporations like microsoft. The solution is simple. get the hardware recommended for the OS. I hear people bicker over windows vista. I have a box that handles vista just fine. As for patches, threats continually evolve so updates are a necessity.

Windows live onecare delivered antivirus protection without hogging all my resources compared to my benchmark result with Mcaffee and Norton( a 20% reduction in my comps peak performance)

Just to clarify, there is no such thing as and will never be a "SECURE" OS. There will always be and back doors. Not because they are intentionally written into the system, but because the cmmunity uses the same platform for programming languages and anyone savvy enough can find weaknesses. Microsoft is currently receiving flack because it is number 1. If some day Mac or Linux take the market share, you'll hear people say.. meh, microsoft was better.

 

[Guest]

spyda.. first you said that Vista users shoud upgrade their hardware "..The solution is simple. get the hardware recommended for the OS." later you complained from Norton "...without hogging all my resources compared to my benchmark result with Mcaffee and Norton( a 20% reduction in my comps peak performance) " so why you dont work by your own advise and upgrade your RAM capabilities to meet Norton recommended hardware!!! any IT person will recommend SECURITY on other measurements (Money)

When it comes to AV we should not look at cheap and free solution...Microsoft is doing so just to compete and dominate the market..they are testing their new AV with the market end users and this is very cheap...

please have a look at their own comment on OneCare..

"Microsoft has said that its OneCare security suite has "a problem" with the underlying antivirus code, and admitted that security is just "a little part of Microsoft". (Microsoft)

the full story can be found on this link: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39286351,00.htm

 

[Guest]

from the same article it was mentioned that Microsoft apologised for the problems and has issued an update that has now been automatically pushed out to OneCare customers, to halt the false positive identification as malware of Outlook .pst and Outlook Express .dbx files.

lol! i cant imagine what the hell "Apologised" will favor me if I had replaced my NOD32 with OneCare ))

 

[Guest]

Let's look back at what Microsoft said in 2003, when it bought the core technology behind OneCare. "Customers told us they needed a safer, more trustworthy computing experience to help combat the threats posed by those who write viruses and malicious code," said Mike Nash, corporate vice president of the Security Business Unit at Microsoft. Indeed so.

Trust and responsibility are key here. If in nearly four years Microsoft has failed to create a reliable product, it is irresponsible for it to market the result as the safer, more trustworthy package promised. By the company's own admission, OneCare is fundamentally untrustworthy. Continued efforts to foist it off on customers go beyond incompetence. OneCare is an insult, and the longer it stays on the market the stronger that insult gets.

Microsoft must withdraw the software immediately. It is poisoning any message the company has about being more responsible about security, listening to customers and being a trustworthy partner. It stands as evidence of incompetence and inability to innovate, of a cynical attitude to the market, of all the attributes Microsoft's competition — and, increasingly, its customers — associate with the brand.

This poison will touch everything Microsoft does, from the rest of the Live branded offerings to the core operating system and application products. For if the company doesn't care about its customers in one area, it cannot be expected to do so in any area.

If the company cannot operate with trust and responsibility then ultimately it cannot survive.

 

[T77]

ms wants to enter every arena be it av,search..........
first they should try to make a good os
second i think their av wont be able to compete with norton and others
their live one care was a failure.
i installed it once and it said that i was at risk because i didnt have ie7 installed.
i used opera at that time not ie so how can i be at risk?

 

[bjlauritz]

Perhaps part of the back room deals with computer manufacturers obliges MS to render computers obsolete every 3 years or so.