Symantec and McAfee

[Dave Neve]

Hello

I'd like to know what people think about Symantec and McAfee criticising
Microsoft's Vista for having it's own security suite

I'm no fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft but even I sympathise with them on
this one.

Imagine a car seat manufacturer criticising Ford for bringing out a new car
with nice seats.

"Gee, it's not fair cos now everyone is gonna stick with their Ford seats.
It's unfair competition. Ford should make cars without seats so that the
public can choose"

That's what seems to be happening here

Also, I changed from Symantec and their expensive 'we only update your
software once a week crap' to a free antivirus (Avlast) with a 'we update
your software once a day policy' and it has been fine.

Until Symantec provides good quality products/services at a reasonable
price, they should put a sock in it.

Regards

Dave Neve

 

[hdrdtd]

From what I currently understand.....

Both companies were critizing MS for not releasing the proper API's to them,
so they could design their products to be compatable with Vista in time to
meet the initial release of Vista.

Microsoft has done that as of about two weeks ago.

Now, both companies are complaining that MS won't release information to
them regarding the core portions of Vista.

Evidently, they're not content to just use the API's MS is providing, they
want more information on core portions of Vista that MS wont let them have,
and MS isn't about to release that information to anyone because it is
propriority information.

No matter what, they'll find something to complain about.

Part of the MS lawsuit was regarding MS not allowing to release the proper
information on Windows to other developers so that other developers would be
able to develop their own products for Windows.

They have done that.

 

[Guest]

It's time to stop misrepresenting Kernel Patch Protection
http://www.stepto.com/default/log/displaylog1.aspx?ID=258

--
MowGreen [MVP 2003-2007]
============
*-343-* FDNY
Never Forgotten
============

 

[Jane C]

If the folks over at Alwil (Avast) and Grisoft (AVG) can get it right
without kicking up a stink, why can't Symantec and McAfee? Sour grapes,
methinks.

 

[altheim]

Hello

I'd like to know what people think about Symantec and McAfee criticising
Microsoft's Vista for having it's own security suite

I'm no fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft but even I sympathise with them on
this one.
[...]

I actually *am* a fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft. I think they
take a lot of unwarranted stick from critics for exploiting valid
business opportunities (that they tend to market buggy software
is another matter for which they do deserve criticism IMO).

As in the anti-trust indictments, which hinged on whether
or not a web browser could be considered part of the operating
system, the question comes down again to whether or not
security measures can be considered part of the operating
system. Personally I think they most indubitably should and
MS should have worked on installing better security decades
ago - not just now. Because they didn't, Symantec saw the gap
in the market and took advantage and, whatever you think of
Norton AV (personally I hate it), you can't blame Symantec for
wanting to protect their business.

However, better late than never. Symantec et al have had their
day and should go. Monopolies like MS are always despised
for their power and wealth but that is the very worst of reasons
for hating them; there are some industries (think of telephones,
railways, gas distribition) in which a monopoly works better by
reason of standardisation. Computers would all work better if
there was only one OS.

 

[Jason]

I 100% agree with you Jane C.


--
Jason

Windows Vista RC1 Build 5600 & 5728
MS Office 2007 B2TR
If the folks over at Alwil (Avast) and Grisoft (AVG) can get it right
without kicking up a stink, why can't Symantec and McAfee? Sour grapes,
methinks.

 

[Jeff]

Ahh,
One thing the Mcafee people left out is; that they actually have an AV solution that is Vista compatable.
I know;been running it;works great;btw. It's their Enterprise version. Virus Scan Enterprise v8.5i
The funny part is; it's beta too!!!
Jane's right on; sour grapes.

Jeff

I 100% agree with you Jane C.


--
Jason

Windows Vista RC1 Build 5600 & 5728
MS Office 2007 B2TR
If the folks over at Alwil (Avast) and Grisoft (AVG) can get it right
without kicking up a stink, why can't Symantec and McAfee? Sour grapes,
methinks.

 

[Robert R. Johnson Jr]

Here is an excellent article from Kaspersky supporting Microsoft's decision

http://news.com.com/Microsofts+play...vals,+Kaspersky+says/2100-7355_3-6123539.html

 

[Jeff]

Good article,
And one thing that McAfee fails to say is; they already have a Vista
compatible AV solution; working good too.
Beta even; I know I'm running it. VSE 8.51 beta 4
Under Enterprise downloads/beta programs

Jeff

 

[MICHAEL]

http://news.com.com/Microsofts+play...vals,+Kaspersky+says/2100-7355_3-6123539.html

Microsoft's playing fair with security rivals, Kaspersky says.

Microsoft's new operating system Windows Vista will not make it more difficult for antivirus
companies, Kaspersky Lab said on Friday, contradicting rivals.
In an open letter this week, U.S. antivirus maker McAfee accused Microsoft of weakening users'
protection by no longer co-operating with computer security providers and denying them access
to the core of the Vista system.

"From what we have seen of Vista, we cannot tell that Microsoft is blocking access to the
core," Natalya Kaspersky, CEO of Kaspersky Lab, a Russian computer security company. "It would
not make any sense for them (Microsoft) to stop working with other computer security companies,
because it would make their system more vulnerable to attacks."

Microsoft, the world's largest software company, entered the computer security market in June
with OneCare, which aims to protect computers from viruses, spyware and other threats.

In its open letter on Monday, McAfee said that Microsoft had firmly embedded its own security
system in Vista, which could lead to disadvantages for consumers.

"Microsoft seems to envision a world in which one giant company not only controls the systems
that drive most computers around the world but also the security that protects those computers
from viruses and other online threats," McAfee said in its letter.

Microsoft responded by saying that it had worked closely with computer security companies
throughout the development of Vista and planned to continue to do so.

"Microsoft would have to change their business completely if what McAfee says was true,"
Kaspersky said, explaining that Microsoft's business model was based on working with other
providers.

CEO Kaspersky said Microsoft had held its traditional annual meeting with computer security
companies this summer, and she had not noticed that co-operation was weakening.

Symantec and other computer security companies have also come out with criticism of Microsoft's
approach to security in Vista.

Microsoft has rejected their allegations. It has said it wishes to deliver a secure version of
Windows Vista that would be compliant with EU law.

Kaspersky Lab, which was founded in 1997 in Moscow, said it was considering a stock launch on
London's junior Alternative Investment Market within the next three years.

However, it said it wanted to wait and see first how Microsoft's new antivirus product OneCare
would fare on the market before talking to investors and seeking a listing.

"After one or two years, we will see what position on the market Microsoft's OneCare product
gets, and perhaps it will turn out that Microsoft is just one among other providers of
antivirus software," Kaspersky said.

Kaspersky's customers include BBC Worldwide, France Telecom, Telecom Italia Mobile, Russia's
largest retail bank Sberbank and several Russian ministries such as railway and finance.


Story Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited.

 

[Donald L McDaniel]

Hello

I'd like to know what people think about Symantec and McAfee criticising
Microsoft's Vista for having it's own security suite

I'm no fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft but even I sympathise with them on
this one.
[...]

I actually *am* a fan of Bill Gates and Microsoft. I think they
take a lot of unwarranted stick from critics for exploiting valid
business opportunities (that they tend to market buggy software
is another matter for which they do deserve criticism IMO).

As in the anti-trust indictments, which hinged on whether
or not a web browser could be considered part of the operating
system, the question comes down again to whether or not
security measures can be considered part of the operating
system. Personally I think they most indubitably should and
MS should have worked on installing better security decades
ago - not just now. Because they didn't, Symantec saw the gap
in the market and took advantage and, whatever you think of
Norton AV (personally I hate it), you can't blame Symantec for
wanting to protect their business.

However, better late than never. Symantec et al have had their
day and should go. Monopolies like MS are always despised
for their power and wealth but that is the very worst of reasons
for hating them; there are some industries (think of telephones,
railways, gas distribition) in which a monopoly works better by
reason of standardisation. Computers would all work better if
there was only one OS.

And I can almost bet that the one OS (in your mind, at least) would be
OS X, Linux, or Unix. Anything but the Windows OS.

Donald L McDaniel
Please reply to the original thread and newsgroup.
---------------------------------------------------------