Gates Says Anti-Something Software Offerings Will Come Free
from the gotta-do-something dept
With Microsoft buying up anti-spyware and anti-virus companies left and right over the past few months, many were questioning whether or not they would eventually turn around and sell those products to users who mainly need to use them because Microsoft didn't successfully patch the security holes in their own software. Today, Bill Gates suggested that these products will remain free, assuming, of course, you can prove you have an authorized copy -- which could end up being something of a nuisance. Others in the PC security space are trying to spin the story in a way that doesn't make it sound like Microsoft just deflated their tires, but you have to wonder how those who have recently invested tons of money into the space must feel.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Anti-spyware yes but anti-virus?
I wouldn't be shocked if it is ultimately given away also. However, many key players in the anti-spyware arena are still small change that MS could roll over easily. In the AV arena, Network Associates and Symantec would easily have the resources needed to legally challenge Microsoft just giving away a competing product to their primary source of revenue. Not that that would necessarily stop MS, but surely they have to consider such a move more carefully.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This isn't a threat to other security companies
(1) The Romanian AV company in 2002 (?) was so small that my Romanian co-workers hadn't heard of it. It was a fourth-tier player with 20 employees. It didn't even have market share outside of Romania. He bought it becuase it was cheap.
(2) The GIANT anti spyware company (their emphasis, not mine) was not a player in the space either. If he was serious he would have purchased AdAware, Spybot or WebRoot. I had to search to find a comparison between GIANT and a real software package, but I think even that study had been funded by GIANT.
(3) Sybari doesn't even make an AV engine. They are basically a GUI and reporting company.
Yes, you could feasably stitch these three products together, but non are anywhere near best of breed, or even in the same league as the top three or four players.
This is theatre. Bill wants to deflect complaints that his software has holes you can drive a truck through so he'll give you free basic spyware and free basic AV. You get what you pay for. If you want real protection you'll still buy a leader in the field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This isn't a threat to other security companie
I wouldn't be so fast in saying that. The Romanian AV company they bought *definitely* was a well known company. My ISP was already using their software at the time, and I knew many others who had it as an option as well. Saying it was unknown is simply wrong. In fact, what was surprising at the time, was that RAV was actually quite popular on Linux based systems, more so than Windows systems, so people were curious why Microsoft bought them. However, the product itself was pretty solid.
Giant, also, was definitely a player in the space. A few weeks before they had been bought, someone at Broadband Reports had run a comparison, showing that Giant out-performed all of the bigger name players. In this case, Microsoft may not have bought the most well known, but it appears they did buy the most comprehensive product.
So... they may not have bought the flashiest of names, but in both cases, they were very good products that were known in the field.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This isn't a threat to other security companie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This isn't a threat to other security companie
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Actually
Neither product is all that good from a corporate point of view.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]