Forum Moderators: phranque
Their new all ..singing all dancing ..update , security , av , firewall etc package
Interestingly it is known by them to "conflict" with the following
Symantec Norton Internet Security 2005
Symantec Norton Antivirus 2005
Symantec Norton SystemWorks 2005
McAfee Internet Security Suite 2005
McAfee VirusScan 8.0/2004
Trend Micro PC-cillin Internet Security 2005
( all known to be almost totally ineffectual ..my words )
but touted uptil now by MS as some of the best apps around
Some major AV companies ( and erstwhile colloborators ) are not gonna be happy with Redmond ..about being cut out of the everlasting ..gravy train ..trying to secure 'doze
For now I'm not gonna comment on the app itself ( wait for someone to rar me a copy ..for now it's restricted to USA only ..in the downloadable / installable ..as if that is a barrier to being tested by the rest of the world )..cept to say as per usual it's over 500 megs ..
there will always be competitors, but more power to MS for buying Giant, and making their own AV, AS, etc.
This beta appears to be the consumer beta package. Previous betas were a bit more restricted.
Regardless of whether you're an MS fan, this is a pretty big program for the average consumer. They're using technology similar to Windows Update but applying it to system security. The one stop approach will appeal to a lot of users and it will certainly make it easier for the less technical crowd to secure their machines.
inititial reviews: if you're foolish enough to install an ms beta of an av (allegedly) application you deserve what you get.
plus then you'll have to reinstall xp to get it out.
I'm trying to understand this: 500 mB diskspace required? What are they doing, giving you a new os? not a bad idea, maybe it's actually a linux desktop that runs over windows and shields xp from itself? Since decent quality to good quality av stuff comes in at around 40 mbytes, maybe 50, what's the other 450 for?
1) Are we going to see another round of "bundling" litigation, a la the media player lawsuits?
2) Isn't it a conflict of interest for MS to charge money for a service that fixes or prevents exploits primarily made possible by design or implementation shortcomings in their other software -- Windows, IE, Office, and Outlook?
I think that much of the problem could be avoided if Washington state would simply make it a felony offense to write, release, or sell network-enabled software with unchecked buffers, since MS apparently doesn't take such things very seriously. ;)
I also think that the media and the legal profession are going to have a field day with this.
Jim
jdMorgan ..#1 probably
..#2 precisely ..
Lawyers always make money out of something ..who writes the laws ..( before you answer "legislators" ..pulled kicking and screaming ;))against their collective wills ;) from the ranks of which profession in the majority? )..
I redraw your attentions to the upcoming plight of all of those companies who previously made their living out of trying to put filler in the cracks of activex running OS 's ..( and building the dykes around buffer overflow issues as you said Jim )..
If Joe and Jane public can be persuaded that they need this extra PAID for "plug in" ..OS ..downloadable licensed virus?( SP 2 still is by most definitions in that category )..(and I wont categorise it till I've got one delivered )..Are Joe and Jane going to continue to buy the products of what appear to have become Microsofts ex partners ( thinking particularly of Symantec here as they were even at one point recommended by MS on it's own sites )..
Their "raison d'etre" will be? ..
Given the number of desktops that run any kind of 'doze this if installed as the only approved app ( will MS disown all responsibility for anything if you run other than this?!..it sure looks like that's what they are saying here [beta.windowsonecare.com] )..if they do get the market penetration the same as their OS ( have to make it applicable to XP prox64 and Vista before tho ..interesting that they say it wont work with the architecture for now ...already that gives major clues on how it functions ..or not as the case may be )..they will cause a huge shake up of the "security" industry ..
**
Get the impression that they don't think they will make it work with x64 ever?
**
How many jobs directly or indirectly depend on coding to try to make MS stuff safer?
Related ..anyone making book on how long before the first reported exploits show up?.
( I have at least one major site in my second screen on auto refresh just waiting for the news )
..system hangs and SOD's ( now they come in more than just blue ) etc we dont count ..as neither did MS in all their OS's or apps upto now .
It's not because they are big that we get on their cases jim ..it's because with size and market dominance should come responsiblity ..It's harder to go elsewhere for the average Joe or Jane if the problem comes pre installed as the OS ..new ..out of the box ..paid for wether you want it or not :)
Related ..anyone making book on how long before the first reported exploits show up?.
( I have at least one major site in my second screen on auto refresh just waiting for the news )
Related [crime-research.org]..Not the precisely the same subject ..but critical IMO for those running any flavour of 'doze
More here [computerworld.com]..in English
Original source article site here /ici [frsirt.com]..this site should be in everyones bookmarks .:)
