World domination failure

[JB]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7737520.stm

2% eh?

Think I'll stick to my free version of Avast.

[Rik]

Google AV will be along shortly.

[Simon]

As usual, I expect MS will only provide the bare minimum protection, but even so, it's a step in the right direction.  What they should do is block network access unless the (or another) security product is enabled and updated.

[Rik]

Can you imagine the outcry if they did.

[Simon]

From the spammers, virus writers, and non-security conscious computer users?  Yes, and wouldn't it be great!

[Rik]

It would, but you can imagine how the press and legislators would oppose it.

[Simon]

Is it me?  I think you're going to have to spell out why, Rik. 

[Rik]

Because MS would be seen as abusing their near-monopoly position to restrict access to the net.

[Simon]

Well, I suppose it might then push more people in the direction of Linux. 

[Rik]

That would appear likely, and if people made it through installing that, they'd probably be competent on the net.

[Sebby]

I think it is a step in the right direction, although I don't see what it's going to achieve. There are already many good, free antivirus programs out there, but the problem is a lack of awareness. Microsoft's offering isn't going to come bundled with Windows, so the issue of unprotected systems will remain. Unless, of course, MS put something into Windows, perhaps in the security centre, that links to their AV program if something else isn't installed.

It's good to read that it's not going to be anything like OneCare - it's a terrible application!

[Rik]

OneCare always makes me think of the American medical profession for some reason.

[Sebby]