Options

Antivirus absent from XP SP2

Unknown
edited March 2004 in Science & Tech
It's no shock news, but it has again been reiterated that the next service pack for Windows XP, will not contain antivirus software. The real question is though, why not?

[blockquote]When Microsoft bought GeCad's virus business in June, executives said that the initial plan was to charge a subscription for virus updates, but that a decision on how to get the software in front of users had not been decided.
[/blockquote]
[link=http://www.cbronline.com/currentnews/8ded35f6a5f9d9ac80256e4a00386099]The full report[/link]

Comments

  • kanezfankanezfan sunny south florida Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    they should be forced to have that crap installed, with free updates for life. do you know how much money that would save the entire world?
  • SpinnerSpinner Birmingham, UK
    edited March 2004
    kanezfan wrote:
    they should be forced to have that crap installed, with free updates for life. do you know how much money that would save the entire world?

    Nope, but I'd guess it would be quite a lot. :tongue:
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    You know why they didn't include it?

    Because **** heads like Norton, AVG, and other AV companies would pitch a fit and land them in the lawsuit bin for monopoly.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Hopefully they will have decided how to do this by the time Longhorn rolls around. Microsoft will be releasing security for Enterprise .NET and web servers that is enhanced (as packages), about the time the SP2 hits. They are actually getting AV and other security demand from Enterprise customers, so maybe the AV will be rolled out on servers first.

    Microsoft is entering a compatitive AV market, if they do this at the consumer level. At the server level of protection, they can charge Enterprise rates. If ISP and corporate servers scan for viruses, fewer will get through, and it is one heck of lot easier to push new definitions to an always-on server than to boxes on dial-up (not intended to insult anyone, that is a fact of life).

    If the end node home-based boxes of folks like you and I have no AV installed, we are to blame, there are lots of products like that out there we CAN use and update. Some alternatives are cheaper than others, but we are responsible for our own boxes.

    When the home users each take responsibility to keep their own boxes safe and AV protected, then we will have much slower spreading virus, worm, trojan, and malware "junk" on the web-- in part because the virus writers rely on many people having boxes that are not protected right and use those unprotected boxes to spread viruses.

    To lick the problem, we ALL get to be a part of the solution. No code is or can be perfect on all boxes it might be put on. That includes O\Ss. Period.

    John D.
  • SpinnerSpinner Birmingham, UK
    edited March 2004
    OMG Kanez', love your new avatar. ;D
  • kanezfankanezfan sunny south florida Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Thrax wrote:
    You know why they didn't include it?

    Because **** heads like Norton, AVG, and other AV companies would pitch a fit and land them in the lawsuit bin for monopoly.

    for once I agree with you about something MS related. that is dead on correct I think. I think in this case though, since we're talking abot a vital part of the OS that should be there, it ought to be an exception. doesn't make sense. i can understand not bundling in IE or WMP or MSN, but anti virus software should be a default, built in thing on windows.
  • kanezfankanezfan sunny south florida Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Spinner wrote:
    OMG Kanez', love your new avatar. ;D

    rofl thanks, it cracks me up every time i look at it. i don't even know who it is or where i got it from anymore, but it's hillarious
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Hell, even if you unbundle browsers and WMP. The OS doesn't serve the basic needs of an OS; and if you include them, it's a monopoly.

    It's BS.
  • madmatmadmat
    edited March 2004
    Maybe they should un-bundle everything from windows except notepad and wordpad and sell the OS for $10 and let us spend our money on 3rd party everything else.
  • BlackHawkBlackHawk Bible music connoisseur There's no place like 127.0.0.1 Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Would it still be considered monopoly if they give the option to install or not? But I bet there're gonna be alot of people with problems cause they installed multiple antiviruses.
  • qparadoxqparadox Vancouver, BC
    edited March 2004
    *sigh* Its not that including the add-on products is a monopoly. Its that Microsoft has been tried and found guilty of having an ILLEGALY OBTAINED monopoly on operating systems. Using an illegally obtained monopoly position to entrench yourself in other markets (browser, media player, anti-virus) goes against Federal Anti-Trust legislation. If you don't like it talk to your congresscritter. The fact is its the law and Microsoft has broken it in the past and continues to flout it.

    Since when was a browser and media player required for an operating system? Not every computer is used to surf the web or play mp3s. At the most basic level an operating system is merely an abstraction layer that allows the user to interact with the hardware without having to directly write the code to do so. Browsers, Media Players etc are all external to the core operating system.

    If Microsoft had allowed the option during install to not install various components and allowed OEM's to install barebones versions of windows with the extraneous stuff packaged then there wouldn't be an anti-trust case. But Microsoft didn't and now they're facing the music and all of us have to put up with the crap. Life does suck :).
Sign In or Register to comment.