Code Name Morro: Useful Or Useless?

[Saint_Michael 3]

On the eve of Windows 7 Microsoft plans to roll out some special, free Anti-Virus service. Of course, most of us laugh hysterically at the thought it would work successfully. I have to admit though that even though it is Microsoft I am still a bit surprised that they are not making people pay $300 for it or some other outrageous price.

However, the following quote really makes me laugh because of the fact Microsoft is blaming someone else for their unsecured operating system.

 

"Microsoft originally got into anti-viral protection," he added, "because they felt that Symantec and McAfee weren't really getting enough penetration, people's machines were getting infected, and it was impacting the Microsoft experience."

 

Obviously are not getting the penetration because of how secretive they are with the back end of things, of course it is sad that any good hacker can figure out the back end kernel then some employees. On top of that it is not that hard to disguise a trojan, virus, malware, spyware etc etc as a legit program and that has been the problem since the beginning.

I can only imagine that that this piece of software will do more then just protect computers, I wouldn't be surprise if I smell identity sniffing and data collecting just to spy on their customers just a bit more. As for direct competition with Symantec and McAfee, the only competition they will get is a forced download of some sorts, because once their service hits the market every hacker, cracker and shape-shifting line backer will go after this and make it pointless and useless and a gateway for more good stuff.

Personally I rather pay the money for the software I know that offers me good protection, on top of that I have various other software to help me out as well. Sure I try it out and see how good it is, but odds are if it is as "basic" as Microsoft says it is, then I might as well run trial ware on my computer and call it a protected computer.
 

[Fractured.Logic 0]

[Emote] ~snort! coughchokewheeze...~ I take a moment to collect myself. [/Emote]

 

What a ridiculous joke. They make monstrous fools of themselves harrassing Linux and accusing its PICs of stealing "their" patents and re-distributing them for free, only to sneak around and try to steal the freeware thunder from under their feet and try to make themselves look like good samaritans.

 

I am not going to even give this a moment's worth of research. Just another farce, as far as I'm concerned!

 

[xpress 0]

"Microsoft originally got into anti-viral protection," he added, "because they felt that Symantec and McAfee weren't really getting enough penetration, people's machines were getting infected, and it was impacting the Microsoft experience."

That was one of the funniest comments I have ever read. What are they talking? They are blaming Symantec and McAfee for not protecting optimized protection to their operating system? and that is the reason for Windows's poor performance? What does it mean? They want third party developers to provide good antivirus products for Windows optimal performance? Then what the hell Microsoft is doing on their OS products? Why don't they try to make an OS strong and invulnerable?

By the way, I don't believe in their own Antivirus product, that will be definitely another failure like their inbuilt Windows Defender.. which is one of the worst anti spyware products...and if Microsoft bundled it with Windows7 that product will definitely uses lot of its resources and will degrade its performance and most people will try turn it off or remove it to get better performance of their product.

I don't think they will spy on our system with this product, because if they want to do so, they can do that without a product like this. They should concentrate on devoloping and making their OS less vulnerable instead of creating new products like this..

[Saint_Michael 3]

Well if they were smarted they build it specifically for Windows 7 and just like Spybot recognize any changes made to the system and prompting you accept or not. Forget about designing it for three operating systems and design it for the one.

[Unparallelogram 0]

I agree, if Windows Defender is any indication, this probably won't end well. Defender is the reason why I can't run large applications without significant (think TENS of MINUTES) startup lag. It also has a rather "interesting" idea of what is harmful software to my system and what isn't. Particularly, it tries to stop me from using what it thinks might lead me to someday pirate, whereas it's powerless to stop any "bad" software with a decent legal department backing it. Personally, I've had a bad experience with defender, especially since I can't seem to get rid of it, and I would hate to see a forced antivirus thing from Microsoft further slowing down Windows 7. The current 7 beta seems even slower and bulkier than Vista already, and I would be sad to see it worsened.