Microsoft May Charge for Security Tools

rscrawford writes "CNN reports that Microsoft may charge extra for security software. So first they edge their competition out of the browser market, then they tie IE into the OS so tightly that a crash in IE can crash the computer, and then they make IE so vulnerable that just using it is hazardous to the typical computer's health, and now they want to CHARGE users to fix it?"

Comments

charging for fixes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. Deal with it.

Re:Seems unusually blatant

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean, they were buying up security competitors as recently as Wednesday! Wouldn't that be a bit too blatant?

You're right! Heaven forbid they get another slap on the wrist like last time! I'm shocked, absolutely shocked, that they would have the gall to monopolize a market after the terrible punishment they suffered the last time!

Charging Allows Tracing to Culprits: Chinese

[Anonymous Coward]

I applaud Microsoft's plan to charge for security tools. By charging for the tools, Microsoft maintains a record of everyone who is using the tools. China is a major source of spam, viruses, and malware. Chinese companies writing this crap are sure to buy the tools in order to reverse engineer them and to determine the maximum weakness of the browser and the OS. The aim is to write even deadlier viruses and malware.

By maintaining records of the customers of the security tools, Microsoft can assist federal authorities in locating the culprits behind the next wave of viruses and malware.

Sometimes, Microsoft does the right thing.

Re:Once again, Microsoft blames the users.

[AstroDrabb]

That's why Apple has it exactly right. You can use a Mac like a toaster or TV.

Yup, Apple did it exactly right that no more then 3% of the population agrees with their exactly right. I can think of no point in the past 5-10 years that more then 3% or so of the population has thought that Apple did their hardware/software exactly right. I would think that if Apple did it exactly right and the population agreed, then it would be Apple and not MS that had the massive desktop market share.