Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Anti-Spyware to Be Free of Charge

Posted by Zonk on from the just-the-right-price dept.

fubar1971 writes "During his keynote speech at the at the RSA Security Conference Bill Gates announced that the MS antispyware will be offered for free. From his speech: 'We've looked hard at the nature of this problem, and made a decision that this anti-spyware capability will become something that's available at no additional charge for Windows users -- both the blocking capability, and the scanning and removal capabilities.' Additional information at Government Computer News." Update: 02/16 16:57 GMT by Z : Microsoft was previously considering charging extra for this service.

6 of 470 comments (clear)

  1. It wasn't a big change... by garcia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the first Slashdot article blurb (emphasis mine):

    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?"

    From today's Slashdot article blurb:

    Quite a turnaround from charging extra to free.

    Looks like they never said for sure that they were going to charge extra. As you can see above it said "may". Now, are we all going to whine that MSFT shouldn't be distributing software with their OS to combat spyware because it "may" edge out competition in the spyware removal market or are we just going to complain that they considered charging people to use it when they aren't now?

    Because MSFT software (browser, OS, and extras like ActiveX) should have been programmed correctly in the first place I would expect MSFT to distribute this software for free. People should be able to clear their computers out of what shouldn't have been there from the get go.

    Personally, I don't care. I will likely continue to use what I have been using all along (although I have been trying to use the Mac for most surfing) as recent testing has shown MSFT's solution to not be quite as good as third party offerings.

    1. Re:It wasn't a big change... by pclminion · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Tires blowing out due to design flaws can end someone's life. Spyware infecting a computer due to design flaws can cause someone to format their hard-drive.

      Don't be naive. The risks of spyware go far beyond lost data. I could write a piece of software than installed itself on my enemy's system and downloaded a bunch of kiddy porn. Or, I could install something onto the workstation of an FBI agent and manipulate data pertaining to a capital investigation. Or I could leak the identities of government agents. Need I continue?

      Spyware is a lethal risk. Just because nobody has written spyware of the sort I just described (actually, it probably does exist, we just don't know about it) doesn't mean the risk isn't there.

  2. Re:Next week's news by Trolling4Columbine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft is doing the Right Thing (tm) here, and all you have for them is more snide remarks?

    How effective this tool is remains to be seen, of course. But what's notable, IMHO, is that Microsoft is making a responsible gesture to their customers.

    It's OK to show a little appreciation sometimes, even for Microsoft.

    --
    Socialism: A feeling of discontent and resentment caused by a desire for the possessions or qualities of another.
  3. Re:Watch for the Error.log file by aug24 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's fairly normal for a test-phase application to do more logging than is even faintly reasonable for a release-phase application. Mine do.

    For the next two points, I have never thought the MS multi-user model was worth its weight in rat shit. YMMV ;-) "Fast user switching" should be, well, fast. Like pressing ctrl-alt-f8 fast. Ho hum.

    Last point? Well, I have always wondered if MS developers put their beta-ware out for testing, then sit back and go "hey, no bugs yet" for three months, then release it, all the while never even noticing that they forgot to build the feedback mechanism ;-)

    Justin.

    --
    You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
  4. Let see by jerometremblay · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BEFORE

    they were evil because they wanted to charge for something everybody using their crappy OS needs.

    AFTER

    they will be evil because they will bundle useful software with their OS killing competing third parties.

    Have another good day on /. Microsoft!

  5. Spyware BAD! Spam zombies GOOD! by dillon_rinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Judging from Microsoft's behavior, they believe that spyware is bad - so bad, that they are willing to devote large sums of money to produce a product that they will charge $0 for. Why? I would guess it's because spyware can denigrate overall system performance, making it seem that Windows is slow or insecure.

    On the other hand, Microsoft refuses to provide security patches for free. If you haven't paid for a license, they will not provide you with security patches. If spam zombies and worms find their way onto your unsecured system, Microsoft doesn't care. I presume that this is because the spam does not appear to be a problem with Windows.

    But it is. I conclude that Microsoft is not concerned with security, but with the APPEARANCE of security.