Slashdot Mirror


MS to Launch Paid Security Subscription Service

user24 writes "MSN reports that Microsoft 'is launching a subscription service aimed at providing better protection for the Windows operating system, which has been vulnerable to Internet attacks. Windows Live OneCare will protect up to three computers for about 50 dollars a year.' From the OneCare website: 'Windows Live OneCare works continuously, automatically, and quietly in the background on your PC, ever vigilant against threats but never in the way, allowing you to have fun and be more productive:'"

4 of 359 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Incredible by Gorshkov · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is a very major difference between a 10 year old washing machine needing repairs and parts replacements after good, solid service and use over a period of time, and having to have the Maytag Man show up on your doorstep once a week if you want to be able to do more than one load a month without having your clothes get caught in the gears.

  2. Re:In search of the almighty $ by Gorshkov · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No double standard at all. Symantec et. al. exist only because of Microsoft's design/implimentation errors - they should not exist at all - there should be no market for microsoft to push them OUT of.

    If microsoft started addressing the problem and making the changes that rendered 3rd party virus programmes unnecessary, I would not only applaud them, but I might even change my mind about being willing to even DEVELOP windows applications.

    In 25 years as a programmer, I have never written a windows *anything* for a client, and never will. Because when the sucker crashes (and it will), will the client blame microsoft? No, they'll blame ME - and it will affect MY reputation.

    When I write for Unix/Linux/QNX/VRTX/Anything the hell else, I can be pretty sure that if something goes boom, it IS my fault - and I should take the blame, and if it reflects badly on me, I deserve it.

    I have no problems whatsoever accepting responsibility for my errors. But there is no f..king way in HELL that I am going to send a client a programme and have them call me once a week bitching about how it keeps crashing becase it's MY fault, when it's because the damned thing is running on an unreliable piece of shit.

  3. Re:We've known the second step for ages. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There are many of us who have known the second step for ages: What do we do? We use Linux.

    Spent the entire day dealing with the CFO's laptop - one of those that happens in a Fortune 100 company on occasion. XP on a Dell decided to stop handling IP - Outlook would seize, IE and Firefox were hosed. Other than a rebuild, the system was screwed. Whole damn thing was tired. Typical fscking Microsoft "This system is more than 2 years old - I'm ready to die" crap. As if SOX regulators thought that way.

    Interestingly, the CFO asked about my teams laptops and what we use in the security dept. to make sure things run, Sarbanes Oxley auditors stay off our asses, etc. "Ah... that Linux stuff again, huh?"

    Yea. Linux made the auditors go away happy, in spite of all the Windows nightmares. Tell me Microsoft isn't ready to fall and I'll invite you into any SOX-regulated shop that knows better. Run, don't walk.

    The moment Linux can handle desktop apps, Microsoft is the next Osborne.

  4. yup by goldcd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a few windows machine.
    One - a 2003 server has never crashed - as I mainly leave that happily running Apache, mailserver etc.
    One - my big beast has bouts of flakiness - everytime it's down to a flakey driver for some obscure or cutting edge piece of hardware. (a problem MS has attempted to address with signed/unsigned drivers).
    Now if a company produces a buggy driver for Windows, you can usually be pretty sure they put even less effort into the linux one (if they bothered at all).