Slashdot Mirror


Intel Buys McAfee

Several readers have noted that Intel has agreed to buy McAfee, the computer antivirus software maker, for about $7.7 billion in cash. There is also a press release available if you are into that sort of thing.

52 of 377 comments (clear)

  1. Will they kill it? by guruevi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pretty please? Just give all their victims - I mean customers - their money back and just kill it off already. McAfee has no right even existing.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:Will they kill it? by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      And deprive millions of corporate IT drones of their false sense of security?!?!? Are you insane, man???

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Will they kill it? by couchslug · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you want to drive demand for new processors, sell bloatware. :P

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  2. Holy cow by mike260 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That junk is worth $7bn?

    1. Re:Holy cow by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      No, but it probably wastes at least that much each year in CPU watts.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:Holy cow by RabbitWho · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think we're all thinking that. I'm so amazed at this. Someone paid 7 billion for the right to sell people magic beans.

    3. Re:Holy cow by HamburglerJones · · Score: 3, Funny

      That junk is worth $7bn?

      No... Intel was up too late and made an impulse buy. It is trying to see if it can throw in McAfee with its sham-wow and shake-weight to trade for the neighbor's old lawnmower.

    4. Re:Holy cow by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I imagine intel has watched the home AV market get gobbled up by MS Security Essentials and may want to join in the free for home use game.

      I'd love to see a shakeup in the AV industry as its pretty terrible right now. I'm sick of seeing machines with horrible infections because the trial of the AV has expired. End users cannot be trusted to maintain subscriptions for something they barely understand. I also imagine intel is so deeply in bed with MS that AV is now their problem as well.

      McAfee's enterprise products sell for whatever reason. I imagine those will continue to be expensive.

    5. Re:Holy cow by tayhimself · · Score: 5, Informative
      Disk Encryption is another big part of McAfee. We not only use their software, an update of which caused BSODs a few months ago, but we've also moved to this Safeboot encryption product which is now called endpoint encryption. Intel has recently added AES-NI encryption instructions to its chips which they will likely port safeboot over to.

      I like truecrypt and MSE for windows systems myself but I am not an IT director.

    6. Re:Holy cow by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Why would the existence of MS Security Essentials possibly convince Intel to shell out billions to get in on that action?

      AV, as it stands, is basically a thankless, reactive chore, with the occasional destructive false positive to brighten your day. Now that Microsoft has come out with a competent(by the standards of the industry) and unobtrusive(by the standards of the industry) free offering from a trusted (if you are running Windows, clearly you trust them to some degree) name, the only gold left in home AV is fool's gold.

      There is still some cash to be had in corporate AV, since MS ain't exactly giving ForeFront away; but what would a company whose software experience consists largely of compilers, drivers, and the occasional linux project want getting in there?

      And, even if they do have some clever plan involving leveraging their Intel AMT motherboard stuff, why McAfee? There are plenty of smaller, presumably cheaper, outfits that are at least as competent, many more so, and the brand name won't matter once Intel starts using theirs. One imagines that they could have gotten Kaspersky for half as much, if that.

      Color me confused.

    7. Re:Holy cow by LUH+3418 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't get why intel would buy a software company in the first place, much less one that makes not-so-great antivirus software. Seems to me they should have put that huge wad of cash into R&D.

    8. Re:Holy cow by labradore · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually, Apple is the largest retailer of music. Also, they are doing their best to become the most important distributor for TV, Movies and eBooks. Apple sells about $5B per year in thru the iTunes Music/Apps/Movies/TV/Books Store and those sales are growing at about 25% per year. While that's only about 7% of their sales right now, it's growing steadily and likely to be about as profitable as the hardware businesses. It's also likely to equal or outstrip Mac sales within a year or two.

      No, Apple is not primarily a distributor, but they are in line to become the biggest distributor. That scares the distribution competition because Apple can afford push down distribution margins to promote high-margin device sales. So, you're right they don't need the money from iTMS but iPhones and iPods and iPads aren't nearly as attractive without iTMS--that's part of what you buy when you buy the device.

      And that's the difference. Intel doesn't NEED McAfee, whereas Apple can't really operate without iTMS. Intel might find a way to differentiate future processors by adding industrial-strength security to their chips by integrating AV and management suite facilities with specialized hardware, but Intel has always benefited from being the premiere supplier of open-platform technologies and they are forced to be that way both by the market and by regulation. If they change that significantly to increase margins, they may become vulnerable to attack on both fronts. To me, $8Bn is just too much for McAfee. I think they could have got the same capabilities for a lot less money. McAfee sells low-margin, crappy AV software. They earn a few hundred million a year. Intel earns 4x the return on investment in its existing business (relative to McAfee). Also, I believe the embarrassing products McAfee sells will dilute Intel's brand. In the words of Warren Buffett, as an INTC shareholder "I feel poorer".

    9. Re:Holy cow by nine-times · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not only that, but I believe Intel owns Grisoft, which means they already own an antivirus package. I don't get what they're doing here.

  3. Strange by lennier1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Couldn't they have bought something that's actually worth the money?

    1. Re:Strange by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sorry, but AOL isn't for sale at the moment ;-)

  4. Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    McAfee is finally in the hands of someone qualified to figure out how to completely uninstall it.

    1. Re:Finally... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      McAfee is finally in the hands of someone qualified to figure out how to completely uninstall it.

      Or at least 99.999967217864781687% of it.

    2. Re:Finally... by RivenAleem · · Score: 4, Funny

      They intend on replacing the software with a looping .gif that pretends to scan your computer when you click on the icon in the systray. Thus they will continue to provide the same core functionality* at a fraction of the processor capability

      *core functionality may consist of, and won't exceed convincing idiots that their computer is secure

    3. Re:Finally... by alx5000 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you mean 1998.999967217864781687?

      --
      My 0.02 cents
    4. Re:Finally... by alexhs · · Score: 5, Funny

      Do you mean 1998.999967217864781687?
      --
      My 0.02 cents

      Well, that's where your 0.02 cents come handy as:
      1998.999967217864781687 + 0.0002 = 1999.

      --
      I have discovered a truly marvelous proof of killer sig, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
  5. Wow! by spiffmastercow · · Score: 5, Funny

    You could buy a cross country railroad for that kind of money!

    1. Re:Wow! by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 5, Funny

      You could buy a cross country railroad for that kind of money!

      Finally, some standard units instead of all this USD nonsense!

      --
      R.Mo
  6. Wow, Intel jumps the shark by DeafDumbBlind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    WTF are they thinking. Granted they're sitting on a pile of cash, but this is silly.
    If I were an INTC shareholder I would be pretty pissed off.
    If they were looking for something to do with the cash, they should have just paid out a nice dividend.

    --


    Jesus used to be my co-pilot, but we crashed in the mountains and I had to eat him.
  7. All part of their core business by PingSpike · · Score: 5, Funny

    Intel plans to release a final update to all Mcafee users that will force uninstall the software from their machines, increasing the performance of Intel systems by 300%.

    1. Re:All part of their core business by plams · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or, they plan to make it even slower, and encourage users to upgrade their processors!

  8. Lycos part deux by aliens · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can see it now 10 years from now, just like Lycos, "McaFee purchased for $7.7 billion in 2010, sold for $200 million in 2015 has just been sold again today for $34 million to some company in Vietnam." Seriously, has anyone personal or enterprise had good experiences with their products?

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
    1. Re:Lycos part deux by hedwards · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Possibly, but I suspect that Intel might be after patents. While McAfee is crap software, it wouldn't surprise me if they had some patents that could help Intel with putting better anti-virus protection into their processors or adding acceleration for heuristics.

  9. The press release is fluff by Iamthecheese · · Score: 4, Interesting

    100% marketing fluff. I really, REALLY want to know what happened under the table, what's still happening under the table, what McAfee has that 15 cheap startups don't, and how this is going to affect Intel hardware in the future.

    --
    If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
  10. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Just diversifying their portfolio or are there other objectives at work?

    They're gonna add even more bloat, sucking more CPU cycles, forcing people to upgrade, and therefore buy more Intel CPUs.

  11. What to do, oh what to do... by Ornlu · · Score: 4, Funny

    A list of better things you could do with $7b:

    1. Fill a swimming pool with $100 bills and go nuts.

    2. Buy several sky scrappers and blow em up, just for shits and giggles.

    3. Buy Kaspersky.

    4. Nothing. Absoluetly nothing. Ever again.

    Any other suggestions?

    1. Re:What to do, oh what to do... by cgenman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      5. Buy Nvidia, and have an on-board graphics card that isn't terrible.

      6. Buy AMD. Twice. Getting ATI in the process. Twice.

      7. Buy Analog Devices and make a play for the low-powered market.

      8. Actually bring Canoe Lake to market.

      9. Send everyone in the United States two stuffed Intel Bunnies.

  12. Makes perfect sense by Are+You+Kidding · · Score: 3, Funny

    As most slashdotters already know, nothing slows your computer down more effectively than Mcafee AV--even if you have the latest and fastest Intel CPU. Optimizing Mcaffe's code would probably add more real horsepower to Intel's processors and be less expensive than designing a new generation of chips.

  13. Perfect match by Tridus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Intel needs people to think they need these faster multi core CPUs they keep cranking out.

    And who is better at slowing Windows down to the point of uselessness then Mcafee?

    It's a perfect fit. We'll see you slow, bloated software, then also sell you CPUs to make your computer usable.

    --
    -- "So they told me that using the download page to download something was not something they anticipated." - Bill Gates
  14. Re:What??? by fvandrog · · Score: 3, Informative

    Does McAfee offer other products of significant value

    They have encryption software -- making those less CPU intensive (especially for cell phone and other mobile use) might actually be moderately useful.

  15. Hardware-based AV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seems like this is the logical goal. Integrate AV at the hardware level and you should see a significant performance increase, plus tasty vendor lock-in.

  16. Re:Uh by Ihmhi · · Score: 4, Funny

    Assuming they were classy and used $100 bills (volume: 0.69 cubic inches), it would occupy about 4,427,500 cubic feet. Anyone care to take a swing at the weight? d:

  17. Direct quote from my boss by jayhawk88 · · Score: 4, Funny

    "I've got a quarter we can flip to see if this is a good or bad thing."

  18. Re:mcafee corporate is better then the home ver by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yep, welded software is way stronger.

  19. Re:Why? by fuzzix · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's just a research venture. Intel is trying to figure out how McAfee can use up so much of a CPU that it should be put out of its misery.

    Nah, Intel actually bought HP - McAfee just came bundled.

  20. McAfee haters? there is more to this deal... by arch · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Wow, I'm really surprised at this announcement and that Slashdot still has my account on profile. Good jobs on keeping that database!!!

    But seriously folks. Bashing McAfee? Are you ignorant to exactly what McAfee is? The largest AV player in the Government/Military sector. They have very large banks as customers too. But, I know it is more fun to joke about their AV performance, which is in fact on par with most AV products.

    So let me get to the business of trying to decide what this means? It is without a doubt a huge plus for Intel. They have entered into SaaS/cloud email arena with MxLogic, now have a viable FW in the Sidewinder. Can be knocking on checkpoint's gate with a EndPoint Encryption product, is the DLP solution going to rival RSA? Intel gains other network based tools such as IPS/IDS (reconnex), Network Behavioral Analysis, Foundstone, etc.

    I say the deal doesn't go through. At least, getting this past federal regulators will be quite an interesting test.

    --
    "Work" is not a stressor. It is the "perception" of work that is the stressor.
  21. YOU ARE EDUCATED EVIL! by Thud457 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why in the name of timecube are you running Oracle on an architecture that McAfee can even run on?!!!

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  22. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  23. Worth every penny ... by BitZtream · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Lots of comments and jokes here about the worth of McAfree ...

    And you've got it almost completely wrong. The value of McAfree isn't in their software, its in the fact that it comes preinstalled on a massive amount of computers, it has a subscription model for recurring revenue and LOTS of people use it.

    The fact that their flagship product is a pile of crap is irrelevant because people buy it anyway, without hesitation.

    McAfee Antivirus might suck and be next to worthless, but McAfee the company is worth a lot of money because people are too ignorant to get the first part.

    Second, as far as system slow down, and this one hurts as I hate defending such shitty products ... but ...

    ALL ON-DEMAND SCANNERS KILL PERFORMANCE. They open and scan every file (EVERY file, not just exe and dlls) before passing the result along to the actual program.

    There is no way around this, the data must be check before it can be used in order to be safe. Well, no matter how fast you right code, it takes a while to scan all the files that go into making even a simple program run. There are thousands of files that get openned when an app like Firefox for Photoshop starts running, and all of those files get read into memory and checked ... BEFORE they are passed along to the app calling them. Unless you invent time bending or something, this will always end up taking a very noticeable amount of time, making your computer seem slow.

    Want your computer with McAfee to not run slow? Turn off on-demand scanning. Want a middle ground? Change the on-demand settings to be less agressive, but its probably not going to make much difference since the speed issue is mostly opening and reading the files in the first place.

    You won't find anyone with an on-demand scanner that doesn't have these problems.

    You also won't find an anti-virus company worth more other than symantec.

    So yes, this was a good deal for Intel, even if most of slashdot is too blind to see the logic in the move.

    I like slashdot a lot more when it was just real geeks with a clue, you know, before all the angsty idiots who happened to be socially inept and own a computer started calling it home as though they were geeks too.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  24. Re:mcafee corporate is better then the home ver by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yeah, I need to disagree. It slows things down on my work laptop. I so want to replace Mcaffee on this machine and use MS Security Essentials like I have at home. Microsoft actually put out an AV scanner that doesn't feel like a lead weight.

  25. Re:Why? by m.ducharme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh come on, no more McAfee, and Norton will just step into their shoes.

    --
    Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
  26. Re:mcafee corporate is better then the home ver by LinuxIsGarbage · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yeah. No unnecessary SVChost.exe http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/04/21/1735211/McAfee-Kills-SVCHostexe-Sets-Off-Reboot-Loops-For-Win-XP-Win-2000

    Given that McAfee "Oopsie" actually shutdown Intel operations for a day, maybe they do want to take it out back, and put it out of its misery?

  27. How Far They've Come by BlindSpot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    20 years ago when I got my first modem (wow it's been that long, I feel old) McAfee was *the* virus scanner. Sysops used it to scan uploads and users used it to scan downloads. Of course back then it was a small command line app that fit on one floppy and ran in 256KB (yes, K) of memory, not the massive piece of bloatware it is now. It was also free... paid versions didn't appear until Windows took over IIRC.

    Never would have guessed that they woulda end up developing into a software giant worth $7.7B. And sold to Intel of all companies.

    Heard a guy on the business channel speculating that Intel might be wanting it to develop on-chip virus scanners. Sounds like a promising application if it'll speed it up. As it is now scanners as no faster now as it was 20 years ago, but back then we only had 30MB drives to scan so it ran a full scan in under 30 seconds. Now we have 300GB or more and it takes about 3 hours... no wonder people hate virus scanners.

  28. They bought McAfee so they can keep Dell away from by wsgeek · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Instead of giving Dell cash to stay away from AMD (which is frowned upon), they will give away McAfee licenses. It's that simple.

  29. Re:Why? by tattood · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Anti-virus imbedded into CPU functionality? I'm sure they won't include all the extra crap that causes the "CPU bloat" but the underlying antivirus technology alone could be embedded into the CPU to protect against viruses.

    --
    WTB [sig], PST!!!
  30. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    But it's only a trial version. After 60 days Intel will have to pay again to keep McAfee for a year.

  31. Re:Why? by Pichu0102 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't think either would be a wise choice if you're looking for a swift anything.

  32. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I guess I've never used McAfee from a home end user perspective, but from a corporate perspective it is a pretty solid product. The client-side agents are extremely resilient, you could have a box powered off for a year tucked away in some dark corner of the office, fire it back up, and it would check in and update just fine -- that is hugely important. Yeah, [full] system scans eat up a lot of CPU, thats why you effectively set your policies (which are pretty damn granular) to scan at certain times, disregard certain file types, etc... so that it doesn't impact the business. Schedule full system scans during the week ends and during scheduled maintenance windows. On-Access scanning is enabled, and I'll admit you can see it chews up a decent amount of proc for compressed file types. But I feel McAfee (again,from a corporate perspective) delivers a pretty nice suite of products. From my experience, the only thing that is a bit lacking (which is seemingly because it's in its infancy stages) is the Endpoint Encryption. Integration with fingerprint readers is somewhat lacking, many common biometric co-processor models are not yet supported, also, even if they are supported, managing the tokens and linking them to user accounts on the server-side is pretty manual. It's a bit silly... but they are making progress in that area.

    Either way, there's no denying that McAfee is a major player in the AV scene... and since Intel already damn near has the market cornered on CPU/Motherboards/etc... Imagine how much integration can be done at the hardware level between AV/provisioning/inventory/imaging/etc using TPM/IAMT. I don't see how any of this is a bad thing.

    Home computing is not the bigger market here.