Microsoft to offer free consumer security suite
Updated at 6:15 p.m. PST with Microsoft and McAfee comment, at 5:30 p.m. with Sophos comment, and at 4:40 p.m. with customer comment.
Windows Live OneCare logo
(Credit: Microsoft)Microsoft on Tuesday said it is changing its strategy for offering PC antivirus software, with plans to discontinue its subscription-based consumer security suite and instead offer individuals free software to protect their PCs.
Code-named Morro, the new offering will be available in the second half of 2009 and will protect against viruses, spyware, rootkits, and Trojans, the company said in a statement.
With the arrival of Morro, Microsoft plans to stop selling the Windows Live OneCare service, although the two services are not identical. Morro lacks OneCare's non-security features, such as printer sharing and automated PC tuneup. Morro will, however, use fewer resources than the subscription-based offering, making it better suited to low-bandwith systems and less powerful PCs.
Microsoft decided to switch to a free product because there are still so many PCs out there that lack any antivirus software.
"Because they're not concerned about malware, the number of people who don't have antivirus software or don't keep it up to date exceeds 50 percent in developed markets, and it's worse in emerging markets," Amy Barzdukas, senior director of product management for the Online Services and Windows Division at Microsoft, said in an interview. "Live OneCare was tailored for developed markets with broadband...and it's not meeting the needs of a lot of customers."
Asked why the company wouldn't just offer both the free and subscription versions, Barzdukas said: "Having core anti-malware at no charge for consumers, we believe, we will protect more consumers that way." Consumers who want more than the features Morro will offer have "fine alternatives from third parties" to buy, she added.
Despite the fact that McAfee stands to lose paying customers to Microsoft's new free software, McAfee spokesman Joris Evers said the news signaled a defeat for Microsoft.
"Consumers have voted; OneCare, in its two years on the market, has achieved less than 2 percent market share," he said in an interview. "Microsoft is giving up and has defaulted to a dressed-down freeware model that does not meet consumer security needs. This is good news for McAfee."
Barzdukas dismissed the notion that Microsoft was responding to market share or competitive pressures. "If the current approach isn't working... (as far as protecting consumers broadly) we need to go with a new approach," she said.
Asked if Microsoft would ever consider bundling the security features into Windows, Barzdukas said: "I can't foresee such a time."
Representatives from Symantec could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at Sophos, said the news doesn't impact his security firm because it focuses on the enterprise market.
"I think this announcement may cause some sleepless nights for the chiefs at McAfee and Symantec--they've always done well out of the consumer anti-virus market, and with tougher financial times ahead of them (they) won't be pleased to see the possibility of that evaporating further," he wrote in an e-mail response to questions.
Microsoft had been selling Windows Live OneCare for $49.95 per year, which covered up to three PCs and offered centralized backup and optimization features in addition to security capabilities.
Windows Live OneCare will continue to be sold for Windows XP and Vista via retailers through June 30, 2009, and direct sales will be gradually phased out as Morro becomes available. "Microsoft will ensure that all current customers remain protected through the life of their subscriptions," the statement said.
Morro, which will be available for download over the Internet, will work on Windows XP, Windows Vista, and the upcoming Windows 7.
The news frustrated OneCare customer Cas Purdy who complained on Facebook: "I just paid for OneCare. I'm kind of bitter."
Purdy, who heads up public relations at security firm Websense, said in a follow-up phone interview that he paid for his OneCare subscription a few weeks ago for his home laptop. Websense does not compete with Microsoft on consumer software.
"I'm all for a free tool but given that I just paid for it...we'll see," he added.
Microsoft's Barzdukas said customers should contact customer support if they have a concern. "We will absolutely do the right thing by our customers, and if the customer wants to call our free phone support line we'll make sure they are happy," she said.
A posting on the Windows Live OneCare Team Blog has a detailed FAQ for customers.
Microsoft started selling OneCare in May 2006, three years after signaling its intent to enter the security software market with its purchase of Romania's GeCad.
Although OneCare received only mixed reviews, it significantly shook up the security software market, resulting in generally lower prices.
The software maker has also started selling its Forefront line of security software for businesses and indicated at its Microsoft Online launch on Monday that it plans to expand its lineup of hosted security services.
CNET News' Ina Fried contributed to this report.
Elinor Mills covers Internet security and privacy. She joined CNET News in 2005 after working as a foreign correspondent for Reuters in Portugal and writing for The Industry Standard, the IDG News Service, and the Associated Press. E-mail Elinor.
- Topics:
-
Privacy & data protection
- Tags:
-
Microsoft,
-
Windows Live OneCare,
-
security,
-
malware
- Share:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
http://windowsonecare.spaces.live.com/default.aspx
Dude: Hey Sue, it looks like your anti-virus software isn't running?
Sue: You mean it's off?
Dude: Yes, your Morro is off.
Sue: I'll turn Morro on
Dude: I know you are, but what am I?
yeah, it was.
:P
Funny thing that M$ should sell/provide an antivirus in the first place. Its almost like packaging a faulty product with the spares.
Disclaimer:- I am no M$ basher. I love Windows XP for its simplicity and serving all my needs.
Now i use free. It may not be as good as Nortons when it worked. But it has always worked.
Robert
What happens if you want some of your files back that were backed up by OneCare after 2009? Gone. The money spent on that protection wasted.
For me, I haven't had any troubles with viruses or spyware since I stopped using Windows. 8). Now if only there was an answer to SPAM.
1) The backups are not online backups they are backups to customer owned CDs, DVDs, or external hard drives. 2) It is a backup not an original so even if they were online backups the people would have plenty of time to install a new online backup service.
Wow Microsoft are going to save Windows with their own version of antivirus. Noboday cares anymore. Windows and viruses are partners in crime. Better off using Firefox and AVG. Both are free. Firefox is more secure than IE, and AVG is up there with the best antivirus programs.
Better still, wait for Android. It will work on Laptops.
I'm just reminded of Elliot Carver in Tomorrow Never Dies, when he asks his computer company associate if they shipped the software with all the bugs intact so they can score more money on the fixes.
If it does become as effective as MacAfee or Norton (doubtful), then it's only as a result of 'insider coding'.
What a morro.
OneCare is more than just an antivirus.
My Advice to anyone that owns shares in a company that sells a security suite is to sell them when they get to an acceptable price.
Users of Linux don't even know the word anti-virus.
Alex Alexzander
And I giggle at these people who say we should use everything that's non-Microsoft. It's the whole "hate Microsoft because they're the evil empire" mentality that just show's their ignorance and immaturity. There are products that are good and there are products that aren't. They're not all bad. Apple has had their own set of issues with their computers and iPhone. (I *hate* my iPhone and AT&T service.)
What most people don't realize is that Microsoft is made up of the most amazing, caring people. Not everyone is like that but many are. As a group, they do amazing things around the world for our communities and environment.
They don't always make the right decision. But I can point to Yahoo, Google, Linux, Apple and a whole slew of companies and say the same thing. We're all just people trying to make the best decisions possible. Sometimes they really suck. Sometimes they really work.
In the end, Microsoft has done some amazing things that has changed the world in which we live. It's not the same company it was in the 1980's. So, whatever their reason for ending OneCare service was (it worked great by the way and I NEVER had performance issues like I did with Norton and McAfee), whether it was because they didn't gain market share or whatever, they have made the choice to spend money on a regular basis to create and maintain an antivirus program so that more computers are covered. They could have just said, "nah, sorry, you guys are on your own. It's not profitable for us so we are getting out of the business." Instead they're spending resources to make sure more people are covered. I don't see McAfee and Norton doing anything close to that.
So keep on spewing all your venomous attacks at a company just because it's successful. There are plenty of us who love Microsoft and what they've done for us. I love their products and will continue to support them. You have every right to your opinion. There are plenty of us who love Microsoft and their products... obviously.
KLR123 If you actually know anything about writing code you know that software has no moving parts, it does not wear out, flaws can be fixed (permanently) once found, and more importantly a flaw in code does not equate to a security risk. If your code has a bug in it (the typical human mistake) it by NO means, implies that it is a compromise of security. Your program, application, buggy code will simply crash, and if your kernel is properly written this does not leave you open to an attack, that exploits the 'crash'.
If they would follow the simple DOD protocols and standards set forth on the original internet, long before you ever heard of Micro$oft, there would not be such a security issue. That first rule of thumb, you never, ever execute arbitrary code from a remote source, period! Scripting, ActiveX, DCOM, these are all M$ 'innovations' (and others have followed suit) that have compromised the entire internet. If code executes in your process space, has access to your file system, utilizes network, device hardware, or memory resources, it had damn well better reside on your local computer as an installed and offline tested piece of software, or you are asking for trouble!
Linux will not ever see the amount of serious computer flaws that M$ Software has, because they actually, and honestly, address and fix flaws when they find them. They do not just move the security holes around with patches. They are not motivated by sales and greed to get you to buy the next version. The idea of planned obsolesence (obscene in my book) is not in their book at all! They would like to get some real work done with their computers instead of just figuring out how to make money selling the next version of computer stuff.
I don't want to bash indiviuals at any of these companies, I expect 80%-90% of them are honest, caring individuals who really do want their products to be great (especially their support depts), but if your entire business model relies upon growth of revenue, profit and sales of the next, latest and greatest version of stuff, regardless of what you have already done, then you are locked in to defeating and supplanting your own products.
Look at the auto industry, if they made a car that could last forever with only minimal maintenance, how would they sell sooo many cars every single year? Fortunately for them, those machines have moving parts, they do wear out, they do have to be replaced, for more reasons than just keeping up with the Jones' and making a fashion statement.
Tell me why this should be the case with software? I still have an original Windows 98 boot disk, and I can still use it to boot and install 'obsolete' or unsupported software on the absolutely latest, dual quad core server. Code never wears out, its support is just abandoned....
It really appears like the wolves are getting hungry, M$ can be greatly assumed to be the major facilitator to the spread of malware, for their complete disregard of computer and network security principles that are much older than the web itself. They have nearly created the whole industry of computer security (through their lack of quality either by incompotence or intention), and now the economy is fumbling, they see the opportunity to deal blows, and gain market share on more of the IT industry by giving away software (that others sell as a business), to address problems they created. If it works out the way they want, MacAfee and Symantec might be forced out of business, or relegated to obscurity (like Netscape was) and they will gain back significant control to which they can start abusing again.
M$ Business as usual. I hope the world wises up and moves to Linux which is not a business as usual. I wish major corperations that actually want to use all of the advantage that IT brings us would support it, with true earnest (and money). because something that is given away for free and is truly useful, is priceless.
....to scan inbound emails for Windows malware before the users get it. :)
/P
How about when the Gentoo servers got hacked?
Or how about the time the Debian Project got hacked?
Or just a few months ago when some of the Fedora servers got hacked and Red Hat had to take them offline?
There is no OS that is not safe.
I've used AVG, ZoneAlarm, and Firefox for over 2 years now on several computers and have never had any issues. The best part? They're already free to use!
I wish OpenOffice worked as well.
There is no reason to enforce the end of the subscription now that they have stopped selling it and are offering free definition updates for the new product.
Windows Defender. Windows Malicious Software removal tool. Windows Firewall. None of them work very well, compared to non-Microsoft programs.
Why should we think that another promise of security will work? There's a special type of security practice needed to prevent rootkits, and the Windows OS intrinsically doesn't have it.
-
by AppleSuxLeo
November 18, 2008 9:37 PM PST
- A while back MSFT bought the company fonded by Mark Russinovich who is an Anti Rootkit genius. Good move on the part of the Softie.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
-
by Renegade Knight
November 19, 2008 7:12 AM PST
- You would think MicroSoft would make it so you can't install a rootkit to begin with.
-
-
-
by AppleRocks1963
November 19, 2008 8:19 AM PST
- What color is the sky in your 'world?'
-
-
See all 65 Comments >>