Microsoft Monopoly

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060912...microsoft_vista

I just read the above article regarding Microsoft implementing its own security features with the new Windows Vista OS. Already, we have commotion about how it will affect the security software industry. I don't agree with everything that Microsoft does, but I do like their products and I don't think it's fair for them to be threatened by others for making their product more safe to use. Their credibility is on the line if there are security flaws in their products. As a customer, I would feel better knowing that Microsoft is making attempts to prevent malicious people and programs from accessing my computer. This reminds me of the stir caused from Microsoft incorporating IE with Windows. Which I still think is total nonsense. It's their product, they should be able to put whatever they want with it! If people don't like IE, which many don't, they use other browsers like FireFox, Opera and the latter.

Anyways, I just want to see what you all think about this.

JMH

I would be very annoyed if some "suit" in Brussels decided I had to install an insecure product (that could be made more secure as standard) on my pc and the only way to make it secure is to purchase additional software.

Am I not then being forced to purchase additional software?

As with IE, if people want to use a different piece of software, that is their choice.

I agree, I have both FF and IE on my pc. You're absolutely right, I would rather have a more secure product that is a standard rather than having to purchase additional software. I still would most likely have the AntiVirus and Firewall installed anyway, but at least MS is making the attempt to correct issues before they release the product.

I agree. Can you have too much security on your pc?

Don't get me wrong, I understand the whole monopolising the Operating System market problem, but on the other hand I find it hard to understand the "attack the end user concept" adopted by hackers, protesting at MS's monopoly. How does this help anybody? It doesn't make users go out and purchase alternative software. It just wastes time and money.In practice, what are the viable alternatives in a company that needs to communicate with the outside business community?

If MS can implement additional security features to prevent or lessen these attacks then all well and good as far as I'm concerned!!!

Actually, I think you can have too much security on your pc
If it is so secure that it prevents the user from being able to use it.

Anywho, I don't have a problem with MS implementing it's own additional security features. I don't think MS has a problem with security software companies and are not trying to run them out of business. Besides, they are the pros at securing from viruses and other online threats..I don't think they will be disappearing anytime soon.

I don't understand the attack the end user concept either. I'm guessing a lot of people are doing it just because they want to be malicious and others just for fun to see if they can do it. I don't know...but it certainly is tiring to have this ongoing problem all the time.

imagine that you created wonderful program against viruses or malicious code.
this program works better than any other, it's very easy to use and very
light weighted.

So far so good.

However, when you try to sell this product you bump into very thick wall: Microsoft.
By making their own programs integral (and usually hard to remove) part of Windows,
they shut out most potential rivals, like the above. The common user won't bother to
download and install something else if there is already something installed. Sad, but
very true.

Microsoft actions may be legal in theory, but when looking in the bigger picture you
can see the result of those actions: total monopoly. And that's already not legal in
many places.

Firefox is exception so far, but only because it gained huge amounts of publicity and
because IE gained same amount of bad publicity. And because Firefox is free.
And still, only 20% of the people bothered to install it, while at least 50% hate IE.

true, but would you tie your good name to a product that has known issues when you know you could fix that? There will always be loopholes for hackers and malicious program writers to get into Windows. I don't think companies like Symantec and McAfee would be affected much with that in mind.

I'd also say that, as an IT professional, would you rely purely on Microsoft's solution? Or would you recommend your "relatively rich" corporate clients also install another piece of software that "works better than any other, is very easy to use and very light weighted."
It's the inexperienced home end user who this will benefit ensuring they then aren't forced into purchasing another piece of software.
I've seen these people in computer superstores (naming no names!! ) who have no idea what they are buying and are hoodwinked into buying anything the "expert" salesman suggests.

good points JMH and richy, however the fact is that small companies can't
rise in the current situation and that's why all those anti monopoly rules.
and maybe little because of envy....