Microsoft Anti-Spyware to Be Free of Charge 470
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.
What is up with the current Antispyware log file? (Score:2, Interesting)
Anybody know if this is a bug that was fixed, or how to stop it?
Hopefully MS are reading (Score:5, Interesting)
IDIOT PROOFING
Right now, the software is far too intrusive in many modes. I just want something that will run when the screensaver comes on (or the PC is locked) and eliminates a predetermined "level" of crap. This would be a blessing for anyone who has to remove this crap all of the time.
isnt antispyware an oxymoron.. (Score:1, Interesting)
Duh! (Score:5, Interesting)
--Bill Gates
Yes, its called AdAware [lavasoftusa.com] and SpyBot S&D [safer-networking.org]. Free spyware killing tools on Windows has little to do with MS putting one out for free.
Want a cookie? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
While active-x, IE, and windows has its security holes - your statement makes it sound like it MS's fault for all of these spyware/virus programs. In all reality, it is the fault of the spyware/virus writers - they just found exploits in MS. So lets pass the blame accordingly.
It is very nice of MS to offer this program "free" - considering they paid a big chunk of change for it. I don't actually consider it free, just an add-on to the OS that I already paid for.
Removing MS own spyware (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Watch for the Error.log file (Score:2, Interesting)
I suspect the one on WU is an earlier beta than you have... I have no error.log file.
It's true it doesn't find much... I've even tried deliberately infecting myself. Missed it completely... maybe I have to log in as administrator first
Re:Too Bad for Ad-Aware (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:4, Interesting)
Uhhh... I don't think anybody's complaining that it'll "edge out" the competition. I'm all for the complete elimination of this entire industry. Spyware should not exist, and solutions to Spyware shouldn't be necessary.
Here's why it's psychotic for them to have even considered charging for it: remember those Firestone tires that were blowing up left and right and killing people? What if Firestone had "considered" charging people to get those tires replaced? "On second thought, we figured it'd be nice to fix them for free." NO SHIT, Firestone/Microsoft.
To even entertain a glimmer of a notion of a possibility of a thought of charging for this would have been moronic.
you forgot the biggest one (Score:1, Interesting)
M$ controlled Spam White List (Score:2, Interesting)
Sounds like they plan to have their own White List of ISPs that play nice with M$. I wonder M$ will leverage this new free spyware tool to lock out smaller competing email systems that will be marked as "unsafe" by default.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
Maybe there are more exploits to be found in MS code than should really be the case, but that doesn't mean we should be knocking them for sandbagging the leaks as best they can.
It seems to me that things are improving in MS land and, while I'll always prefer free/open source software, I won't be actively trying to find things to criticise when the beast actually does something right.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:3, Interesting)
Quite frankly, valuing one anti-spyware software over another is foolish. It has been proven over time that no anti-spyware software has been a true solution, and that using more than one is the best way to go. I would never replace one anti-spyware product with another in any near future. Rather, I would add it to the list of anti-spyware software that I already use. That being said, I still like MS Antispyware, because it has a few tools on there to get rid of shell hooks and the rest of that noise. I just don't depend on it. I've run into countless issues where MSAS didn't get rid of a problem, and then when I ran Adaware SE, it DID get rid of the problem. BUT I've also seen it happen vice-versa, hence why I use a plethora of anti-spyware software and not just one program.
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:5, Interesting)
I like the software, too. I'm not sure it catches everything, but it seems to do a pretty good job. Plus, for the features present in Microsoft/Giant Antispyware alone, I had been running a whole host of free tools (spybot, adaware, spywareguard, spywareblaster, hijackthis!). I thought it was good software when made by the Giant Company, and so a free (and hopefully improved) version should be a nice thing to have.
It is very nice of MS to offer this program "free"...
Well, like I said, it's nice that it's free, but I wouldn't say that Microsoft is "being nice" by releasing it. They're merely protecting their business interests. People/businesses really are looking at OSX and Linux more and more as feasible alternatives to Windows, and with all the frustration people are experiencing associated with spyware, Microsoft is looking at a problem that could potentially be huge. They have a much better chance of maintaining their market dominance if they can demonstrate that Windows is a secure platform and that Microsoft is committed to keeping up with new security threats.
BTW, I'm not complaining. I'm not saying, "Microsoft if evil because they're only doing this to keep their OS on top!" I don't think it's bad for a business to try to please their customers for the sake of long-term profitability (which this seems to be). What I have a hard time with is when businesses try to screw their customers for the sake of perceived profitability (which MS seems to do as well). In neither case, however, is Microsoft being "nice".
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:It wasn't a big change... (Score:2, Interesting)
Is this a legal risk for Microsoft? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Next week's news (Score:3, Interesting)
The right thing to do would be to fix or remove the entry points malicious software uses to compromise a system. Since I.E. and Active-X are the entry points for the vast majority of malicious programs, and Microsoft has been unable to fix them after many years, the right thing to do would be to remove Active-X and and to remove I.E.'s ability to automatically execute code.
MS Anti spyware contains spyware! (Score:5, Interesting)
The.Aviator.FullDVDRip.avi 793MB
it will autmatically flag it as suspicious and by the same token share that information with "the MS Anti Spyware Community".
The lesson is, if you use this program TURN OFF THE COMMUNITY UPDATE FACILITY.
Will MS get spanked for this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Clearly there is a thriving market for anti-virus/ anti-spyware software, so MS jumping in with a free product doesn't bode well. If MS had added this product before they they created a market for it, fine. Really what MS should do is remove the market - then it's difficult to complain they are competing unfairly. That would mean producing a more secure OS, which I thought was their top priority [slashdot.org] for over 3 years now.
I don't mean to bash, the more antispyware the better, I'm just curious... where will this lead?
H.
Of course they're going to charge... (Score:2, Interesting)
They're really going to spin this right in front of the consumer's eyes. They distributed a buggy, hole-ridden system to some huge percentage of computers out there, and now they'll charge people to get off of it with the promise of fixes to these holes.
What I really don't get (or like) is how they'll charge for the betas when they come out. I thought that was the most ridiculous thing when I saw it for XP. Who the hell pays money to test their pre-release software? I can understand downloading and testing a beta for free for the good of the community, but to offload testing costs to the consumer (perhaps even making a profit!) is either stupidity or genius.
Actually, I guess it's genius, considering the success of the program.
Re:Hopefully MS are reading (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:No. The "right" thing would be to fix IE. (Score:2, Interesting)
Why should I cut them slack? Why should I not bag on their shoddy workmanship?
It wont be free. (Score:2, Interesting)