Coming Soon: Microsoft's Free Anti-virus Software

[anon]

Back in November Microsoft announced that they will offer free anti virus software, codenamed "Morro", to replace Windows Live OneCare. As you know Windows Live OneCare will be discontinued. Subscriptions will stop being sold via retail channels from 30 June 2009, though direct sales via Microsoft will stop only when "Morro" is available. Well, it looks like "Morro" is here since Microsoft has been removing OneCare from the channel for the past couple of months.

LiveSide - Windows Live news and interviews

[alpacino]

I hope it will lightweight and an effective. Unfortuantelly other AV companies will be very pissed with this, and maybe this will be yet another reason for MS face an antitrust sue.

[Black Orchid]

I have doubt that this will surpass other anti-virus program currently available. It is nice to have option, but this likely not better than NOD and more.

[SealLion]

Oh, I totally agree. Considering that MS OS has got more holes in it than swiss cheease, this wouldn't be much of a surprise that this supposed AV will have bigger orifices in it than the human body has of its.

[Black Orchid]

Not only that but MS only release patch for their OS one Tuesday per month. Even for critical 0-day security holes. Millions of PC use Windows OS. To leave unpatched until "Patch Tuesday" is "shoddy."

[slikrapid]

Unfortuantelly other AV companies will be very pissed with this, and maybe this will be yet another reason for MS face an antitrust sue.

why would they be angry - they already hold a large portion of antivirus market so considering this fact they are technically in greater danger to face an antitrust lawsuit

considering M$ firewall inadequacy compared to other firewall 'dedicated' companies it hasn't proved to be a real competition and since afaik M$ doesn't have much experience with antivirus software it is likely that this will result in similar 'effectiveness' of its antivirus program

To leave unpatched until "Patch Tuesday" is "shoddy

i believe they would adapt to other company's practice to releases virus definitions as soon as they are available, otherwise it would be bad policy for product promotion

[alpacino]

why would they be angry - they already hold a large portion of antivirus market so considering this fact they are technically in greater danger to face an antitrust lawsuit

considering M$ firewall inadequacy compared to other firewall 'dedicated' companies it hasn't proved to be a real competition and since afaik M$ doesn't have much experience with antivirus software it is likely that this will result in similar 'effectiveness' of its antivirus program

Regarding firewall, yes they really failed miserably at that, I doubt that anyone concerned about firewall would trust that one.
But with the anti-virus we are yet to see their effectiveness, only time will tell and if it happens to be a good one (who knows?), then I guess other AV companies could end up doing a joint-effort to shake MS a little bit

[Black Orchid]

i believe they would adapt to other company's practice to releases virus definitions as soon as they are available, otherwise it would be bad policy for product promotion

Of course. I was speaking to update the OS itself.

Regarding firewall, yes they really failed miserably at that, I doubt that anyone concerned about firewall would trust that one.

If really concerned about firewall, software not best. Get router. NAT firewall best protection available. Software just Band-Aid.

[alpacino]

If really concerned about firewall, software not best. Get router. NAT firewall best protection available. Software just Band-Aid.

Or a dedicated box/machine running as a firewall node.

But I guess here we are talking more of a home firewall stuff, so good software choices or router (like you said) would be the way to go, for concerned users.

[anon]

If really concerned about firewall, software not best. Get router. NAT firewall best protection available. Software just Band-Aid.

As far as I know routers are the best (packets to nonforwarded ports won't even reach your computer), but there's the issue of maximum connections, port forwarding, etc.

What alpacino said of a "computer-firewall" is a good idea, but it costs more and needs extra physical space.

I personally prefer a software firewall

[SealLion]

most pple prefer software firewall as it also provides addtional features that, I am guessing, provide more features than a NAT firewall would, yes??....or er....no??

[anon]

I think it's because routers have more features, but things like port forwarding, etc. are a bit hard for newcomers. Setting up a software firewall is easier

[slikrapid]

I think it's because routers have more features, but things like port forwarding, etc. are a bit hard for newcomers. Setting up a software firewall is easier

also, routers are usually set up through their web interface (slow) and sometimes need restarting for the effects to take change (even slower) - some of them tend to forget all settings when left without power (can it get slower than that?? )

[SealLion]

I think it's because routers have more features, ....

I don't have a router. What sort of features are available with one??

[alpacino]

I don't have a router. What sort of features are available with one??

They usually have a system to assign internal ips for multiple computers in order to manage connections through them and some have an internal firewall feature that can be turned on or off or customizable or not depending on the brand.

The one I use has these features:

Firewall
Remote Assistance
Game/Application Sharing
Dynamic DNS
User group management