Microsoft Security Pricing Irks Partners

http://www.betanews.com/article/print/Microsoft_Security_Pricing_Irks_Partners/1150842136

Print this article | E-mail this article | Comment on this article

Microsoft Security Pricing Irks Partners
By Nate Mook, BetaNews
June 20, 2006, 7:32 PM
When Microsoft first hinted that it would enter the security software
market three years ago, the company's partners began to worry behind
closed doors about the implications. With Microsoft's security push now
in full swing, the doors have opened and once bedfellows have turned
adversaries.

Apprehension began to surface after Microsoft purchased GeCAD Software
in June 2003, acquiring the company's RAV antivirus technology. In
August of that year, Microsoft launched its PC Satisfaction trial,
which would later morph into Windows Live OneCare.


A Microsoft partner told BetaNews at the time that the Redmond company
was asking a number of questions regarding the design of antivirus
software before PC Satisfaction made its debut. Grumbling was heard
throughout the industry, but politics kept the complaints under wraps.

2004 brought the acquisition of GIANT Software and its anti-spyware
utility, now free and branded Windows Defender. Microsoft shored up its
enterprise security offerings last year by purchasing Sybari Software
and its Antigen line of security products. Microsoft recently rolled
out updates to Antigen and a lower pricing structure.

Security was also the central focus of Microsoft's TechEd conference in
Boston this month. The company unveiled a new security software brand
called "Forefront," comprised of its Antigen product line and Microsoft
Client Protection -- essentially an enterprise version of Windows Live
OneCare.

Windows Vista, meanwhile, will have built-in malware and spyware
protection through Windows Defender, along with a beefed up firewall.
The new efforts may be good news for Microsoft customers, but the
company's partners are seeing an already-competitive market being
invaded by the 800-pound gorilla.

"It's bad enough that Microsoft is getting in to all aspects of
security. But now they are going to kill their competition through
predatory pricing," explained Sunbelt Software CEO Alex Eckelberry in a
blog posting on Tuesday. Sunbelt makes a number of security solutions
for both enterprise and consumer customers. The company also recently
acquired the popular Kerio Personal Firewall utility.

Eckelberry notes that Microsoft has priced its products 50 percent
below the security market leaders like McAfee and Symantec. Predatory
pricing occurs when a dominant firm sells its products at a loss to
drive competitors out of business, and is then able to raise prices
beyond standard market rates.

"Alex contends--and I would agree--'that Microsoft is endangering the
entire security ecosystem,'" commented Jupiter Research senior analyst
and Microsoft pundit Joe Wilcox. "No question: Microsoft is competing
with its security software partners, and the company is doing so
through aggressive pricing."

"OneCare costs $49.95 for three PCs, an average of $16.65 per machine,"
Eckelberry says, noting that the software is selling on Amazon.com for
$19.95. "Let's look at their price, versus the market leaders:
Symantec and McAfee. Both of these companies have AV products that
retail for $39.99. But they also have three-user offerings, at $69.99
(McAfee) and $89.99 (Symantec)."

When it comes to Antigen for Exchange, "Microsoft has priced themselves
over 60% less than Symantec, an astonishing difference in price," added
Eckelberry. "Microsoft has effectively low-balled the entire antivirus
industry in one fell swoop. And their product includes five antivirus
engines, not just one."

Microsoft disagrees with Eckelberry's assessment, claiming that "with
such a large segment going unprotected," the security market "is full
of opportunity for all security vendors to play a role in customer
security."

"We believe that Windows Live OneCare and Microsoft Antigen products
provide a good value to customers and that all firms should compete to
provide good value. Our customers have made it clear that malicious
software and other Internet threats represent a major problem and they
want Microsoft to deliver effective solutions," a Microsoft
spokesperson told BetaNews.

Last October, Microsoft acknowledged to BetaNews that it has "knowledge
and an understanding of the capabilities of the operating system" that
its partners may not have, but said it would not hide this information
from those companies.

"Microsoft believes that customers want the freedom to choose the
security solutions that work best for them," the company reiterated
Tuesday.

But Eckelberry, whose company is a Gold Partner and does business with
Microsoft, takes issue with the recent strategic decisions that
endanger third-party developers. "It's one thing that Microsoft has
destroyed competition in browsers, languages, word processors,
spreadsheets, presentation packages, and all the rest," he says. "But
it's another thing to kill competition in the security space."

For now, however, the industry appears to be gearing up for tough
competition ahead. McAfee on Friday began beta testing new security
suites based on its "Falcon" platform, which will compete with Windows
Live OneCare. Symantec is working on a similar all-in-one solution
known as "Genesis," but has not set a timeframe for release or pricing.

Whether or not Microsoft can be successful in efforts to dominate the
market remains to be seen, but Eckelberry says security vendors should
not rest on their laurels. "In a world where Microsoft has a hegemony
on security, the implications may be far reaching, possibly to our own
national security."

McAfee and Symantec had not returned requests for comment as of press
time.

Add a Comment (59 Comments)
BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any
reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul
language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.


Name (required):



E-mail (required):



Enter Your Comment:





By billweh posted Jun 22, 2006 - 9:03 AM

You know, people complain left and right that MS products are unsecure.
Yet when they take the steps to protect their customers, they all whine
that MS is trying to take over the world, or push other people out.

Sheesh, give me a break and complain about something worth while. Like
how many children are murdered each day through abortion. Or how many
people are forced to live on the street, homeless and hungry.

If you really dislike MS that much, then stop using their products,
stop whining about them. Instead start showing people why the
alternatives are better. It is so easy to condemn something, show that
there is a group of dedicated people out there that really can provide
a better alternative and then you'll have something.

Just saying something is bad is useless. Show me something better and
why it's better and people will buy it.

Score: 0 By fewt edited Jun 22, 2006 - 12:44 PM

You know what's interesting though?

Everyone is different, and everyone complains about something.

There's no way to eliminate that, it's part of the human factor.

"You know, people complain left and right that MS products are
unsecure. Yet when they take the steps to protect their customers, they
all whine that MS is trying to take over the world, or push other
people out."

Sure, they were insecure for years and they still are to a much smaller
degree. The steps they are taking are noble, I'm all for them building
anti-virus and other security features into their OS.

In my opinion, symantec and mcafee shouldn't have needed to exist in
the first place. Their business models should have factored this in,
and they should be prepared for a future where computers are actually
secure.

It's about d$#n time too.

:-D

Score: 0 By xyzcb1 posted Jun 22, 2006 - 12:00 PM

Amen to that, and it been said million time here.

But you have to understand most who complaint are fanboys of other
products. It's like how Mac's fanboy think their OS X is perfect and
invulnerable. OS X only released 6 reversion so far, and a 7th one due
in a few months.

Score: 0 By cousinkix1953 edited Jun 22, 2006 - 4:59 AM

Let them fight like angry dogs. We can use FREE anti-virus, firewalls
and utilities instead. Some of those software programs are here on the
BetaNews site.

Don't waste your money on Symantec or McAfee. You don't really need
Micro$uck's One Care or their WGA hassles trying to install it
either...

Score: 0 By xyzcb1 posted Jun 22, 2006 - 12:02 PM

If Microsoft is Micro$uck to you, why are you still using Windows?

Score: 0 By ingram091 edited Jun 22, 2006 - 3:28 AM

Its no secret that Microsoft has a wold domination attitude towards
everything. They always have... Even their Reps jokingly admit it.
That's been the issue from the beginning even back in the old Netscape
days. Big surprise? Not really... Everyone was expecting this, and I
fully expect this is the reason Symantec and Mcafee have been
increasing their price while they could for their antivirus packages.
cause they know with vista coming on the market its going to be a hard
sell to get people to pay the current prices for antivirus. Heck the
best engines on the market are under $30 and often offer a free year of
subscription on top of that. And they work cross Workstations (XP home
and pro) And even Server (2000, 2003) platforms in the same package...
Namely CA Antivirus and / or AVG from GriSoft; there are plenty of FREE
ones too. So MS is just causing an Antivirus market correction in my
opinion.

Now if you've read my posts in the past you know I'm not a fan of MS in
all things, and not a fan of vista as it stands Right now today. But
this one aspect of the OS was something that was needed. Too many
people still even in this day and age leave their system completely
open to all kinds of security problems. MS is just protecting its
market share by integrating it into their OS. If Symantec is expected
to survive it will have no choice but to come into line with the
Microsoft pricing structure and offer a competitive service again.

This will easily be done when Symantec learns that all the client wants
and needs is the Antivirus engine and signatures, not all the other
needless crap that comes with the recent releases that 90% of people
disable anyway cause it eats up resources like candy...

In the long run I think this will be a good move for the CONSUMERS
first and foremost. and that dear friends is how MS Ice's the cake...
Kinda sucks for their partners yes, but its really good for the
Customers.

Ingram...

Score: 0 By kcrannie posted Jun 22, 2006 - 8:33 AM

For years I used Norton Internet Security and paid hefty prices for
renewal subscriptions, that is, until last month when I discovered
Comod Group.com

Comodo Group offers full featured AntiVirus and Personal Firewall and a
host of other free products. These products are NOT the stripe down
versions that you find with Zone Alarm, AVG, etc. Once you register for
these products, there is never any yearly renewal fees or license fees
ever.

PC Mag.com recently gave Comodo Personal Firewall the highest rating
that a product can attain. To quote PC Mag., "It is a kick-ass
product!"

I use all things FREE, including Windows Defender AntiSpyware and, for
home pc dial-up user, the suite of applications that Comodo Group
offers absolutely free-of-charge, is the perfect companion.

In terms of Windows Live, I have no intention of getting involved in
any of that crap. It's a money gimic and nothing more.

Score: 0 By Kev21 posted Jun 22, 2006 - 1:20 AM

Isn't it obvious?
The point is that Microsoft owns the OS. They can make all the changes
they want so that the new security products work perfectly. Business is
business and although seems unfair for the "partner companies",
Microsoft has a point, it's a free market.
That's why statements like: "the security market is full of
opportunity for all security vendors to play a role in customer
security" or "Microsoft believes that customers want the freedom to
choose the security solutions that work best for them" sound like a
joke knowing the fact that they control 90% of the market or maybe more
and they can decide which third party application application will be
supported.

Score: 0 By WGA_Not edited Jun 21, 2006 - 9:19 PM

Gee, I wonder how many security flaws will be found in these products.
If Windows was designed right in the first place none of this would
have been an issue, but unfortunately we have to endure the short
comings of a software manufacturer that releases software that isn't
100% bug free. Unfortunately most other manufactures followed suite and
now we endure these badly written programs. To top it of we then pay
for this cr*p which we then test and find their bugs for them and then
pay more again for the fixes which they call a new version.

Seriously Microsoft fix what you already have and leave security to
someone else as you have proved time and time again that you cant get
anything right.

Get your WGA of my machine

Score: 0 By paulm posted Jun 21, 2006 - 6:54 PM

Competition. Bring it on!

Score: 0 By roj posted Jun 21, 2006 - 5:02 PM

Poor Symantec and McAfee. Both build poor products and now there's a
large player in town that will aggressively push solutions and charge
customers less. How terrible for them.

I've tested and/or implemented both McAfee and Symantec AV "security"
products in a corporate setting and find McAfee's offerings hopeless
and Symantec's, while it does actually work, to be poorly architected,
clumsy, bloated, slow and unnecessarily resource intensive. I welcome
MS' entry intot his market - now perhaps it will be done RIGHT.

Score: 0 By Joe Dirt posted Jun 21, 2006 - 4:34 PM

Blah blah blah......whine whine whine.....

Get a job.

Nobody complaining would even have a company if it weren't for
Microsoft Windows.

Dorks.

Score: 0 By ozerob edited Jun 21, 2006 - 2:51 PM

"Microsoft is competing with its security software partners"
No - got that wrong - the one time partners are now become prey.
Competing? No, just feeding...
Did they honestly think if they shared they would get anything
in return? A.K.A. if you give the school bully your lunch one day
don't expect you won't be asked again. Next time it may be your
shoes. Or worse. Another set of lawsuits are certainly in the making.

Score: 0 By bourgeoisdude posted Jun 21, 2006 - 1:19 PM

EU intervention imminent! I'm sure Adobe, Symantec, Sun, and Mozilla
have already gone to the EU guys and another anti-Microsoft conspiracy
is underway !

OK, not really :) Is this a Windows 98/IE lawsuit repeat? Not really,
as OneCare is not free. However, I know Zonealarm had my business for a
long time up till the time SP2 came out, so I know that this is hurting
them. Lavasoft Ad-aware has moved from the #1 download at download.com
to the #2 spot, something that hasn't happened in over three years.

Is Microsoft hurting the competition? Yes, clearly they are taking
market share from firewall, anti-virus, and anti-spyware vendors. No
question in my mind. Now--are they doing anything ILLEGAL to take away
the market share or are they just running a good business? Harder to
answer that question (at least TRUTHFULLY anyway).

Score: 0 By mshulman posted Jun 21, 2006 - 2:02 PM

And is it really a bad thing? Competition is great. And if Microsoft is
pushing that to the next level, then that's fine by me.

I like onecare as it's $50 for 3 computers - hard to beat that. and
it's easy to use and keep current. Ever try to renew symantec or
mcafee? PITA!

Score: 0 By KirtB edited Jun 21, 2006 - 12:17 PM

The choice of AV and firewall is largely governed by the same forces
that govern just about every other product: What it's worth is to the
user. Most users (myself included) are satisfied if they can operate
their computers from day to day without ever being affected by
malicious invaders. If something does slip by, then I am both startled
and gratified by a notice that detection has occurred and a solution is
available.

The hard core programmers (and wannabes), as well as those users who
routinely venture into the netherlands of seedy websites and software
are the most vocal and judgmental about current solutions, and always
seem to have a better way of doing things. Some of these same highly
vocal people have been shown to abet or directly commit acts of
vandalism. In a way they are the most maniacal of all hackers.

I welcome those who hold the commercial vendors' feet to the fire
because it helps keep the Microsofts, Symantecs and McAfees from
becoming complacent. It's the same philosophy as being only somewhat
annoyed by the extreme tree huggers that want no industry at all
because their presence helps keep the light shining on the corporations
that might otherwise recklessly abuse the environment. By the same
token, those groups are infamous for committing acts of sabotage that
cause personal and property damage. Their white hats often turn black
for want of notoriety.

In no way am I seeking a "civil" discourse, because as the saying
goes, "Nice guys finish last." I even enjoy the comedy when asses
clearly expose themselves through their insanely jealous rants. Keep it
up, guys, it is good for us all. But, if you intentionally do us grave
harm in the process, may you and your family be shown no mercy. The
infamous hammer to the head of that Russian mass spammer is just
revenge in such instances.

Score: 0 By sorahl posted Jun 21, 2006 - 10:56 AM

Sunbelts comments are rediculous.
I have the 3 computer version of Mcafee and I didn't pay a cent more
for it than I did for Live Care.
$19.95 after rebate. so they are priced the same..and i got more for
the $19.95 for LiveCare than I did for Mcafee.

Score: 0 By Silentmaster101 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 10:56 AM

So competitive pricing is bad now you say? thats news to me, especially
when they run on a windows os, i mean isnt it their own right to make
products that complement and/or work more efficiently with another of
their own products?

Score: 0 By xyzcb1 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 9:53 AM

Symantec and McAfee deserve this. Years ago, they used to be good
products, and now, they are just expensive, inefficient and slow down
your system.

I don't know why they are complaining, they are pre-install on most
machines sold currently. If they have a great product, they shouldn't
have to worry about it. Great products will win customer loyalty.

Score: 0 By PC_Tool posted Jun 21, 2006 - 8:40 AM

Concerning Defender:

What these companies fail to realize is that they wouldn't *Exist*
without Microsoft. These products and companies sprang up to address
issues with the Operating System. Now Microsoft is attempting to
address those issues on it's own.

The *only* folks these companies have to blame are themselves for
building their companies on a parasite technology...*totally* dependant
on Microsoft's "good enough" philosophy, and their Operating systems
lack of the features they provide. That philosophy seems to be
changing, Microsoft is now providing these features, and now their
companies are threatened.

I got one thing to say to 'em:

Duh!?!?

As for the AV product:

Predatory pricing my ass. There are plenty of *free* alternatives and
*cheaper* alternatives. If they actually have the nads to take this to
court, they're gonna do more damage to themselves than Microsoft ever
could.

Score: 0 By The Man posted Jun 21, 2006 - 1:05 PM

"What these companies fail to realize is that they wouldn't *Exist*
without Microsoft."

works the other way too

without support over the years from other companies, MS wouldn't exist
either

Score: 0 By bourgeoisdude posted Jun 21, 2006 - 1:24 PM

That's true. In fact, that is the reason that I believe Microsoft can
be left alone by the government on the issue of being a monopoly--if
Microsoft becomes the power-hungry evil genius villians that so many
bloggers make them out to be, Symantec, Sun, Adobe, Mozilla, McAfee,
Lavasoft, Novell, Apple, Real, and all those other vendors will
organise a boycott, and refuse to support their software altogether.
That will fix Microsoft way better than the measly fines the EU can
dish out.

Score: 0 By fewt posted Jun 21, 2006 - 10:03 AM

"What these companies fail to realize is that they wouldn't *Exist*
without Microsoft."

True, as there would be almost no viruses. :-P

Score: 0 By AaronDobbins posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:59 PM

well played old chap, well played...

Score: 0 By PC_Tool posted Jun 21, 2006 - 10:28 AM

I knew you'd like that one. ;)

Score: 0 By PC Rat posted Jun 21, 2006 - 1:53 AM

....

Symantec and McAfee are overpriced and of
questionable efficacy.

Your fav rodent has some real doubts about any
Microsoft AV, but it will at least introduce some
price competition.

The ultimate competitor, however, is AVG Free !

....

The Computer Rodent

....

Score: 0 By eclipsingdivinity posted Jun 21, 2006 - 2:13 PM

Actually I was going to make a point that real undercutters are the
folks that offer their software free like AVG for instance. But what it
really boils down to is marketing. AVG has a hard time getting to the
typical consumer without having someone knowlegeable suggest it to
them.

Folks like Microsoft are able to market this security suite with better
results. They have the finances. For instance, parallel to Alex's
comments you can see where he's coming from. Xbox was a daunting blow
to Microsoft as they lost millions trying to establish Xbox as a
console heavyweight. With Windows Defender and OneCare, they may be
using a similar tactic.

Score: 0 By tigreseis posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:42 PM

AVG finished third in a recent heads up free antivirus test through
av-test.org. They scored a 66 out of 125. Antivir scored a 94.

I had a simple Word macro virus that came out in 1999 that AVG did not
detect.

Score: 0 By wat0114 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 3:09 PM

Okay, but test results on AVG Pro resulted in "Standard" Certification
Level on both tests. That's pretty average for a Pro version.

Score: 0 By Intrusive_Rogue posted Jun 21, 2006 - 8:23 AM

I have to admit that I agree with Rat this time.

The Anti-virus market has seen a steady increase of their pricing over
the past 2-4 years, for questionable increases in protection and
definite increases in bloat.

I also agree that I would be skeptical of any anti-virus from any
company that's fresh on the anti-virus / anti-spyware scene, this
includes Microsoft.

Score: 0 By The-One posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:28 AM

HA HA Security firms....

Just like every other business MS invades, its time for another to
fall.

Oh well, too bad, I really think Symantec makes great products (yeah
right), and McAfee is awesome as well (cough). Time to show the world a
real antivirus product, just like IE showed a real browser, MS Word
showed a real word processor, Outlook showed real email, .NET showed a
real language, well you get my point.

I won't be crying without Symantec, especially for charging year after
year for the same slow, CPU intensive, crappy software.

Score: 0 By wincement posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:25 AM

Someone else complaining about something Microsoft did.

Huh...

Imagine that.

Score: 0 By shy_one posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:03 AM

How can Symantec complain most new PCs come with a free trial
preinstalled along with all the other crap venders decide to put on
there which is why the first thing i do is format the hard drive when i
get it home.

Fortunatly Shaw internet comes with F-Secure suit for free and i'm very
happy with it.

Score: 0 By cranbers posted Jun 20, 2006 - 10:31 PM

I tried it, it sucks. Enough said, who knows if its even working. When
I tried it it did nothing, the scan took a very long time, it didn't
communicate at all. Yeah it did pop up some message once in awhile. But
the only real thing it did was tell me windows defender wasn't
installed.

Sad they can't even buy other products and launch them correctly. They
should just give it away for free and tie it to the browser. That is
really the only thing they are good at. Then all the other companies
can go out of business and there won't be any question, they are the
best.

They own the personal computer, even if they are not the best. It's
called strongarm tactics. The have as much money as probably 50 percent
of the other software makers combined with that you can do whatever you
want, even be held above the law.

Score: 0 By Silentmaster101 edited Jun 21, 2006 - 11:25 AM

or maybe you failed to install it correctly, or failed to entirely
remove all other anti-virus products and possibly things with passive
scanning, dont dismiss it without trying to figure out why it didnt
work, you know besides that it is still in beta....

Score: 0 By wincement edited Jun 21, 2006 - 12:31 AM

with that you can do whatever you want, even be held above the law

I'm fairly certain that the EU, along with the U.S. government, would
disagree with that statement.

Score: 0 By drumcat edited Jun 20, 2006 - 9:45 PM

http://www.agnitum.com/p...s/outpostfree/index.php
http://free.grisoft.com/
http://cityofrain.com/ (look for software tools - all free)

Score: 0 By drumcat posted Jun 20, 2006 - 9:42 PM

They price something cheaper, and everyone moans... I don't get it.

To be frank, every product they are offering is available via freeware
now, and not only freeware, good freeware. For businesses, I might look
at this as a locksmith selling me a security guard. If Microsoft can't
fix the holes via the first product you pay them for, why pay them
twice?

Look, if you think an OS should be secure, without excuse, then you
have to think that antivirus, et al, are all effectively a patch.
Right?

Score: 0 By Joe22 posted Jun 20, 2006 - 8:56 PM

I've always been a hardcore Microsoft fan and I an truly excited about
their upcoming Security Products. I used to have McAFee, but that ended
up ruining the computer I used to have, I've never had a serious
problem with any of Microsofts products.

Score: 0 By cranbers posted Jun 20, 2006 - 10:26 PM

Yeah ok mr hardcore ms fan, I seriously doubt mcafee ruined your
computer. By ruin do you mean hosed the os, or physically harmed the
computer? I assume hosed the os, now obviousl it didn't do this to very
many computers or they would of had some serious issues. So while your
paying MS twice now, one for the os itself and again for their security
suite now. Well its people like you that makes Ms do what they do. That
is steal or buy someone else's stuff brand it as their own and call it
a day.

Sad isn't it when this company has some of the brightest minds out
there making a lot of money. But like they say, work smarter not
harder. If they were smart they would of bought mcafee or symantec and
just let them be their own LLC.

Score: 0 By ozerob edited Jun 21, 2006 - 3:53 PM

.... or maybe Av wasnt up to date and something got loose - and trashed
the OS. Not unlikely. For those folks that complain - I've used both
McAfee and NAV since they came out with little or no problem. If a scan
is running I go get a
coffee. Geez,you got a few Ghz of speed there, how much time are you
going to save trying to do work while something crucial is going on.
Sort of like really,really needing to have a smoke because you're
stressing out over your asthma...
(brought on by looking at the cost of buying and supporting Vista, no
doubt.)

Score: 0 By Silentmaster101 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 11:30 AM

i take it you have never tried removing mcafee or symantecs products
then? or had i virus, that although they should be smart enough to
prevent tampering with their av software, that corrupted norton or
mcafee av's function?

Score: 0 By Tenoq posted Jun 21, 2006 - 2:46 AM

No, McAfee and Norton security software has a very real reputation for
"ruining your computer" in the eyes of consumers. Any damage to the
operation of the system is considered "ruined" by your average person,
who just wants their PC to work. Typically, an install of one of these
bloated, ineffective security suites results in a significantly slower
and far less useful PC. Often, you're better off with the virus than
with the security suite. :P

Score: 0 By wincement posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:34 AM

If they were smart they would of bought mcafee or symantec and just let
them be their own LLC.

*gasps*

You can't be serious. Perish the thought.

Score: 0 By PaneTrez posted Jun 20, 2006 - 8:39 PM

I agree that it seems like a bunch of whining...and yes, that's half
true. However, they do bring up some interesting points and fair
competition is never a bad thing. I think Microsoft is doing a good job
by stepping into the security market and as long as they play their
cards correctly and are political with their decisions, their support
can only help in the on-going malware/spyware/adware/virii/worm/etc
battle.

Score: 0 By wat0114 posted Jun 20, 2006 - 8:31 PM

"...It's bad enough that Microsoft is getting in to all aspects of
security. But now they are going to kill their competition through
predatory pricing," explained Sunbelt Software CEO Alex Eckelberry..."

Funny coming from Eckelberry, when his company is offering their pc
firewall at a far-below market value $14.95.

http://www.sunbelt-software.com/Kerio.cfm

Score: 0 By eclipsingdivinity edited Jun 20, 2006 - 9:19 PM

Kerio's firewall doesn't have enough technology put into it to go above
$15. For one it has a content filter/script blocker. Whoopy sh!t? And
it blocks ads...the fact is that you're paying $15 for a group of
features you can grab free with better quality. On the other hand,
Outpost is at $50+ Because you're seeing extensible plugins,
antispyware built in, and a better interface. Sunbelt isn't
undercutting anything, they just know what they have isn't enough to
warrant a higher price tag. Hell, I debate paying $15 for what Kerio
offers, it's better for me having the features run out and use it for
free.

There's a difference between undercutting competition who offers the
same features, and undercutting competition because your features
aren't enough.

Score: 0 By wat0114 posted Jun 20, 2006 - 9:50 PM

Outpost is US $39.95, the same price Kerio used to be. However, I do
agree Kerio is not in the same league as Outpost.

Score: 0 By eclipsingdivinity posted Jun 20, 2006 - 11:34 PM

Yeah, whoops I was just throwing that price out there. But I did forget
that Kerio has HIPS, but then again I don't think the hips are
sophisticated enough to warrant consideration.

Personally, Kerio makes a very solid free firewall, I just don't blame
Sunbelt for the low price considering the technology is roughly a year
old and should be due for a much needed
Sunbelt-interface-and-technology-update.

Score: 0 By wat0114 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 12:21 AM

Certainly I'm not complaining about the low price of Kerio fw either
and nor did I ever see it as price undercutting by Sunbelt. It just
seems odd that Alex E and company would offer it so far below the
typical price of a "full" version fw. I trialed Kerio a couple months
ago and quite liked it, but it needs some work to compete with the
likes of Outpost, ZA Pro and Look 'n Stop.

Score: 0 By Grazer edited Jun 20, 2006 - 8:25 PM

Seems like a bunch of whining by companies that don't want to have any
serious competition. People talk about how horrible MS products are,
and then complain about how MS gives it away for free making it
anticompetitive. I'm sorry but free crap is still crap. If these
companies made decent products, they wouldn't have to worry about free
alternatives.

....Microsoft has destroyed competition in browsers, languages, word
processors, spreadsheets, presentation packages, and all the rest...
Really? They were bundling Office for free at some point, or is he
trying to say that Office is predatorily priced around $400.

In a world where Microsoft has a hegemony on security, the implications
may be far reaching, possibly to our own national security.
Ack, the sky is falling!!

Score: 0 By Kramy edited Jun 20, 2006 - 10:08 PM

"In a world where Microsoft has a hegemony on security, the
implications may be far reaching, possibly to our own national
security.
Ack, the sky is falling!!"

Actually, that would be very bad. All it takes is finding an exploit,
and then finding a way around OneCare, and poof, you'll probably have
nailed half the Vista installs out there. Having dozens of antivirus or
firewall providers ensures that things won't get by all of them.

Score: 0 By computershack posted Jun 20, 2006 - 7:44 PM

Symantec and McAfee deserve all they get. They peddle overpriced
bloatware that does nothing but bring your system to a crawl. There are
plenty of FAR BETTER free alternatives and NOD32, which is dirt cheap,
beats them hands down for effectiveness and being lightweight.

Score: 0 By school1012 posted Jun 20, 2006 - 7:48 PM

Agree. Microsoft is making a good product, and is trying to force the
prices down. Who wins here, the consumers. You and me.

Score: 0 By mjm01010101 posted Jun 20, 2006 - 7:56 PM

Microsoft Client Protection

We'll be looking into this seriously end of year. I'm not too happy
with trend micro right now, it's not installing on Exchange to my
satisfaction, and I don't have the time and patience to continually
reinstall it as their support people want me to do.

Score: 0 By alexeck edited Jun 20, 2006 - 10:21 PM

Actually, it's not me whining about underpriced products. I compete
with free and inexpensive products all the time, and in fact, I have a
free firewall myself that I give away. The point is not price -- the
point is predatory pricing -- where a large manufacturer like Microsoft
comes into a market and undercuts the incumbents. Perhaps some may
think it's nothing to be concerned about, and perhaps they are right.
One might, however, propose that the security industry should be a
vibrant, diverse one; and that the business should not be dominated by
one vendor who can be taken down by attack; and to whom the majority of
the community relies upon. If Microsoft wants to compete fairly, I have
absolutely _no_ problem with that. But if they want to undercut the
market, it makes things a bit different.

Note that I agree with many of your comments that many of the major
security companies have been peddling bloatware on the consumer and
good competition for them would be deserved. It's just the massive
undercutting that's disturbing.

Alex Eckelberry

Score: 0 By Silentmaster101 posted Jun 21, 2006 - 11:36 AM

or is it just competetive pricing. or maybe look at it as a bundled
price, seeing as you need windows to run it....

Score: 0 By eclipsingdivinity posted Jun 20, 2006 - 11:30 PM

One thing that must be buggin' the hell out of you Alex is the fact
Microsoft is offering Windows Defender (Previous a technology based on
Giant Software that you get your Counterspy signatures from) for FREE!
So in actuality I see how a security exec like yourself would be
worried.

But as a consumer it's hard for me to juggle sympathy and outrage at
the price of security software these days. For one I think companies
like Symantec and Mcafee make a fortune off their software. Not just
through their yearly subscription fees, but through expensive phone
support because the software screwed up customer machines, etc.

Microsoft can undercut all they want, I think Mcafee and Symantec need
a swift kick in the gonads to come realization that they don't own our
machines, and that even the typical grammy, brother, sister have real
competitive choices. I just firmly believe the security market has room
for 3 big security contenders, and that while Microsoft is showing off
it's gun, it wont replace Mcafee and Symantec anytime soon. it's just
merely fun watching them scrambling like the expensive, ruthless tards
they are. VIVA LA REVOLUCION~!!

But to be fair Alex, I just want to say 'you're the man' and I read
your blog all too often. :-D. Sorry if my comments seem one sided, i'm
just blowing off steam.

.

Quantcast