Why would MS have to deliver signature updates for 3rd party AV? No reason that I can think of. The 3rd party AV products would continue to operate as they do now, only the initial installation is offered via MS Update. That is what the complaining AV vendors are unhappy about. They think their not-free products should be available in the same way.
Now, Microsoft could also turn this lemon into lemonade by offering paid 3rd party AV via MS update and collect a royalty for each such delivery. They wouldn't have to collect the money for the product, MS update could just install trialware and it's up to the AV program to convince the user to pay. If the trialware expires then MS update again offers a set of AV choices to the user. Would the user be able to repeatedly install the same trialware? It's up to the AV vendors whether to permit that or not. And MS Update can require a EULA-like acceptance before installing that states Microsoft is not responsible for quality or performance of products not provided by them. Carl From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 1:14 PM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: Re: MS Anti-virus delivered via Microsoft Update I *almost* agree with you on that, Carl, but there is the issue of liability. It's one things to offer drivers via Microsoft Update, as there isn't quite the same level of timeliness required as with AV signatures. So, given the compressed time frame, is it wise for Microsoft to bear the brunt of providing AV signatures from other vendors that might have issues at some point? Surely, they've cannot apply the same process for QA and certification of 3rd party signatures as they would for 3rd party drivers, right? (Disclaimers will simply not be enough if a signature turns out to be bad, and they'll still have skeptics who insist that they sabotaged the 3rd party signature in such an event...) ASB (My XeeSM Profile) <http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker> Exploiting Technology for Business Advantage... On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:37 PM, Carl Houseman <c.house...@gmail.com> wrote: Is Microsoft making money on this? No. Are they pushing ads to buy something? No. So I think Microsoft should make a big public splash by offering to provide via MS Update any other AV software that is also free-for-life and doesn't try to sell an upgrade to a paid version once installed. Be that'll shut 'em up quick. Carl From: David Lum [mailto:david....@nwea.org] Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 11:02 AM To: NT System Admin Issues Subject: MS Anti-virus delivered via Microsoft Update IMO they should offer a choice of multiple vendors if they want to play fair. http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20022148-245.html?tag=mncol;title David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764 ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to listmana...@lyris.sunbeltsoftware.com with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
