Could Vista be the end for Nortons?

[Dave A]

For almost as long as I've played with PC's, the weaknesses in the Windows operating system has spawned a whole industry cashing in one way or the other.

Like Nortons. First they came out with toolboxes that gave a nice interface to operator system maintenance. The fact that most of the functions could be done with Windows (or prior to that DOS) was besides the point. Their product was simply easier and more intuitive to get the job done.

Then came the internet and with ever increasing take-up of the technology, so too came viruses, trojans and all the other nasties we see nowadays. A big chunk of the problem being Windows weaknesses yet again. And the list and size of the beneficiaries grew.

Windows had overcome much of the basic user interface issues but still had a healthy dose of flaws which kept security software folk laughing all the way to the bank. To the point that Nortons is now far better known for their security products than their PC maintenance products.

So look what's happening now....

Just a couple of months before Windows Vista ships to businesses, Microsoft is worried that the project may be delayed again, or delivered with reduced security -- though only in Europe. If that happens, you can mostly thank United States software giant Symantec, which has been loudest in its opposition, although another security vendor, McAfee, has also been agitating for change.

----

Symantec's Norton 2007 already disables the Windows Security Center in XP, so it stops working, and Paden wants to do the same in Vista. That way, users will only see Symantec's security centre, "the one they've paid for".
get the full story from M&G here

If Microsoft manages to deliver a much more secure OS without the flaws that have plagued previous products, bang goes that rather lucrative security industry.

And I'm not sure that Symantec or McAfee are going to be able to appeal to monopoly restricting legislation; that would be tantamount to insisting that Microsoft deliberately deliver a defective product so that we, the consumer, can get exploited by the security software companies!!

As the article implies - it seems the writing has been on the wall for a while.

[duncan drennan]

The proof of the pudding will be in the eating.

[Txico]

I had a very hard time explaining to a customer the other day that the viruses around for the linux operating system were virtually zero. (about 40 of which all of them are "contained".

I think what strikes me as interesting, is that if we took a poll, 98% of us are using ms-based operating system - when a far better OS is available, and linux is simply a lot friendlier than it used to be!

So, what's preventing us from the switch? Software? My hangup is my accounting software, couldn't get it working with a windows emulator.

T

[duncan drennan]

Tony, you post reminded me about two virtulization projects that you might try looking at, Xen and [http://www.vmware.com/download/server/]VMWare[/url]. Both have freely downloadable virtual machine servers - maybe worth trying one of them? I've been meaning to, but had actually forgotten about it.

[Entity]

Its a scam LOL

Its how it always goes. Microsoft releases a windows that is "so powerful and stable" yet we all know its only a matter of time beforw we see the "Blue screen of death" Windows 95 got released and had soooooo many bugs they just had to release 98 with all the bugs fixed but new ones created. We all know windows ME was a flop so XP had to get released but was it stabe.......Of course not with all previous bugs fixed new ones had to be placed for what reason.........To release Vista.

Its all one big conspiracy theory

[AndreMorgenrood]

I cannot see MS building a fully functional anti-virus system into their OS and not charging for it. The engine itself would be easy but they would need a dedicated department to make sure new defenitions are available for new virusses as people create them.

But I would love to see Symantec go down, o man would I love to see that. They care so little about their customers lately that you have to phone a cellphone line to contact them and I wont even go into the quality of their support. Norton has taken advantage of customers for way long enough.

I've been running a beta system with VISTA for about three months now and I must admit it looks pretty cool and has a lot of added functionality. The stick in the mud is that it looks like you will have to fork out quite a bit more for the DVD codex over and above the normal price which effectively makes the new (very nice) media centre completely bloody useless.

As for Linux I'm installing the new version of Shuttleworth's Ubuntu on a HP laptop tonight to see how it handles the hardware. Up to now my experience with Linux has been that it's bloody users unfriendly unless you're a closet nerd in which case it's fine.

[duncan drennan]

As for Linux I'm installing the new version of Shuttleworth's Ubuntu on a HP laptop tonight to see how it handles the hardware. Up to now my experience with Linux has been that it's bloody users unfriendly unless you're a closet nerd in which case it's fine.

I had the same attitude until I used Ubuntu - it has really been a pleasure using it versus any of the other distros I've tried in the past. It does what I expect an end-user product to do - it just works.

One note - I installed the AMD64 version, but there are some things, like Flash and Acrobat that are not supported in it. I'm hoping that Macromedia and Adobe will come to the 64 bit party soon.

[Dave A]

A thought

Viruses exploit security weaknesses in the operation system code. Is the concept of a secure OS that difficult to imagine - even with that pesky error-ridden human operator?

I've little doubt that this is a goal at MS. Whether it is achieved this time round I wouldn't know, but I'll not discount the possibility of it happening one day.

Never say never. Or better still....

Whatever can be conceived and believed in the mind of man, can be achieved. (Napoleon Hill).

[Entity]

DAM the specs on the new windows vista is crazy. Now def gotta upgrade to keep up with vista and playing games.

* 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor.
* 1 GB of system memory.
* A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero .
* 128 MB of graphics memory.
* 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
* DVD-ROM drive.
* Audio output capability.
* Internet access capability.

How crazy is this

[AndreMorgenrood]

DAM the specs on the new windows vista is crazy. Now def gotta upgrade to keep up with vista and playing games.

* 1 GHz 32-bit (x86) or 64-bit (x64) processor.
* 1 GB of system memory.
* A graphics processor that runs Windows Aero .
* 128 MB of graphics memory.
* 40 GB of hard drive capacity with 15 GB free space.
* DVD-ROM drive.
* Audio output capability.
* Internet access capability.

How crazy is this

Sounds about right. You would probably be able to run on less RAM or even a slower chip but it will be slow going. That is if VISTA allows you to install on that little, as with Server2000 and 2003 it might simply tel you that you dont have what it takes and switch off. I would also be sceptical on how well a Celeron processor will do and would recommend people taking this oppertunity to move on to 64bit processing.

Also, as far as Norton and anti-virus programs are concerned I found out that Microsoft did some serious re-writing of their Kernel and VISTA now incorporated, to some extent, memory randomisation. Essentially features and applications are placed at random locations in your system memory so a virus that was programmed to target a specific part of the operating system has a very small chance of finding it. Linux also does this and it sounds like it makes for a nearly virus proof operating system. Or so they say.