OneCare Activation Explained

Our customers have a lot of questions about OneCare activation and want to know exactly what it is all about. We commonly hear feedback from customers who say that activation is only for the purposes of adding a second PC, but it is much more than that.

So why do customers need to activate in the first place? You may have noticed that OneCare is not a traditional software package, it is a subscription based service. One way to think about it is to compare it to your cell phone service, where you pay a fee for a period, receive updates to your service during that period and have a phone number associated with your service. Similarly, it is necessary for OneCare customers to have a Windows Live ID account so that we can provide them with the proper level of service. Getting a Windows Live ID means you have one simple way to interact with your OneCare account whether that means Activating a 2nd PC or getting support.

View: Full Story
News source: Windows Live OneCare Blog

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Gas price Web sites see skyrocketing traffic

Next Story

Inspire IRCd 1.1.8

22 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

symantec products are horrible,i would rather use an alternative,onecare is complete crap and those who run it need to be shot and or hung for using it,get something better and you need an antivirus even with common sense.common sense wont save you if a virus were to get you if by the slim chance,i know on alot of bought systems norton comes in it and i simply remove it and put nod32 in it's place,the basic firewall will do unless your into crazy stuff then use another like maybe outpost.


I was offered a low price version and I took it. Coverage for 3 computers for $19 was a very god deal.

OneCare ran fine for a few weeks, but suddenly, on a Tune-Up, an error window appeared that said that some of my system files were corrupted and to "please inset the disk labeled XP sp2". My pc is a Pavillion, so I tried to force the search to the recovery partition,. It didn't work. Every week it kept saying so, so I finally sent request for assistance to Microsoft by email.

They replied rather quickly and they sent me a XP sp2 disk free of charge! I was stunned. The support lady was incredibly good. I could tell that she really wanted my satisfaction. The next time the error happened I inserted the disk, and it said that it was the wrong disk! I took screen shots and sent them to support. The funny thing is that the error is gone. It hasn't complained once ever since.

In terms of protection I am sure there are better ones, but this one integrates well with XP and if something goes wrong you get help from Microsoft only. No going back from Norton to M$ and back anymore. That in itself is a big plus.

PauloParra said,
I was offered a low price version and I took it. Coverage for 3 computers for $19 was a very god deal.

OneCare ran fine for a few weeks, but suddenly, on a Tune-Up, an error window appeared that said that some of my system files were corrupted and to "please inset the disk labeled XP sp2". My pc is a Pavillion, so I tried to force the search to the recovery partition,. It didn't work. Every week it kept saying so, so I finally sent request for assistance to Microsoft by email.

They replied rather quickly and they sent me a XP sp2 disk free of charge! I was stunned. The support lady was incredibly good. I could tell that she really wanted my satisfaction. The next time the error happened I inserted the disk, and it said that it was the wrong disk! I took screen shots and sent them to support. The funny thing is that the error is gone. It hasn't complained once ever since.

In terms of protection I am sure there are better ones, but this one integrates well with XP and if something goes wrong you get help from Microsoft only. No going back from Norton to M$ and back anymore. That in itself is a big plus.

I can't imagine there's many people that will ever go back to using Symantec from another product. How they continue to get away with an application that truly cuts a systems performance in half is beyond me.

SK[ said,#11.1]I can't imagine there's many people that will ever go back to using Symantec from another product. How they continue to get away with an application that truly cuts a systems performance in half is beyond me.

Symantec Corporate Edition isn't too bad

While I generally agree with what everyone has said above, I would suggest that OC is perfect for my father (who is in his mid-60s) and other who haven't the faintest idea of how to protect their PC.

It's about as low-maintenance as they come, and for him and other seniors who aren't PC savvy that's an excellent thing.

Jim

All software firewall/antivirus suck imo they just eat your memory resources as well as spins your hd non stop and adds crappy real time scanning which slows down your whole pc.

It's just a complete waste.

play smart and you won't get infected.

I think you are saying that since you are still stuck on your little Windows 3.1. Get into the future and get a more powerful computer. Everybody needs it no mater how smart or retarded they may be. avast uses only about 15 MB RAM total and not even 1% cpu load on an old 754 K8. Your hard drive is never at a constant rotation either. Same for NOD32.

Naughty Dog said,
Everybody needs it no mater how smart or retarded they may be.

I don't believe so. I have never visited porn sites, Java type through the browser gaming sites, or be dumb enough to use my real email address to sign up for anything else that is irrelevant for that matter. I've kept up on all newly released updates, and never once received any kind of virus. So I guess it does require some common sense not to need any anti-virus software. So no, not everybody in my belief needs over bloated software to run their machine for them, because of not using simple common sense.

D-M said,

I don't believe so. I have never visited porn sites, Java type through the browser gaming sites, or be dumb enough to use my real email address to sign up for anything else that is irrelevant for that matter. I've kept up on all newly released updates, and never once received any kind of virus. So I guess it does require some common sense not to need any anti-virus software. So no, not everybody in my belief needs over bloated software to run their machine for them, because of not using simple common sense.

How would you know?

Avast has the unfortunate advantage of being a resource hog, and having a ****-poor user interface. I gave up on it after about 6 minutes, and went back to AVG Free, which doesn't seem to insult my intelligence as much.

i have a free lifetime subscription to OneCare, its actually not that bad,,, do i trust it, not all that much ( but its free, only reason i use it )

i purposly dont save anything important to my XpBox, i only keep it cause my games are on it, and cant play them on my Mac unles i bootcamp.

and a previous post was right, it integrates verry wel into XP/Vista itself, and isnt NEAR as much a memory hog as Norton/McAfee

onecare is even worse than mcafee/symantec,i tried it and it was horrible,very hard to remove and it forces a few services like auto update and bits to stay on or the app would not work,nod32 beats this hands down.and onecare costs too much from what i have seen.

It would be interesting to see a detection and performance comparison of this and free antivirus tools.

The weird thing about OneCare is that it is, like some free alternatives, still aimed at home users. It is not intended for the corporate sector with LAN-oriented management features such as remote administration and licensing geared for that like their competition, but basically just for home users. Even their official FAQ spell that out. And then they aren't competing with commercial alternatives anymore, but free ones like AVG. So yes, Microsoft's offer with OC Live comes off as quite a bit strange to me. In a modern antivirus world, I could see them offering their subscription for advanced corporation protection, but not this. It feels overpriced for how proven their technology is (it's highly unproven).

As for me, well OC is waaay too unproven historically for me to trust it as I do with e.g. Avast or AVG for free use, or NOD32 or Kaspersky for commercial use.

I believe Microsoft is basically just trying to sell this because of their brand connection and the "it's from Microsoft and they even made the OS they're protecting, so it must be good". Which of course is as non-scientific as you can get, without any facts backing it up, and it's all about statistics and feature sets when comparing antivirus tools, nothing about brands.

Unfortunately, Microsoft seems to often use its paying customers as beta testers which, while being an unsavory business practice, allows Microsoft the large scale, real-world testing ground that it needs to rapidly improve and stabilize its products.

Sure, I've been p¡ssed off at being used as a Microsoft guinea pig from time to time, but overall I'm pretty happy with the outcome: Microsoft's servers, operating systems, and office suites have reached a level of sophistication and reliability that wouldn't have otherwise been possible if they has kept these programs under wraps until they were "finished" (ha ha).

My point is that if Microsoft is really serious about making OneCare work – and I believe that it is – it will eventually be a reliable program that does what it's supposed to do, no matter how much it may suck in the mean time.

I had a free 1 year subscription to Windows Live OneCare
it just seemed to take up a lot of resources in my opinion. Hard Drive was spinning wayyyy more than normal.
and many of the features in it were automated. couldn't customize it like i wanted to.
took it off my laptop after about 5 months. put on Comodo Firewall/AntiVirus
noticed a big difference in responsiveness

its not free. I actually like it and find it integrates well into windows. also being in the perpetual(i.e. ongoing) beta I get the whole thing free anyway which is the major winning point for me.