Kr0z Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Why should it be free? Should Office be free too then? Yearly subscription fee is good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidnightDevil Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 I don't really understand how executables are a vulnerability. 586309499[/snapback] Most of the problems today are exploited on windows vulnerabilities. Worms, like blaster, red alert, the sort of TCP/IP propagation, on outlook, there are lot's of vulnerabilities that displaying the html will automaticly infect your computer, browser and code executions, buffers overflows. Yes, free. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWahbinator Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 I think it should be a subscription, where you can order a year in advance and pay like $5 a month for the protection. Another good idea is that there should be 2 levels (Standard or Plus) that the Plus has more over the standard. Also I think a 7 day free trial should come with Vista :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay420 Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Yeah, definitely want a one-time payment. I mean, its normal for software companies to charge for major new software versions, so I really think a one time fee should do it. and i am not willing to pay more than $20, if they are willing to do so :ninja: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidnightDevil Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Neither. They have to think on EVERYONE. Everywhere in the world, and look at them and say "we're just protecting our systems". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 whoever says that its ms fault that there are so many vulnerabilities is ignorant. they are probably comparing with other oses. which, as windows is the most popular, are used very little and hacked very little = less vulnerabilities found. Now, if microsoft made the program free. guess what? monopoly, eu etc. If they make money off of it, the public will complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenny McCormick Posted August 3, 2005 Share Posted August 3, 2005 Pay after each subcription expires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaClearly Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 whoever says that its ms fault that there are so many vulnerabilities is ignorant. they are probably comparing with other oses. which, as windows is the most popular, are used very little and hacked very little = less vulnerabilities found.Now, if microsoft made the program free. guess what? monopoly, eu etc. If they make money off of it, the public will complain. 586321017[/snapback] They will only get in trouble if they bundle it with the OS itself. I see no problem if they offered it for free at Microsofts onecare website for free. People can choose to download and install this software just like they do today with many freeware products. The courts would say that its not Microsofts fault that customers like their product better than Nortons for example as long as nothing in the OS directs the customer to this product instead of another companies products. Now with all that said my belief is that it will be a subscription model even though Microsoft should not charge for it because in todays market this type of software should be required and free. We have all of these problems today partly because customers systems aren't protected and maybe thats because they don't know what they need so they won't spend money not knowing if its a waste. Second most customers don't even know they need protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MidnightDevil Posted August 4, 2005 Share Posted August 4, 2005 Kinda true, but courts don't go against linux for bringing GNU software bundled, MS OneCare isn't exacly GNU, but it's going to be free, could be a optional component. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted August 5, 2005 Share Posted August 5, 2005 Kinda true, but courts don't go against linux for bringing GNU software bundled, MS OneCare isn't exacly GNU, but it's going to be free, could be a optional component. 586324000[/snapback] courts also don't go after apple for bundling their software. they go after ms simply because they are the big guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Geek Posted August 6, 2005 Share Posted August 6, 2005 I personally think it should be free for one reason, Microsoft is the ony who makes Windows and they don't make it secure. Why should I pay $200 for an OS that has bugs to begin with and then turn around and pay a subscription fee because Microsoft can't get it right in the first place? 586303997[/snapback] i agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Veteran Posted August 6, 2005 Veteran Share Posted August 6, 2005 I reckon that there should be an installation choice here, to provide it or not upon first Windows install, then a one off fee of like ?5 should be charged. This way, Microsoft can still generate some revenue for the program, its advertised with Windows (no annoying popups, just one plain "Yes" or "No" at Windows setup) and consumers are happy asmany> people would pay for a complete package which is excellent quality at a completely affordable price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert McClelland Posted August 7, 2005 Share Posted August 7, 2005 I'm testing right now :) I'm really protect now lol. I have my ZASS and one care running it seems work great with both on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cloud Geek Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 whoever says that its ms fault that there are so many vulnerabilities is ignorant. they are probably comparing with other oses. which, as windows is the most popular, are used very little and hacked very little = less vulnerabilities found.Now, if microsoft made the program free. guess what? monopoly, eu etc. If they make money off of it, the public will complain. 586321017[/snapback] they could call it an "update" like xp sp2 and windows security center Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bastawhiz Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 When you really think about it, OneCare doesn't patch flaws in Windows, it prevents errant programs from taking over your computer. This would exist in the computer world whether or not there were flaws in the OS, only because Windows (and Linux and Mac, for that matter) are designed to be extended by programs and applications. Not a sigle OS today is smart enough to recognize that a certain program performs dangerous actions. Thats all a virus is. A worm breaks in. A virus/trojan, on the other hand, is designed to be very inconspicuous. Then, it infects the computer when the user has activated it. So basically, OneCare protects the user from him/her self, and from exploits which were not forseen/found during testing/discovered early on (seriously. if they've stayed hidden all this time, they must be pretty damn hidden). The firewall prevents hackers from manipulating existing features of Windows. Or breaking in. Put yourself in MS's position. Do you see how hard it is to analyze these problems? Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCobra Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 (edited) I personally think it should be free for one reason, Microsoft is the ony who makes Windows and they don't make it secure. Why should I pay $200 for an OS that has bugs to begin with and then turn around and pay a subscription fee because Microsoft can't get it right in the first place? 586303997[/snapback] You hit the nail on the head but I would pay a one time fee. The BETA is pretty good. It's got some minor issues/flaws but good none the less. Edited August 9, 2005 by MrCobra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zucker2k Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 OneCare cannot be provided by Microsoft for free, you know why? They'll be sued by all the AV software companies, unfair trade practice. Just as in the WM fuss in Europe for example. I'm sure this will happen even if OneCare is not bundled with Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 they just now sent me the welcome email. i used to run nod32 and SPF before i installed one care and i can already tell one care needs a lot of polishing. running a virus scan takes ages, 4% completion after 15 mintutes. its doesnt seem too bloated, although it does use more memory than a few other av/firewall combos, there's still some potential for this product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The J Man Posted October 5, 2005 Author Share Posted October 5, 2005 If Microsoft made Windows better at virus then we would not have this problem. 586302032[/snapback] exactly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The J Man Posted October 5, 2005 Author Share Posted October 5, 2005 You hit the nail on the head but I would pay a one time fee. The BETA is pretty good. It's got some minor issues/flaws but good none the less. 586350578[/snapback] beta is good.. it ought to be better... there ain' enough features that will make people go "wooww" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fragmaster Posted October 5, 2005 Share Posted October 5, 2005 Hmm, I think a little care and effort from users is when this software becomes redundant. It shouldn't be free because people are too lazy to be aware in life and can't be bothered to take proper security measures themselves. For instance, if you installed a Linux distribution and ran as root constantly, as nearly everyone I know that runs Windows does (well Administrator), then you will get flamed. Not so with Windows :/ If you went out on the road on a motorbike without a helmet, and got hit by a car, would you blame Honda or whoever made the bike? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostWarrior25 Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 Well to me, I think that it should be subscription based because you are getting Anti-Virus updates from Microsoft. It shouldn't be free, because the genuine check is always getting hacked. To me I really would personally pay for OneCare, but I don't have any money because I am a freshman in high school. OneCare is a good program, it helped me with the virus my friend sent me. Hopefully, because im beta testing the software, they will give a free subscrption for OneCare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomcat2821 Posted October 7, 2005 Share Posted October 7, 2005 If it is better than Symantec I will pay for a subscription I just got mine in the mail today exited Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The J Man Posted October 9, 2005 Author Share Posted October 9, 2005 we'll just have to blame on those virus writers. creating so much trouble for us and the software giant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mohammed_MAM Posted October 9, 2005 Share Posted October 9, 2005 How Can I Get It :alien: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts