“Symantec has accused Microsoft of withholding key information about its upcoming Vista operating system in an attempt to gain an advantage in the security market,” Tom Espiner reports for CNET News.
Espiner reports, “The security specialist said this week that Microsoft is refusing to hand over the application programmable interfaces (APIs) for Windows Defender, the spyware product that will be included in Windows Vista. Without the APIs, Symantec contends that it isn’t able to ensure that its own security products are compatible with the update. ‘Microsoft is affirmatively introducing bottlenecks to funnel customers to their products,’ said John Brigden, Symantec senior vice president for Europe. ‘It’s all about control and dominance. They are deliberately delaying giving us the APIs.'”
“Microsoft responded to Symantec’s concerns on Wednesday, and said that it had made the APIs for Defender available earlier this week. Symantec, though, insists that the APIs still aren’t available,” Espiner reports. “The timing of the release of APIs is crucial for Symantec, as it is due to ship a Vista-compatible Norton antivirus product to PC makers in October.”
“Security vendor McAfee is also irked that Microsoft has not provided APIs for Defender. Sources close to the company confirmed that Microsoft has not provided the APIs, and that senior McAfee executives ‘really have a bee in their bonnets’ about the situation,” Espiner reports. “Symantec and McAfee are battling Microsoft for the ability to replace the Windows Security Center with their own security consoles. Additionally, the security companies also claim the PatchGuard feature in 64-bit editions of Vista excludes them but lets in hackers.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: No way. You mean to tell us that another company is accusing Microsoft of leveraging their Windows monopoly in an underhanded manner that lacks proper business ethics and morals? How ever could this be? Not innovative Microsoft. No.
The dinosaur is trying to eat its parasites and vice versa.
Jobs, life is far too short for this idiocy! Windows is a cancer on personal computing. It needs to be cut out. Plus, it’s ugly and it sucks. Are people stupid or what?! No, really, are they just stupid? How much more evidence do they need to see they’ve made the wrong choice?
If you pay Mafiasoft a yearly subscription fee to protect Mafiasoft Windows, you deserve to use Windows and only Windows for the rest of your natural life. And, while you’re at it, send us US$1,000 via PayPal immediately for full legal ownership of The Brooklyn Bridge which we own and are selling to you, you pigeon, you: webmaster@macdailynews.com
We just can’t imagine having the time, processor cycles and patience to waste. We pity the Windows-only sufferers. We are 100% Microsoft-, Symantec-, and McAfee-free and loving every single minute of it!*
*Of course, we do test various software and operating systems to keep up-to-date. We just don’t bother trying to use them. If we ever find something we like, we’ll let you know.
[UPDATE: 8:05am: Added disclaimer.]
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Symantec details more security holes in Microsoft’s Windows Vista – July 26, 2006
Symantec: Microsoft’s ‘improvements’ to Vista could cause instability, new security flaws – July 18, 2006
Mafiasoft launches Windows protection racket – May 31, 2006
Symantec Antivirus software flaw allows hackers to seize control of PCs without user interaction – May 25, 2006
Symantec sues Microsoft to halt Windows Vista development – May 19, 2006
Microsoft’s Anti-Spyware program deletes Symantec’s Norton Anti-Virus – February 12, 2006
Mafiasoft: Microsoft to charge $50 per year for security service to protect Windows – February 07, 2006
Mickeymousesoft policy: Protect from virus via-us.
Good thing I ducked. I almost got drenched in bile! LOL
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”tongue laugh” style=”border:0;” />
Windows is a cancer on personal computing. It needs to be cut out. Plus, it’s ugly and it sucks.
Truer words have never been written.
Embrace, Extend and Extinguish
If Microsoft did things right in Vista, there should be no need for anti-malware software.
*busts out laughing*
“Microsoft do anything right? *more laughing*
Is it just me, or do the MDN takes seem a little edgier this evening? Doesn’t quite sound like the usual MDN voice. This one has fangs.
Funny… if Microsoft improves security and virus protection with Vista, will they be sued for using their monopoly power to harm third-party software companies?
We just can’t imagine having the time, processor cycles and patience to waste. We pity the Windows-only sufferers. We are 100% Microsoft-, Symantec-, and McAfee-free and loving every single minute of it!
In Apple we trust, all others who want a admin password to fsck up our machines can GO TO HELL!!
All those who want to use Trusted Computing via EFI to snitch on our usage, police our software can join them and burn to death forever.
That’s not possible. MS has always dealt fairly, openly and equitably with all partners and competitors. Bill said so. And he’s real rich.
Jobs isn’t God.
“[…] if Microsoft improves security and virus protection with Vista, will they be sued for using their monopoly power to harm third-party software companies?”
Depends on how they do it. I’ll admit, sometimes Microsoft ends up damned if they do and damned if they don’t. But this doesn’t sound like one of those cases.
Essentially, Microsoft has created a security system tied into the operating system that only Microsoft can use. For example, each copy of Windows ships with the Windows Security Center which will let you know whether or not you have firewall and antivirus protection running. But Microsoft has not yet told anyone how to let Windows Security Center know that you are an antivirus program and you’re running.
So if I go out and buy Symantec’s Antivirus and install it, Windows will continue to tell me that I don’t have antivirus protection. Only Microsoft’s Windows Defender will work with the Windows Security Center.
Don’t get me wrong–if the Windows Security Center shipped with Defender, that’d be fine. But since it ships on every copy of Windows, it should work with any program that is and provides those protections.
Poor Symantec. They can’t update their POS Norton anti-shite crapware. Microslop is a poor excuse of a software company and Symantec is right in there with them IMHO. I hope MS drives Symantec out of business and then does the same to themselves. The world will be a better place without these non-innovators.
mac user 47: No, but God is Jobs (and everything else).
I’m genuinely stunned…
That anyone would expect any other sort of behaviour.
Symantec products protect my XP riddled laptop just fine, thanks.
I will be dropping Norton when I start using Windows on Parallels on my new MacBook Pro as soon as it arrives.
Until then, I must say that Symantec makes damn good XP AV protection.
I have a slightly used Sydney Harbour Bridge for sale. Cheap at only 10k.
Any takers? Email back with your bank details so I can verify you have enough cash.
Cheers,
MDN: expect – expect to be ripped off!
Mac user 47 and God-Reporter
By the beard of Zeus! These barbarians think they have a monopoly on theology!
Everyone’s missing the boat here.
The real issue: why are Windows Defender and APIs for it necessary in the first place??
Why not a solid OS design, a firewall, and online updates? The way another OS vendor does it…
We know the answer so don’t bother. MS and Symantec are fighting over the symptom, not the core problem.
<b>”Windows is a cancer on personal computing. It needs to be cut out. Plus, it’s ugly and it sucks.”<\b>
Love it.
Some of us are forced to use Windows at work – urgh. It’s soul destroying.
Particularly if you have to work with the Outlook/Word combo all day.
Like when Outlook has that hourly spasm – does that weird frame flicker and jumbles your typing. So you sit, and wait and fold your arms……
What about that essential application which just refuses to launch/execute in W speak(?) ? And you have to restart the system.
. . .
. . . . .
..Oh, ok, we can start again.
Now, where was I? Oh yes… Let’s try that <i>again<\i>…
that’s got to be the reason why they issue security concerns over OS-X. Their Windows market is getting shut down by MS, and now they need a new herd of sheep to buy their “security” software.
I have no love for MS, but none for Symantec either. It’s like watching one hungry hyena devouring the other.
All Norton ever does is screw up the OS anyway, I don’t blame MS for keeping them out
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Norton AV is like the Real player. It tries to take over the entire system and makes a computer run as slow as shit.
I won’t put either one on my PC, and I don’t need either one on my Mac.
McAfee isn’t bad though for protecting a PC. But Norton can go to Hell…
“We are 100% Microsoft-, Symantec-, and McAfee-free and loving every single minute of it!”
So you talk about Boot camp and Parallels and have never used them?
You don’t know what the competition actually does, you just trash it?
Your opinions are based on what you THINK vista might be, not using the betas?
Great.
I guess any comments you make about Microsoft or the PC industry really are not worth listening to.
As if there were any doubt on that front.
“Why not a solid OS design, a firewall, and online updates? The way another OS vendor does it…”
Gee, a firewall, Microsoft should get right on that. hang on, they already did.
Online updates, Microsoft should get right on that. hang on, they already did.
Secure OS design. What’s in Vista in this regard is light years ahead of Mac OS X.
It’s not that Apple’s any more secure, just that few people can be bothered creating exploits for such a small user base.
I’ve given up on the ignorant masses. They know there are alternatives but they think Macs are harder to use than PCs and also have viruses and malware. Accepting suboptimal solutions is a way of life, which I leave for the windose masses!
meaning and through:
I use Windows: XP and 2000 NT. I started with Windows back in the 3.1 days. I’m not impressed.
The security fixes that MS put into place came after malicious code caused billions of dollars worth of damage in commerce. All of it mostly and easily preventable if they had done it right in the first place. All of these simple steps that happened with OS X from day one.
You argue obscurity. Vista betas and release candidates have only thousands of users, yet it took little time for the first Vista virus to be discovered.
Security isn’t MS’s only problem.
Networking on Windows is a pain in the rear. Uninstalling software too many steps. The color space is more difficult to manage. Windows Media Playere, yikes, I have trouble with it on both my Mac and any Windows machine. I usually end up ditching and walking past most wmv files. A nightmare.
The only time I have problems with media on the net with my Mac is if I haven’t updated to the latest version of Flash.
Are there things that I like on Windows better? A few, but I’d struggle remember any of them, being buried under all of my gripes and complaints about the platform.