Microsoft “OneCare”
Microsoft is getting into the security software game and, as usual with anything from Microsoft, there is a lot of discussion. Yesterday, David Pogue wrote quite a bit in the NY Times about it. Part of what he wrote raises the issue of why Microsoft should be charging for software to fix problems that they caused in the first place.
So you might be surprised to find out who just entered the antivirus and anti-spyware market this month: Microsoft. Yes, Microsoft, the company whose inattention to security made antivirus software a necessity in the first place.
What’s next  Häagen-Dazs diet pills?
This business plan sticks in a lot of craws. Why should Microsoft profit from the plague of viruses and spyware? Shouldn’t it have designed Windows better to begin with? And if it has indeed found a way to protect Windows, isn’t it a tad exploitative to charge for it?
Ultimately, however, he comes down in favor of the software
In the meantime, OneCare offers very good value, convenient automation and clean design  as long as you can accept the fact that you’re buying Microsoft software to protect Microsoft software.
On the other hand, over at PC Magazine they are pretty lukewarm. Michael Miller says
My take on the situation is this: I’m not really thrilled with any of the Windows security solutions to date. A couple of months back I wrote an “open letter to security vendors†saying they shouldn’t be too concerned about Microsoft, but rather should focus on improving their own products.
Whether the Microsoft effort is top-quality or not, I think Symantec is facing a major problem. They can no longer keep selling buggy software and blithely assume that there is no major competition