Symantec CEO: Microsoft security ware pricing 'monopolistic'

Iria · Aug 29, 2007, 04:07 AM

Source: InfoWorld
________
Symantec Chairman and CEO John Thompson blamed Microsoft on Tuesday for the current pricing competition his company faces in the consumer security market, suggesting Microsoft's pricing scheme for its first entry into the space is "monopolistic."

Speaking at the offices of the Nasdaq stock exchange in New York, Thompson said Microsoft's decision last year to offer Windows Live OneCare, a service that combines firewall, antivirus and backup capabilities, for $49.95 per year for three PCs "clearly recast prior expectations for consumer security technology."

"I don't want to say it was monopolistic, but it looked that way to some of us," Thompson said.

Judas · Aug 29, 2007, 08:25 AM

Ok, wait a second, so microsoft is providing an all in one system, for 3 machines, for the cost of what norton can only seem to provide for one machine?

Wait a second, didn't nortons home software baised client recently fall appart for alot of people (causing massive grief)...... and frankly with the solutions out there already, and the number of people increaseing there computers available in one room deal, i think microsoft is being rather, realistic. Norton on the other hand imo has been dropping the ball since 2005.

EZero · Aug 29, 2007, 09:09 AM

Seriously, from reading the whole article, it really seemed like he was just complaining because Microsoft's solution is driving prices down too much for Symantec.

I don't get it, if he thinks his (Symantec) is so much superior, why would he worry about the prices? People will pay more money for better products as long as it is truly better and less for inferior products. All they have to do is prove themselves.

With that said, with my recent experiences with Symantec as a home user, I would say that their software is turning more into bloatware and headache generating machines than they are helping. I've seen one too many times when my friend installs Norton Antivirus and their Firewall solution and all of a sudden all their network traffic is being blocked even after going through all the options in a futile attempt to disable it.

BlueMak · Aug 29, 2007, 10:38 AM

They should go back into releasing a new version of NCD than bitching about Microsoft releasing a lower priced security software package.
It sure makes them look like vultures and that people shouldn't be allowed to have that kind of protection for only that amount of money per 3 PCs.
I mean, who is going to support them in this?

bug77 · Aug 29, 2007, 01:04 PM

Well, OneCare already managed to finish last in a 14 AV products comparison. IE also shows that most users couldn't tell quality if their life depended on it. So yes, it is possible that a quality security solution is more expensive than 49.95/year/3 computers.

I know Symantec products are not exactly top-notch, but that doesn't automatically mean M$ isn't trying to kill off competition.

Aug 29, 2007, 04:07 AM	#1
Iria DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 7,275 Rep Power: 89	Symantec CEO: Microsoft security ware pricing 'monopolistic' Source: InfoWorld ________ Symantec Chairman and CEO John Thompson blamed Microsoft on Tuesday for the current pricing competition his company faces in the consumer security market, suggesting Microsoft's pricing scheme for its first entry into the space is "monopolistic." Speaking at the offices of the Nasdaq stock exchange in New York, Thompson said Microsoft's decision last year to offer Windows Live OneCare, a service that combines firewall, antivirus and backup capabilities, for $49.95 per year for three PCs "clearly recast prior expectations for consumer security technology." "I don't want to say it was monopolistic, but it looked that way to some of us," Thompson said.

Aug 29, 2007, 10:38 AM	#4
BlueMak HH's Asteroids' Dominator Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Hellas->Macedonia->Thessaloniki Posts: 13,478 Rep Power: 349 System Specs	They should go back into releasing a new version of NCD than bitching about Microsoft releasing a lower priced security software package. It sure makes them look like vultures and that people shouldn't be allowed to have that kind of protection for only that amount of money per 3 PCs. I mean, who is going to support them in this? __________________ The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm *Sic semper tyrannis.*

Aug 29, 2007, 09:09 AM	#3
EZero HardwareHeaven Lover Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 119 Rep Power: 52 System Specs	Seriously, from reading the whole article, it really seemed like he was just complaining because Microsoft's solution is driving prices down too much for Symantec. I don't get it, if he thinks his (Symantec) is so much superior, why would he worry about the prices? People will pay more money for better products as long as it is truly better and less for inferior products. All they have to do is prove themselves. With that said, with my recent experiences with Symantec as a home user, I would say that their software is turning more into bloatware and headache generating machines than they are helping. I've seen one too many times when my friend installs Norton Antivirus and their Firewall solution and all of a sudden all their network traffic is being blocked even after going through all the options in a futile attempt to disable it.

Aug 29, 2007, 01:04 PM	#5
bug77 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: around Posts: 792 Rep Power: 0	Well, OneCare already managed to finish last in a 14 AV products comparison. IE also shows that most users couldn't tell quality if their life depended on it. So yes, it is possible that a quality security solution is more expensive than 49.95/year/3 computers. I know Symantec products are not exactly top-notch, but that doesn't automatically mean M$ isn't trying to kill off competition.