www.winxp.fora.pl

[fertieg49]

There’s a great piece from Emil Protalinski over at Ars Technica which highlights criticism of Microsoft Security Essentials from anti-virus vendors. As you may know, this month, Redmond changed the licensing terms for Security Essentials, allowing small businesses with up to 10 PCs to download the product for free.
But there’s still more to do. One of the few criticisms I agree with from the AV vendors is NOD’s assertion that Security Essentials doesn’t protect servers. That’s absolutely right, but do small businesses with 10 PCs or less actually run a server? Many don’t, but more and more are adopting Windows Home Server as a centralised backup solution, and as a server-based product,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], it’s not only unsupported on WHS, but Microsoft have been vague to say the least on its compatibility with the platform.
Mon, Oct 18, 2010
If Microsoft are serious about protecting small businesses (I believe they are), and the company are also serious about positioning Windows Home Server as a solution for those same businesses (check out these marketing materials if you have any doubt there), then the job is only half done. Not only do Microsoft need to fully test, and then add Windows Home Server to the list of platforms Security Essentials will protect, they should go a step further and provide an add-in which supports centralised installation,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], monitoring and management of AV updates across those ten PCs in the small business. Only then will we have a compelling, free anti-virus solution that serves Microsoft’s vision of small office/home office IT, and truly protects their customers’ data.
Carefully worded statements from Symantec,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], ESET and Avast all applauded Microsoft supporting small businesses with free malware protection – as quoted by Symantec,? a 2009 survey conducted by the company an the National Cyber Security Alliance found that small businesses are storing more important information than ever, and are a high profile target for criminals. That said, all three companies were disparaging regarding the effectiveness of Microsoft Security Essentials. Symantec: “While we applaud any vendor that heightens small business awareness around the need for computer security, it’s clear that today’s threats have moved beyond the capabilities of the product Microsoft is offering…t he reality is that the number and sophistication of Web-based viruses and malicious code continues to rise, resulting in small businesses needing more than just a signature-based antivirus product to fully protect their critical information.”
| Terry Walsh
Let’s be clear, here � it’s in the interest of these companies to persuade small businesses that they need a different anti-virus solution than the now freely-available Microsoft Security Essentials. But some anti-virus protection is better than no anti-virus protection, and I’ve found that Security Essentials does a great job of protecting all of the PCs I use here at WGS, without clogging the systems up with bloated features that few need. If you know of a small business owner who doesn’t have AV protection, or more dangerously, has let their AV signature subscriptions slide, then I’d recommend you send them straight over to Microsoft.com to download and install MSE immediately.
Avast and NOD hammer on the lack of support available with the product, “In case customers need help, there is no one to call”, shouts NOD whilst Avast worries about? the cost of protection. “What small firms do need [is] antivirus protection that is affordable in terms of its total cost. This includes not just the purchase price, but the labor costs of IT maintenance and also the expense of repairing an unblocked virus outbreak.”
(Thanks to Chris S for the heads up on the Ars Technica post.)