Collision course for Symantec and Microsoft

TalkBack 40 of 40:

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Symantec vs. Microsoft

It always amazes me that no matter the issue, you can always find a linux disciple in the middle of it.

Having worked in the industry for 20 years, I know a tiny bit about users, OS's and the software that spans the two. I have my SUSE 10 PC sitting next to my wifes XP box. She runs Symantec products and Microsoft products because they are more suited to her needs, and I use linux because I enjoy the reliability and choices. I will not say that one is superior to the other for everyone. Fact is, there are different kind of auto transmissions, because people drive different ways. I have supported MS products for most of my career, I have worked for Symantec, and currently spend my time troubleshooting servers for one of the larger server vendors.

I think this is just the latest in a series of steps that Microsoft has taken to define the role of the OS. Symantec products have been included in the OS way back to DOS. This time, MS has stepped over the line. John Thompson has always said that Symantec would not follow a legal course of action as a marketing strategy, and in this case, I think it is more a matter of selling tech that isn't theirs than trying to prevent them from edging Symantec out of the market.

I personally am not a fan of the MS product. I do, however, think the accusations of 'bloatware' are unfair to both MS and Symantec products. The AOL/MS/Symantec combo allows untechinical people access to the information superstream that we more technical people tend to take for granted. These products install, and do their thing without lots of user intervention. That is where the overhead comes from. If linux had the simplicity of use on all its applications and installations that the Windows world has, it would be bloated also. And if you wish to sound off that any linux installation is as easy out of the box as an MS OS, you really should spend some time doing support for servers purchased with linux "because it was cheaper". It is hard enough to get Ed the Bait King to follow an SBS wizard. Walking them through configuring anything in linux is... interesting.

View this issue for what it is. Once again, MS has tried to offer its customers what it believes to be necessary tools for the OS and the technology it is offering happens to belong to someone else.

The end of MS? No, I don't think so. It is simply the result of an OS trying to do more for the user every generation. Remember, once upon a time the internet connection was an add-on (Trumpet WinSock), as was any type of game, a GUI, a browser, hard drive utilities, etc... Back in those days, you had to be a computer person use a computer. Now, most anybody can log in and post.

Posted by: sabazio   Posted on: 06/07/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Virtualization: Architectural Considerations And Other Evaluation Criteria VMware Of the many approaches to x86 systems virtualization available in the ... Download Now
• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now