Antivirus makers applaud, mock MSE

fseal said:

... It's hard to argue the immorality of "anti-competitive practices" (of the free MSE) when the they (the commercial av companies) are making a mint off the backs of such evil in the first place. An Evil which MS itself should be (and is) doing everything it can from it's end to stop.

There is no moral claim that could be made with a straight face that MS should NOT prevent the infection of it's own OS or that they should charge their customers one penny extra for the priviledge!

Good point, but logic and law are rarely congruent.

The comments I am pleased, but not surprised, to see are those from avast.

I can remember when they came into the AV market and their stated reason for providing home users with free protection.

They stated that in order to provide better service to their commercial customers it was necessary to protect home machines from infection and thus the potential for "sneaker net" transfer into business machines.

It is pleasing to see that the company is still holding the moral high ground in this matter

Antman said:

Norton and McAfee are, in my opinion, partly reponsible for the spread of viruses and other malware. Bundled packages that are out of date or never activated, expired subscriptions.

Just an opinion - they are cancerware.

You should put McAfee first and Norton second.