<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael Gracie &#187; security software</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelgracie.com/tag/security-software/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelgracie.com</link>
	<description>Clever Tagline Unavailable At Publication Time</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:53:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Symantec and McAfee fight to stay alive</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/10/23/symantec-and-mcafee-fight-to-stay-alive/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/10/23/symantec-and-mcafee-fight-to-stay-alive/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Oct 2006 14:10:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[security software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/symantec-and-mcafee-fight-to-stay-alive/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Symantec and McAfee are fighting for not only their lives, but getting embarrassed as well.  C&#124;Net Australia reports that the companies may fall into the same trap as Netscape, being market leaders, and then, well, getting pummeled by Microsoft.
Personally, I don&#8217;t think Microsoft wields that kind of influence anymore (or Firefox wouldn&#8217;t continue to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>Symantec and McAfee are fighting for not only their lives, but getting <a title="The Netscaping of Symantec and McAfee - Internet Applications Software" href="http://cnet.com.au/software/internet/0,239029524,339271785,00.htm">embarrassed as well</a>.  C|Net Australia reports that the companies may fall into the same trap as Netscape, being market leaders, and then, well, getting pummeled by Microsoft.</p>
<p>Personally, I don&#8217;t think Microsoft wields that kind of influence anymore (or Firefox wouldn&#8217;t continue to make gains).  But, if the company ever does get its act in gear regarding security, Symantec and McAfee may have to re-invent themselves in a way.  Nonetheless, the argument <a title="Spamroll: Will Vista kill the security companies?" href="http://www.michaelgracie.com/2006/05/08/will-vista-kill-the-security-companies/">has been made before</a>, and I doubt anyone is going to be holding their breath when Vista arrives.</p>
<p><em>(h/t to Slashdot)</em></p>
<p>PS: A show of hands - is anyone even going to buy Vista?  Or a Dell with Vista on it?</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/10/23/symantec-and-mcafee-fight-to-stay-alive/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Symantec must have saturated the business market</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/09/25/symantec-must-have-saturated-the-business-market/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/09/25/symantec-must-have-saturated-the-business-market/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 25 Sep 2006 16:49:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[security software]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/symantec-must-have-saturated-the-business-market/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[According to Symantec, home PCs are the new target for hackers.  It&#8217;s a bold statement, complete with statistics, so it must be true.  Hackers are going after grandma, because all those pictures of the backyard flowerbed are worth big bucks in the blackmarket.
My take - Symantec must have saturated the business security market [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>According to Symantec, <a title="Home PCs are the new targets of attack by hackers, says security firm" href="http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/8963.html" target="">home PCs are the new target for hackers</a>.  It&#8217;s a bold statement, complete with statistics, so it must be true.  Hackers are going after grandma, because all those pictures of the backyard flowerbed are worth big bucks in the blackmarket.</p>
<p>My take - Symantec must have saturated the business security market by now (or at least someone has), so they are going after all the everyday folk who view their Pentium IIIs as just another appliance in the house.</p>
<p>Or maybe the &#8220;<a title="E-Commerce News: Security: The Hidden Costs of Security Freeware" href="http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/53113.html" target="">hidden cost of security freeware</a>&#8221; is that people are actually using it?</p>
<p>***UPDATE***</p>
<p>Since virus writers are <a title="Techdirt: Virus Writers Looking To Slow Things Down" href="http://techdirt.com/articles/20060925/170612.shtml" target="">playing the &#8220;insecurity by obscurity&#8221; angle</a>, maybe all that niche freeware is just doing a better job marketing, hence the need for scare tactics.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/09/25/symantec-must-have-saturated-the-business-market/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How not to sell security software</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/15/how-not-to-sell-security-software/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/15/how-not-to-sell-security-software/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2005 14:19:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[security software]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Symantec]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/how-not-to-sell-security-software/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ed Bott&#8217;s Windows Expertise site makes it clear that buying software online needs to be a bit easier.  What is even more clear is that if you are buying security software, it better be crystal.
The buying process described by Ed&#8217;s cohort Carl Siechert is both convoluted and dangerous.  There are a several points [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>Ed Bott&#8217;s Windows Expertise site <a href="http://www.edbott.com/weblog/?p=1178" target="">makes it clear</a> that buying software online needs to be a bit easier.  What is even more clear is that if you are buying security software, it better be crystal.</p>
<p>The buying process described by Ed&#8217;s cohort Carl Siechert is both convoluted and dangerous.  There are a several points where I would have given up out of sheer aggravation, and several more where I would have questioned the source of what I was downloading.  Most of the hoops the vendor made the buyer jump through were likely designed to protect against piracy, and/or simply give the system time to get the right license key.  So be it.</p>
<p>The security vendor in question, Symantec.  Makes you wonder whether this has something to do with their <a title="Spamroll: Can't profit from protection" href="http://www.michaelgracie.com/2005/11/02/cant-profit-from-protection/">inability to make any money</a>.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/15/how-not-to-sell-security-software/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
