<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:series="http://unfoldingneurons.com/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Microsoft beats major antivirus vendors</title>
	<atom:link href="http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/</link>
	<description>For Windows Administrators</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 23:51:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/comment-page-1/#comment-38629</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:29:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/#comment-38629</guid>
		<description>I agree that that there is a certain conflict of interest. However, I think Microsoft’s primary concern is to make Windows as secure as possible. Windows is their cash cow not Forefront. Microsoft invested a lot in the security of Windows (XP SP2, Vista, Server 2008). Do you really believe that they will risk their newly gained reputation in regard to security just because they to hope to sell a couple of Forefront licenses? The main purpose of Microsoft’s security products is to help make their operating systems more secure because they want to sell more Windows licenses. I guess if they didn’t have to fear another anti-trust case, they would just add OneCare to the consumer version of Windows and Forefront to Windows Server.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree that that there is a certain conflict of interest. However, I think Microsoft’s primary concern is to make Windows as secure as possible. Windows is their cash cow not Forefront. Microsoft invested a lot in the security of Windows (XP SP2, Vista, Server 2008). Do you really believe that they will risk their newly gained reputation in regard to security just because they to hope to sell a couple of Forefront licenses? The main purpose of Microsoft’s security products is to help make their operating systems more secure because they want to sell more Windows licenses. I guess if they didn’t have to fear another anti-trust case, they would just add OneCare to the consumer version of Windows and Forefront to Windows Server.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Shadow</title>
		<link>http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/comment-page-1/#comment-38510</link>
		<dc:creator>The Shadow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Dec 2007 22:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://4sysops.com/archives/microsoft-beats-major-antivirus-vendors/#comment-38510</guid>
		<description>Its crazy that you actually applaud Microsoft for their forefront service. They are selling a product that is a direct conflict of interest in that if they don&#039;t patch thier systems, they could try and sell more Forefront. Its crazy. Its like Ford selling you an extra wheel because they have a safety issue with a wheel falling off. How could you even say that Microsoft is good on security and taking it seriously? If they had, they wouldn&#039;t need to try and make money on a security software in the first place. Just my two cents</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its crazy that you actually applaud Microsoft for their forefront service. They are selling a product that is a direct conflict of interest in that if they don&#8217;t patch thier systems, they could try and sell more Forefront. Its crazy. Its like Ford selling you an extra wheel because they have a safety issue with a wheel falling off. How could you even say that Microsoft is good on security and taking it seriously? If they had, they wouldn&#8217;t need to try and make money on a security software in the first place. Just my two cents</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
