Symantec thinks Microsoft’s security suite is showing signs of monopolistic pricing? Haha, Symantec, you’re so funny, it’s just your anti-virus software being too expensive.
Remember the time when you disappointed me with your ugly yellow interface, your resource hogging tools. You have the most confusing set of products, your Antivirus software is cross-bundled in numerous of your flagship titles. Now you micmic the Windows Live OneCare idea and offer everything in one simple suite you call Norton 360 and you’re calling their price ‘monopolistic’.
Symantec CEO: Microsoft security ware pricing ‘monopolistic’
Symantec Chairman and CEO John Thompson blamed Microsoft on Tuesday for the current pricing competition his company faces in the consumer security market, suggesting Microsoft’s pricing scheme for its first entry into the space is “monopolistic.”
Speaking at the offices of the Nasdaq stock exchange in New York, Thompson said Microsoft’s decision last year to offer Windows Live OneCare, a service that combines firewall, antivirus and backup capabilities, for $49.95 per year for three PCs “clearly recast prior expectations for consumer security technology.”
“I don’t want to say it was monopolistic, but it looked that way to some of us,” Thompson said.
Symantec released Norton 360, its competitor to Windows Live OneCare, last March, but the product — at $79.99 for three PCs — costs more than Windows Live OneCare but has the benefit of more features and Symantec’s experience in security going for it.
Using competitive pricing to try to get a leg up in a market where a company is weak is a common practice, and Symantec is no stranger to such pricing storms, Thompson said. “We have seen a continued focus on price competition in some markets and some channels,” he said.
Source: InfoWorld
I am using Windows Vista and many of the virus that is made prior to Windows Vista aren’t working too. Assuming that only 10% of the virus are still working, should I just be paying for 10% of the cost your anti-virus software? With Microsoft plugging Vista bugs and holes in an almost weekly basis, the need of an anti-virus software, in my opinion, has clearly depleted.
OneCare at US$50 per year is not cheap too. And from a consumer viewpoint, I’m all for lower prices. The funny thing is that Mr. Thompson said himself that ‘using competitive pricing to try to get a leg up in a market where a company is weak is a common practice’. If OneCare is really not good enough, it is only justifiable that they have to charge cheaper since the consumer is getting a more inferior product in Mr. Thompson’s point of view.
You know what? It’s really just because the competitor is Microsoft.
[Declaration: I am a OneCare perpectual beta tester and I have not try Norton 360.]
I always found Symantec a bit irritating. Maybe that’s why I moved. Mr. Norton himself has been a philanthropist I can agree with, but I’m not so sure about the company.
by cactusbeetroot (Aug 29, 2007 at 11 AM)I found McAfee quite irritating too these days. McAfee made it quite hard to disable the anti-virus and they had a lot of pop ups informing me of this and that. I’m okay with pop ups for those informations but I wished they looks simpler. Essentially security product should sit at the back and protect the computer and intrude as little as possible.
Speaking of these reminds me of UAC in Windows Vista, that’s a horror.
by Mr. Dew (Aug 30, 2007 at 2 AM)