Is Microsoft Buying Anti-Virus Companies to Undermine Linux?
Linux - NewsThis forum is for original Linux News. If you'd like to write content for LQ, feel free to contact us.
All threads in the forum need to be approved before they will appear.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Is Microsoft Buying Anti-Virus Companies to Undermine Linux?
I'm guessing that Redmond has fallen out of the Federal Trade Commission's jurisdiction since it has scooped up RAV anti-virus and now Sybari and discontinued Linux and UNIX services without as much as a "boo". They only left distributors holding squat in 60 countries and left 10 million users without service.
Here's my questions and my assertion about Microsoft's contribution to an ugly America. IS all fair in love and war? How about in restraint of trade?
Well, NO it is not fair, but it's legal, right? I just read that and i mae me really mad at M$, they are selfish and do not mind terminating anything in their way.
what can you do
Originally posted by ctkroeker Well, NO it is not fair, but it's legal, right? I just read that and i mae me really mad at M$, they are selfish and do not mind terminating anything in their way.
what can you do
You see, it may be illegal because they are a monopoloy and anything they do in restraint of trade is illegal.
Now, why in the world aren't the people who enforce these laws jumping on Microsoft?
ok this topic is interesting... Microsoft only has a stranglehold on the OS side of the market, and only when you buy a computer with a preinstalled os on it... They was forcing windows down our throats, because whenever we bought a non-custom machine form a major store, it had windows. Now i can go to my local staples and a get a relatively cheap desktop with Linspire on it. Kind of cool.... oh, one other thing, they can buy the antivirus until someone says they have to big of control, and they go to war again....
Last edited by hackerarchangel; 06-30-2005 at 09:00 PM.
Originally posted by 69_rs_ss MS might have been found a monopoly, but not in the Anti-virus realm. There are many big players out there that have their own linux versions.
Another dunce?
Not in the anti-virus realm?
God help the children of this world because we got some uneducated brick heads passing their bricks on to future generations.
I'm sorry, but it's sad and its funny at the same time.
I don't think that the monopoly problem is that they are buyng companies or developing new kind of software. I think that what was considered to be illigal is develop an OS where an Internet Browser and/or a media player cannot be removed. Because if you want to use firefox or opera you have to have them both: firefox and internet explorer. This is something that is considered to be illigal. (they kind of changed this after SP1 because they were forced to do that).
If Microsoft develops an Anti-virus, it's OK to ship it with Windows, but they have to respect the other competitors, which means that If I as a consumer find another antivirus better and want to use it instead of the Microsoft one, I should be able to remove it.
Another thing that is considered as a monopoly tactic is to keep parts of the windows API for your self, so that your native programs run better than the others.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.