European security software makers are closely, but quietly, watching as Microsoft enters their turf.
Companies such as F-Secure, Panda Software and Sophos are taking a low-key approach, unlike their US counterparts. Symantec, in particular, has been vocal in its opposition to Microsoft, even sending executives to Europe to talk to reporters about how it fears the software giant will undercut security rivals with Windows Vista.
That doesn't mean, however, that the Europeans don't share the concerns that have been voiced by Symantec, McAfee and others.
"We should regard Microsoft's entry into this space as a threat," said Josu Franco, director of corporate development at Panda Software in Bilbao, Spain. "Microsoft is trying to leverage its monopoly in the desktop to compete in the antivirus space, and we should call that abuse."
Europe is a key battleground for Microsoft as it gets ready to ship Vista, the successor to Windows XP that is slated to be broadly available in January. The European Commission has already warned Microsoft to stick to its competition rules — in particular, those that prohibit abuse of a dominant market position. Microsoft continues to seek out what's permissible in Vista.
Europe has many small companies that sell antivirus and other security products. Some are concerned that they face the same fate as Netscape, the venerable browser company that saw its business evaporate after Microsoft added Internet Explorer to Windows.
"All of them are concerned, and should be," said Thomas Raschke, a Denmark-based analyst at Forrester Research. "The security market, and particularly the most mature areas like antivirus and firewalls, is maturing and consolidating rapidly. Many of the companies will either have to join forces or disappear."
The Netscape effectWhile security software and Web browsers are obviously different, Microsoft's intentions are the same and hold an equal risk for security, Franco said.
"I don't think that anybody would say that having Internet Explorer on over 90 percent of desktops has been good for consumers in terms of innovation, user choice and especially in security. We all know that this monoculture in browsers has been bad," Franco said.
But Microsoft maintains that it can't protect Windows on its own and that other security companies are important.
"We don't believe that Microsoft can solve this problem by itself, and we need the industry's support in this effort," said Adrien Robinson, a business development manager at Microsoft. "The more that we can do with partners, the better for our customers."
Security software and features have emerged as the hottest topic among a number of concerns with Vista, which will come with added security technology. At the same time, Microsoft is pushing into the security space with a new product for consumers, Windows Live OneCare, and is working on protective business products under the Forefront brand.
"As long as Microsoft allows equal access to the operating system, we can differentiate," said Steve Munford, chief executive of Sophos, a security company in Abingdon. "We have to make sure that we have a broader and more comprehensive strategy than Microsoft."
Symantec, which leads the worldwide antivirus software market, has been loudest in raising the alarm over Vista and Microsoft's entry into the security arena. Chief executive John Thompson earlier this year warned of a future where all security applications are provided by Microsoft.
"The concerns from the US companies are real," said Risto Siilasmaa, chief executive officer at F-Secure, based in Helsinki.
Pricing concerns
Predatory pricing is of particular concern, said Siilasmaa. "If Microsoft starts to offer their solutions at significantly reduced price levels to gain market share, and then plans to raise prices again after a few years, that obviously is a business issue all the companies have to tackle," he said.
Microsoft could change the game on pricing, Munford agreed. "You always think about predatory pricing, but I have not seen any evidence of it," he said. Siilasmaa also said he hasn't yet seen any signs that the software giant will sell its products at artificially low prices in order to harm rivals.
In the short term, Microsoft's entry into the security industry might mean lower prices, but that isn't necessarily good for software buyers, Franco said. "We would think that Microsoft tactics to compete in this space will ultimately hurt consumers," he said.
The software giant has introduced its Windows Live OneCare in the US, but the consumer security product is not yet available in Europe.
In addition to a firewall, which was also part of XP, Vista will include anti-spyware software called "Windows Defender" and a new…





Talkback
Poor old Microsoft. They get slated if they get it wrong and equally if they get it right. In this case they are getting it right. Trying to make their software more secure for the end user. So what does the security industry do? Try and make them unsecure elements of their product so they can stay in business.
Well guess what guys, that's business. If your area of expertise is changing or becoming more competitive then you need to step up to the plate or change your business model. They invented the OS so why shouldn't they make it more secure. It's about time we got away from this demented patch, signature and re-patch mentality and started to produce software from the ground up that is secure. Well done microsoft. They have a long way to go but it looks like they are going to have to step on a few toes to get there
Microsoft is right to focus on the marketplace, which demands that it provide a good secure (or whatever they're selling) product.
By virtue of the EC's reasoning, virtually anything the comnpany produces will need some sort of Commission thumbs-up. Look at the WMP-less version of Windows to get an idea of how successful the Commission has been in this stead - only 1700 copies sold (mostly for souvenirs).
The industry should be concerned that we're letting regulators have such sway. It's the behemoth that sits in the cross-hairs now - it's others (not so much) later.
The sooner rivals stop crying over nothing the better. Microsoft is shipping an antivirus with their OS. Let me get this right, did i just say THEIR OS as in the OS microsoft wrote and have 100% control over on what they can put into it, take out of it and do with it? Microsoft adding an antivirus to the microsoft operating system is no different than toyota adding their own CD systems to their own cars or built in TVs. It is their car, if they want to do this sony have no right to complain about this!
Likewise, just because microsoft is shipping the Antivirus with windows does not mean i am going to go right out there, uninstall it and stick on my own preferred antivirus. Is their anti virus being so is shit the reason why Symantec are making such a noise over nothing? The sooner Symantec go out of business in the Antivirus world the better.
Yeah, put more muscle into marketing tactics. That's what it's all about, right? So starting right now all anti-virus vendors should delay their Windows specific anti-virus signature files for at least 20 days (Microsoft does that with most of their security patches, so why shouldn't they?). Do or die, right?
If Microsoft is so good with security then surely they'll life up to that challenge without problem for sure. Seems only the right thing to do. Equal oppurtunity and all that. Meaning, (ab)use your current market share. Of course, if Microsoft wouldn't be all to happy about that then they can renegotiate the when and how of their introduction into the anti-virus market with concerned current anti-virus vendors. Surely everyone involved has only the best interest of consumers in general in mind. So us consumers need not to worry. And surely the Microsoft anti-virus team won't favour the Microsoft Windows team, or any other Microsoft team, in any way. They only work for the same boss and their managers just happen to lunch in the same room just about daily. Anyone seeing a possible conflict of interest with that surely doesn't have any clue about common human behaviour. Sigh.
But that's not how Microsoft (fans) want things to go down. They want the current anti-virus vendors to do their part until Microsoft is finally ready to take over.
Like playing Ceasar. Thanks for building an empire and taking care of our (security) neglects. Now look the other way and take the stab in the back.
Thank you. Next!
Next runners up. The gaming industry. And the ads industry. Like anti-virus vendors have been warned about years ago. Betting on a single horse is a sure way of ending up in the gutter.
Business 101. Spread your risks. Also meaning, spread your revenues streams. Don't ever become vitally dependant.
It's not quite to the point but I installed Vista 5728 on Wednesday and on Thursday I visited a site which collected my email addresses and started vigorously spamming me with phishing emails. The connection between the site visited and the spam is absolutely unambiguous
This means that this site was able to access my computer and lift my email addresses with apparant ease. So much for Vista being the most secure system ever. Windows Defender and PC-cillin Internet Security 14 are installed. However, I do note the difficulty in finding anti virus programmes which will work with Vista this near to release.
The origin of this spam is not yet blacklisted
I cannot find out how to tell Microsoft about this intrusion.
"Microsoft adding an antivirus to the microsoft operating system is no different than toyota adding their own CD systems to their own cars or built in TVs."
So Myles, in your analogy are you seriously suggesting that Toyota have a 95% market share of the automobile industry?