MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

 MacDailyNews Poll

5 Day Most Commented

Opinion Archive

Current Headlines

Latest Joy of Tech

  • Latest Joy of Tech!

MacNN

AppleInsider

Macworld UK

TUAW

MacRumors

Yahoo! Finance AAPL

iTunes Top 10 Albums

Mac OS X Downloads

Mon, Dec 01, 2008 - 12:19 PM EST  —  AAPL: 90.10 (-2.57, -2.77%)  |  NASDAQ: 1453.07 (-82.50, -5.37%)

Symantec cries wolf with misplaced Mac OS X ‘security’ warning
Wednesday, March 23, 2005 - 03:21 PM EST

"In a perfect would [sic], people might pay for security software based on the number of attacks prevented and the severity of those threats. The bigger the threat, the harder the software works and the more it protects, the more you pay. Seems fair enough," David Coursey writes for eWeek. "In the case of Mac OS X, if you paid for what you got, the price for security software would be zero. The price would thus equal the number of virus and malware threats that target Apple's Unix-based operating system."

Coursey writes, "So why do Mac users pay so much—often as much at $70 for anti-virus alone and as much as $150 for a security 'suite?' Using the same math, Windows anti-virus software would probably cost $1,000 a desktop, yet it's easy to find software for as little as $20 in the stores. Mac OS X users pay significantly more for protection than Windows users, protection so far they have needed only in theory or 'just in case' a big new threat appears. People are getting wise to this. So is it any wonder that Symantec, in the eternal search for the next dollar, is out with a report that seems to predict dire consequences for future Mac users? It's like a teacher once told me, 'Sell the sizzle, not the steak. Especially when you don't have any steak.'

"Is it any surprise that Symantec would beat the drums of fear as loudly as possible? This is, after all, a company that has for years persuaded Mac users to pay $70 for software 'necessary' to protect their computers against nonexistent threats," Coursey writes. "This makes me wonder whether the real threat that concerns Symantec isn't from Mac OS X viruses and malware. Rather, it's customers noticing that they've paid a lot of money for Norton anti-virus software that they didn't really need."

Full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Standing ovation for Mr. Coursey. If the world could magically dump Windows and instead run Apple's Mac OS X, would Symantec be able to stay in business selling "security" software? And if Symantec thinks that we're going to forget about their Mac OS X FUD report, they're sadly mistaken.

Related MacDailyNews articles:
Symantec's Mac OS X claims dismissed as nonsense, FUD - March 22, 2005
Symantec warns about Mac OS X security threat - March 21, 2005
68,736 Microsoft Windows viruses vs. zero for Apple Mac's OS X - March 12, 2005
Mac OS X has no viruses; what's wrong with Windows? - February 11, 2004

  • Social Web
  • E-mail






Always -- Free ground shipping with orders over $50 at the Apple Store.

Reader Feedback: ( = registered)

Mar 23, 05 - 03:47 pm Comment from: Biz

Big gold star for Coursey. *thumbs up*

Mar 23, 05 - 04:01 pm Comment from: No Shock

We can't be too surprised at Symatec's fear based marketing approach. After all, our government has taught us it is acceptable by using the same 'fear tactic' to sell us the war in Iraq.

Mar 23, 05 - 04:03 pm Comment from: hooty

what, no spell check??? "perfect would". I think he meant "world."

Mar 23, 05 - 04:05 pm Comment from: hooty

Correction: Spell check wouldn't have caught that; proofreading would......

Mar 23, 05 - 04:05 pm Comment from: House Dems

Actually, that war in Iraq might turn out to be the start of one of the best things that ever happened to mankind. Now how can we spin it so that Bush doesn't get credit for bringing peace to the Middle East and making the world a better, freer place?

Mar 23, 05 - 04:07 pm Comment from: RePlay

I wonder how much Virex makes off the version bundled with my .Mac account? Got to admit, partnering with Apple was probably a pretty shrewd move on their part.

Mar 23, 05 - 04:10 pm Comment from: Vinita Boy

Be careful when speaking of kettles and pots, No Shock, for fear is perhaps the greatest of all motivators. People from the "tree-hugging" consortium (YOUR side, may I assume?) have been using precisely the same tactic ever since the end of the cold war to discourage the use of SUV's and power lawn mowers. Read Michael Creighton's latest novel for more insight into this type of "persuasion."

Mar 23, 05 - 04:10 pm Comment from: Steev

No Shock-
You were afraid? Really? How did you modify your life based on that fear?

I wasn't afraid of Iraq, and thought after Afghanistan it was as good a
place as any other to start the cleanup.

Mar 23, 05 - 04:22 pm Comment from: jefre

Vinita Boy... Since when is Propaganda the banner of just one company, political party, or government? Fear is the best Medium in which to sell goods just look at history, its full of this...


Jefre

Mar 23, 05 - 04:24 pm Comment from: TheRealist

I'm with you, RePlay. This is what Apple says as they sell .Mac:

"It's a Jungle Out There
Every time you save an email attachment or download a file from the web, you're risking exposure to viruses and other types of dangerous programs. The second-most prevalent type of virus, Macro viruses, can attack both Macs and PCs. That's why .Mac membership comes with full-strength virus protection (a US$50 value): Virex® from McAfee Security®, the first choice in anti-virus software for the Mac."

$50 value? My arse! How about this, Apple: Let me get .Mac without Virex for a $50 discount, then I'd sign up to this otherwise overpriced service.

Mar 23, 05 - 04:27 pm Comment from: Fatty Arbuckle

Agreed, Realist,shame on Apple for spreading virus FUD as they sell .Mac to former Windoze weenies who don't know any better!

What goes around...

Mar 23, 05 - 04:41 pm Comment from: Spelunking Troglodyte

Get real, No Shock. I mean, I was disappointed when I realized that I wasn't going to be able to take my next vacation at Lake Afghanistan. But hey, we decided instead to go in and clean it up the hard way and so . . . no lakeside resort. And with Iraq, the same thing. But Afghanistan is now a real society again (thanks to America doing in a few months what the assclown Soviets couldn't do in a decade) and Iraq will become democratic and one by one her neighbors will fall -- to democracy -- as well.

And then we'll have resorts all over the friggin' place!!!! Yeeee-HAWWwwwww!

Mar 23, 05 - 04:42 pm Comment from: Rob

At least .Mac offers a lot more than just virus protection for it's $99 per year charge. Symantec is charging $69 per year strictly for anti-virus protection for an OS that doesn't have any viruses.

Mar 23, 05 - 04:42 pm Comment from: Fidel-ity

Lemme get this straight:

iWork, $79, useful.

iLife 05, $79, DAMN useful!

Virus software on the Mac, $50-70, near useless.

Might pay $0.99 for OS X Virus protection if it came bundled with a song


wink

Mar 23, 05 - 04:45 pm Comment from: Reality Check

You liberal queers need to take your politics and FUD elsewhere. Damn, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with politics you sore losing hypocrites! Stick to the damn subject at hand and quit trying to make everything a Bush bashing circus.

Mar 23, 05 - 05:34 pm Comment from: Occasional Poster

I think Symantic is using FUD to protect its PC sales turf more than just make sales to Mac users. It wants to prevent PC users from potentially migrating to Macs by making the Mac look just as vulnerable. Then it makes sales from both sides.

But if a large amount of PCers did migrate, they would soon learn that they don't need Symantic and Symantic would lose sales. This is really what is behind their FUD.

Mar 23, 05 - 05:36 pm Comment from: surreality check

Reality Check...

Good of you to keep it on topic. You're momma must be proud of your wonderful insights.

What a 'tard.

Mar 23, 05 - 05:53 pm Comment from: Dave

Unless, of course, Symantec is actually funding hackers to bring viruses to the Mac and they've had a recent break through...

Sorry, my trust for large corporations is zilch these days.

Mar 23, 05 - 06:15 pm Comment from: Jimbo von Winskinheimer

Michael Crichton is a fiction writer.

Mar 23, 05 - 06:32 pm Comment from: Jake

surreality check = eurotrash-commie-low life

Mar 23, 05 - 06:37 pm Comment from: from a guy in az

why is macdailynews allowing pop up ads to sneak by the pop blocker in Firefox 1.0.2? I just downloaded Fx and visited this page first time today and I see popup ads. I am like WTF!!!!!!!!!

I thought MacDailyNews fixed that hmmm..


(yeah I saw the MDN Magic Word...which was "family" weird)

anyway to stay on topic... The article is right on spot! Remember Virusbarrier? I can't believe Symantec will do the same thing that they did last year or so. I only have Virex installed... why? cuz I am .mac user so it was free for them.

Mar 23, 05 - 06:55 pm Comment from: the anti eco-nazi

hey Jimbo

Crichton writes a fictional story wrapped around actual facts while the eco terrorists try to spin "facts" based on pure fiction

magic word air - as in eco-terrorists are a total waste of air

Mar 23, 05 - 07:27 pm Comment from: John

Mr. Coursey nails it! Right on!

Mar 23, 05 - 07:50 pm Comment from: Jack A

I think though that more and more people are acknowledging and accepting the fact that Apple is going to be gaining market share and this is a good thing. Shame on Symantec for trying to take that and use it to make a buck by selling FUD. The way their statement was worded it was definitely meant to instill fear.

Now if they had said something like "Apple is going to be gaining market share and as they do they will present more of a target and we are gearing up our Macintosh division to meet any threat that may come along." That would have served their purpose and been much more acceptable.

Mar 23, 05 - 09:22 pm Comment from: Less is More

Given M$'s historical penchant for foul play, you'd think they would've written a virus for OS X by now, but no, not even the devil's company could. On the other hand, M$ just can't code right.

Mar 24, 05 - 01:56 am Comment from: Between Iraq and A Hard Place

In this corner we have Symantec, maker of truckloads of money due to the general insecurity of the 'Doze. It is their meal ticket.
In the other corner we have Micro$oftopoly, the world's largest purveyor of stolen, copied and me-too technology. Seeing more money in selling AV programs than in fixing the 'Doze, they decide to enter a market created by their own insecureware.

If you are Symantec you are now in fear of having your market taken from you by the very people who have fed you for years. What are you going to do? Spread FUD about every other platform, hoping to sell more software and services to them. The "report" is more about selling than security.
Methinks Symantec knows it's about to be "Netscaped".

Mar 24, 05 - 04:44 am Comment from: Craigybaby

As recent reports have all stated, the Mac OS is becoming a bigger target for hackers and virus-makers as, for the first time, the Mac is becoming a serious contender for the consumer personal computer. Because of this it is only common sense to keep a virus protection program on your system and keep it up to date with all the latest virus definitions. If anything purely to stop your Mac being used as a conduit to send windows-based viruses to other windows machines.

I am happy to get virus protection from my .Mac account and keep it up to date at all times. What would be better value is to have a full internet security suite included too. Sure, the threat of viruses on OSX is laughable at the moment, but one day it MIGHT not be. I for one intend to be one of the prepared few that stays secure.

FUD is one thing, reality and common sense is another.

Mar 24, 05 - 05:40 am Comment from: Charlie

Anyone wanting AV for OS X should get the open source ClamAV. Virex is a resource hog.

Mar 24, 05 - 09:14 am Comment from: Al

All AV software for any platform only protects against known viruses. If there are no known viruses then having up to date AV software will not protect you from the very first virus attack.

AV software on your Mac only protects Windows users from Windows viruses resent by your Mac.

Screw em'. Let them buy their own protection. AV software is not yet needed for the Mac.

Mar 24, 05 - 09:21 am Comment from: To the right wingers

You know, I agree that this is a forum for Apple news, and not a political forum. And while my political views are different from those of the right wingers that post here, let me ask you this.

If you wish to be taken seriously, why do you constantly name call, and ignore facts? It is true that Bush did use scare tactics leading up the war in Iraq. He told the entire world that Iraq was a threat that it wasn't, and connected it to 9/11 which it wasn't as well.

And the to be so blaise over a war that has caused death on both sides (go tell your little "resort" joke to some mothers that lost sons and daughters in Iraq and see if they laugh) should make you ashamed of yourself, no matter what your political views are.

If you have a differing view, try at the very least to rebuttle respectively and with a little consideration to what you are actually talking about.

Mar 24, 05 - 09:55 am Comment from: Harry

Rumors that's all those anti-virus-companies need, to make to much money.

Mar 24, 05 - 11:49 am Comment from: anastasia beaverhausen

To stay on topic for one (I promise I won't make this a habit)... since Microsoft will be releasing a free virus checker for Windows, it seems that companies like Symantec need to scare up some sales in other places.

Mar 24, 05 - 12:30 pm Comment from: Steev

Hey, most of the Right sided posts didn't have name calling.

And- the same can be said about the Lefters.

And- I believe pretty much all of the Politicians in Washington supported going into Iraq.

And- I wasn't worried about Iraq, and weapons. I was focused on Iraq's behavior, which was impeding the UN Inspector's efforts, thumbing their noses at the UN's enforcement of sanctions, and their past behavior of supporting WMD programs.

So- America went in and did what the UN should have but didn't have the wherewithal to do.

And- now we find out that it was because France, Germany and Russia we busy undermining the UN's efforts

And- It turns out that there was corruption in the UN related to the Oil for Food program (Kofi Annon's son was involved (these findings were published by a Bi-Partisan committee).

So there you have it.
(quickly types, apologies for spelling/grammar)

May 26, 05 - 03:03 pm Comment from: justified

Name calling means "I don't have a valid point. I'm unable to formulate ideas. I'm losing this debate. So, now I'll have to slap you down." It's much like child abuse.

Reader feedback page 1 of 1 pages:

Always -- Free ground shipping with orders over $50 at the Apple Store.

Add Your Feedback:

Register or Login

Name:

Email: (optional)

Emoticons | Allowed HTML Tags

Remember my personal information   Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the "MDN Magic Word" you see in the image below: