Why Free?

A lot of users dont have the money or dont want to spend money on software
such as AV s/w.

However, if they dont have AV cover then it isnt only their problem, it is
all of our problems... Their machines become toys in the hands of the
hackers & spammers...

So it is in everyones interests that we all have AV protection.
Consequently, some organisations offer free AV software for
personal/non-commercial use. Business still have to pay, but they will tend
to do just that. They have plenty to lose, and they are more readily
accountable.

So now we have the situation where some free software is available.. if Fred
uses Product X at home for free, he might be inclined to recommend it to his
company, so they buy Product X for their corporate machines...

Consequently some of the competitors also release free home-use versions,
and so on...

So for home users, we now have the awful monolithic s/w like Norton & McAfee
for £50 per year, or Avast! or AVG for free. A lot of us choose to use the
free versions... why pay if you dont have to? Personally I use Avast! and I
recommend it to all my family and friends. If I could find a free version
that I had confidence in, I would pay for a commercial version.

CJM

"Cathrine Lowther" <janusNOSAP RemoveThis @PLEASEmagma.ca> wrote in message
news:MPG.1ac4a268f5ead1a6989687@news.magma.ca...
> This is an open question, because I am genuinely curious, and because I
> work with a lot of creators of Free/Libre and Open Source software....
>
> It seems that many, many people who can afford computers and other
> software want or expect to get a really good anti-virus product for
> free. Why? Why should AV be free when almost everything else costs
> money? Or do the folk who ask about a free AV also use free/libre and
> open source software like OpenOffice (which, btw, I can highly
> recommend)?
>
> Don't get me wrong -- for years, I was a happy user of F-Prot for DOS,
> which was and is free. Now I am an equally happy user of F-Prot, for
> which I pay a really small annual sum, compared to the cost of any other
> commercial software on my machine(s). And, for that small price, I am
> allowed to install it on every machine in my home.
>
> So, for curiousity's sake, I wonder if anyone has any ideas?
>
> Thanks

This message is not archived

This message is not archived

me.TakeThisOut@myhome.com wrote:
[snip]
> One other thing I question. Are any of these viruses created by the
> companies that make the most money off of AV software? I mean, if
> they send out more viruses, they sell more product, right?
> However, if they give away their AV software for free, then why would
> they be sending viruses. Something to think about !!!!

oh no... not that dead horse again... av companies would not be able to
keep such dealings a secret and if word got out that company X was in
league with virus writers then company X wouldn't be able to sell their
product anymore - no one would touch them...

--
"we're the first ones to starve, we're the first ones to die
the first ones in line for that pie in the sky
and we're always the last when the cream is shared out
for the worker is working when the fat cat's about"

<me RemoveThis @myhome.com> wrote in message news:bm0m501114p8nft0tu9crooe94sqri45qc@4ax.com...

> After all, they write the software that has holes which allow these
> viruses to "work".

[snip]

Viruses (and many worms) don't rely at all on software flaws, so
your above statement is inaccurate.

On Fri, 19 Mar 2004 06:24:16 -0500, Cathrine Lowther
<janusNOSAP.RemoveThis@PLEASEmagma.ca> wrote:

>This is an open question, because I am genuinely curious, and because I
>work with a lot of creators of Free/Libre and Open Source software....
>
>It seems that many, many people who can afford computers and other
>software want or expect to get a really good anti-virus product for
>free. Why?

Why not? Paying for software is no guarantee that it will perform
worth a damn. I pay cash when I buy a new car. That is not relevant
to the fact that I am perfectly satisfied with the four (4) free
AV's that I update daily. I believe I have a 'little' better chance
that one of the four will catch a new virus than ANY 'one' $ware AV.

>Why should AV be free when almost everything else costs money?

Free AV's are offered to the public as a goodwill gesture; not all
users can afford to buy software. Some users will voluntarily send
money [see Spyblaster, WinPatrol, etc,] or move up to the $ware
version which may have a few more options, although not necessarily
be any more effective.

>Or do the folk who ask about a free AV also use free/libre and
>open source software like OpenOffice (which, btw, I can highly
>recommend)?

Kerio is an excellent FREE firewall. So is Sygate. Again, these are
programs that 'all' users need, but may not be able to afford. They
are offered gratis by companies who know the value of goodwill.

>Don't get me wrong -- for years, I was a happy user of F-Prot for DOS,
>which was and is free. Now I am an equally happy user of F-Prot, for
>which I pay a really small annual sum, compared to the cost of any
>other commercial software on my machine(s).

Are you saying that you now use F-Prot for windows? Some malware can
destroy all windows based AV's. I hope you also retained F-Prot for DOS.

>And, for that small price, I am allowed to install it on every machine
>in my home.
>
>So, for curiousity's sake, I wonder if anyone has any ideas?

I've provided my 2¢. Let's see what others have to say.

>Thanks

BoB