Security at the Forefront
|
Microsoft's new ad campaign for Forefront security products may be a noncompetitive event. "Why?" is the question. |
The company has engaged in a competitive campaign with partners, such as McAfee, Symantec and Trend Micro, with products like Forefront and Windows Live OneCare.
"I don't think that Microsoft's security competitors are going to panic over the Forefront ad campaign," said Andrew Jaquith, Yankee Group's program manager for Security Research.
A Symantec spokesman said the company doesn't comment on others' advertising campaigns. Oh? Symantec sure had lots to say about Windows Vista.
The ho hum response is perhaps good indication why Microsoft needs to better market Forefront.
Microsoft acquired what would become Forefront in the early 2005 purchase of security developer Forefront. Microsoft has since positioned the product as a means of protecting Exchange Server from malware and spam.
"My read on Forefront Client Security is that it is primarily a defensive offering that protects the Windows brand, aimed at all-Microsoft shops," Jaquith said. "It does not advance the state of the art over competing products—something you need to do to dislodge other vendors. Thus, I don't see them taking significant market share from incumbents like McAfee or Symantec."
Microsoft didn't jump to reveal how much it was spending on the ad campaign, but I observed the effects: A Forefront banner donned the eWEEK home page most of the day. I joked with another editor that maybe I should be asking the ad sales team for story tips, seeing as how they must have known about the ad campaign earlier.
Microsoft has set up a Web site, which the banner ads link to. The ad copy cajoles, "Learn to defend yourself. Learn to defend your systems."
The site uses different villains, including a Bond-like secret agent, to convey that Forefront should be Step One in protecting any system. The secret agent leads to a bunch of options. I chose No. 5, "the holy mackerel." A secret agent tries to outmaneuver the IT guy, who bests his opponent with a whack of mackerel aside the head.
The Web site is great fun and a huge time sink for anyone with time to spare. I gave it about 5 minutes. Surely anyone serious about security would have even less time to spend reviewing a marketing Web site.
"Strangely for a late-to-market product, Microsoft hasn't been very aggressive in terms of the way they position Forefront versus competitors," Jaquith said. "In fact, they could not have marketed Forefront in a more low-key way if they tried. I don't see John Thompson [Symantec CEO] or Dave DeWalt [McAfee CEO] getting on the hotline to Neelie Kroes [European Commissioner for Competitor] over this."
Related Posts:
- ANI Patch: The Day After, Microsoft Watch, April 4, 2007
- Microsoft Sees Double (Security Tuesdays), Microsoft Watch, April 3, 2007
- The Sad Truth About Mr. Gates' Neighborhood, Microsoft Watch, Feb. 28, 2007
- Is Symantec's Vista Security Assessment Credible?, Microsoft Watch, Feb. 28, 2007
- What's Your Exchange?, Microsoft Watch, Dec. 8, 2006
Comments (5)
I don't know about anti-competitive, but the idea that you protect the very platform that's supposed to be secure is absurd. You sell something broken to the customer and then it is also you who provides a fix for extra fees.
Posted by Roy Schestowitz | April 10, 2007 8:34 PM
And so says Roy !!!
Roy loves SUSE ! Sound familiar Roy ? It should it's off your site Roy !
SUSE bbeing a "form" of a "Linux" people, this guy is a self professed Linux freak !
If SUSE is so good why oh why are you loking at this site ??
Oh ! I forgot maybe because the editor "Joe Wilcox" doesn't like microsoft either !!!
At least Joe will "sometimes" put what he should put on this site.
What's the matter Roy don't you like ads that say MS isn't bad like you thought (or wished) they were?
Posted by Neil | April 11, 2007 1:39 AM
Ah ! the almighty Andrew Jaquith of Yankee Group, my retort to him is "Yankee go home" !
Of course the security firms don't like the stance that MS is taking on Vista, and I don't like the fact that MS caved in on the "Kernel" in the 32 bit version either.
The security companies are only to quick to say about flaws, mainly because their jobs are on the line, no flaws, no Jobs !!
I totally agree with MS that NO ONE should have access to the kernel, and I feel that they should INCREASE the levels of security even more, therby cutting out the need for the security companies.
Every time Joe Wilcox needs help theres the "Yankee Group" or NPD, both of these companies were sayers of Doom when it came to the release date of Vista and nothing has changed, they still get at Vista anytime they can.
Posted by Neil | April 11, 2007 1:52 AM
Finally neither Joe Wilcox or Andrew Jaquith seem to have taken the time to look at the "Forefront Demo" !
I did !
And I tell you what the security companies would all be in favour of "Forefront".
Why simple they ALL can be used at the same time time that's why !
One for picking up worms, one for trojans, etc., etc.
Forefront is against the security companies at all ! It works with them !
Joe you are an idiot !!
Forefront is really good, you provided the link perhaps you should have gone further and viewed the demo as well, and if you did you wouldn't be against it, this is really good technology at work here.
Posted by Neil | April 11, 2007 2:16 AM
That should read:
Forefront is NOT against the security companies at all ! It works with them !
One word changes the whole thing doesn't it !
Joe STOP BAGGING MICROSOFT !!!!
No ONE security company needs to used, you can use the lot ! The security companies are NOT going to advertise that are they ????
They want only theirs used, and not their competitors, this is something like "dual booting" and having multiple antivirus scanners, rather than having multiple OS's.
Posted by Neil | April 11, 2007 2:23 AM