| « PalmOne LifeDrive | Bayesian Numb3rs » |
Microsoft Windows OneCare is actually a good idea. Not one to which I would necessarily subscribe, but a good idea. Much like buying an extended warranty or service agreement on a new TV, PC or car. I would disagree with John Paczkowski, who wrote in "Nice, stable little system you got here; shame if anything happened to it" that is akin to "an auto manufacturer selling you a car and then charging you a monthly fee for seatbelts". It's more like an auto manufacturer charging you for a pre-paid maintenance plan, or an electronics store selling an extended warranty. It may or may not be cost-effective. It's up to the purchaser to decide how valuable the protection is against the likelihood of something going wrong, and their ability to recover from a problem with DIY or cost of third-party help [be it auto-mechanic or online-PC-helpdesk/security-suite].
Dan Gillmor has also been writing about OneCare, more from the standpoint of Windows charging to fix its mistakes, and Robert Scoble responded. Most software is buggy and ultimately not secure; and that is why I always stand amazed when hype wins out over function. But that's our seems to be our nature. In the perfect world, my car wouldn't break down, have an accident, or need servicing, but in this world it does.
Of course, I've found support from COTS software OEMs to be horrible, whether it be Symantec [which is so bad we no longer use them] or Microsoft, or almost any of them. That's one thing that has been very attractive about Open Source: the community of developers and users as represented in their forums and blogs, has proven much more helpful in helping out when a problem occurs than any paid support I've ever had.
Software is becoming a commodity, much as photocopiers and PBX systems have. Services that once were free will become fee-based as margins shrink.
Trackback URL (right click and copy shortcut/link location)
Comments are closed for this post.