I can think of no better reason to dump McAfee then this. As big a fan of MF as me, I have dumped them as my main source of virus protection and gone with the free SuperAntiSpyware progam. Intel could careless who digs into their system.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38768840...s-us_business/
msnbc.com news services
updated 8/19/2010 11:05:16 AM ET
NEW YORK — In a move signaling the growing importance of online security, Intel Corp. said Thursday it is buying computer-security software maker McAfee Inc. for $7.68 billion as the chip maker adds to its arsenal of tools to serve an increasing array of Internet-connected devices, including mobile phones.
The $48-per-share price represents a 60 percent premium over McAfee's Wednesday close of $29.93. McAfee shares surged 58 percent after the deal was announced Thursday to hit $47.14 in morning trading. Intel shares slipped 59 cents, or 3 percent, to $19.
Intel, which is based in Santa Clara, Calif., said security is now a fundamental component of online computing, but today's approach to security isn't adequate for the growing availability of Internet connections on mobile phones, medical devices, ATMs, automobiles and elsewhere.
The industry needs a new approach that combines software, hardware and services to meet tomorrow's needs, the company said.
"With the rapid expansion of growth across a vast array of Internet-connected devices, more and more of the elements of our lives have moved online," Intel CEO Paul Otellini said. "In the past, energy-efficient performance and connectivity have defined computing requirements. Looking forward, security will join those as a third pillar of what people demand from all computing experiences."
Otellini said the idea to acquire McAfee grew out of a close collaboration that's been going on for a year and a half, one that will result in unspecified products reaching the market next year.
On a conference call with executives, UBS analyst Uche Orji questioned Intel's rationale for the deal, wondering if it would get something out of owning McAfee that it couldn't get through a collaboration.
Otellini responded that owning McAfee meant Intel could plan for the longer term and combine the two companies' technologies at a deeper level, adding substantial value.
Vijay Rakesh, an analyst at Sterne Agee, said he was surprised by the size of the premium but added that the deal showed Intel's willingness to move from hardware to software and services.
"I think people were probably (expecting) some smaller acquisitions from Intel. It's definitely — even by Intel's standards — a pretty big acquisition for them," said Rakesh.
Intel is an infrequent acquirer with a history of dabbling in, and retreating from, markets outside its core business of building computer microprocessors. It once even had a toy division that made microscopes and other gadgets before giving up on it because of poor sales.
But Intel has been persistent in trying to expand into the market for the guts of smart phones and other Internet-connected wireless devices. And the purchase of McAfee would help Intel secure those devices from malicious software and other computing threats.
Intel said the deal with hurt earnings slightly in the first year the companies are combined. Excluding costs and other one-time items related to the acquisition, Intel predicts the deal will slightly boost earnings next year and improve after that.
Both boards of directors have unanimously approved the deal. The deal still requires McAfee shareholder approval and regulatory clearances.
McAfee, also based in Santa Clara, is one of the world's largest security technology companies with about $2 billion in revenue last year.
Intel has made a series of recent software acquisitions including companies that specialize in gaming, visual computing, embedded device and machine software.
Last month, Intel Corp. reported its largest quarterly net income in a decade as the chip maker benefited from a stronger computer market and more sophisticated factories.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report
I thought McAfee was a good reason to dump McAfee. Maybe Intel will bring new life to it. I use Avast, so it doesn't affect me.
I use, the free SuperAntiSpyware with the MF system with no problems. In fact the MF system has had to do nothing since I have added the SAS system. Like you Jorge, I have had no problems not using a big name virus control with my system. I also use Spybot as a back up just in case but have not had to rely on it for sometime now.Originally Posted by Jorge
I use whatever my ISP gives me for free, which just switched 6 months ago from the MF suite to Norton. Both are kinda bloated, but if your smart about what your doing they all work fine.
My wife works at Comcast and they dropped MF as their virus system for their net customers because of it's crappy system. So I am betting SG that Norton is what you have now. Six months ago is about the same time Comcast switched from MF to Norton. Nortron in my opinion is no better then MF.
As you say it is just as big a memory hog as MF. In fact in my past use With Norton, I found it to be the worse of the two when it came to memory usage.
It does seem that many of the smaller virus progams work just as good, if not better then the high dollar big name programs.
Many viruses have the abiltiy to turn off many anti-virus systems. Such was the case with the MF system that I had when I got hit by a drive by site virus. It shut off the MF and Spybot systems. The free SAS system has a setting that keeps it from being turned off. That was the only saving grace thta kept me from having to do a complete system restore from scratch.
It found the piece of shit program and removed it in safe mode.
I have had several viruses that MF would not catch but the SAS did.
Wow, you hit that nail on the head. Yes, I have Comcast and they switched anti-virus companies about six months ago. This years Norton is actually much less a headache and bloated then in the past but to be perfectly honest certainly still lacking. It is free however(through Comcast) but the free versions of AVG and Avast are abhorrently annoying.
Choose your poison, but just like sex its better to be safe then to try rid yourself of an unruly virus. And when doing something nefarious on the web sandbox your shit.
I use microsoft's scanner, pretty impressed with it so far.
Anyone upset or offended by my post please follow the link and let your opinions be known.
http://www.zeropaid.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=55492
I know a few people that use MS Essentials and really like it. I wonder if it's available in 64 bit. I needed a 64 bit AV, so I went with Avast, as they had 64 bit before many of the other big names did. It works for me...and if it ain't broke, well you know.
-----------®N®----------
あなたをファック
yes it does. when downloading it will automatically identify your 64bit OS and install the 64bit version. i can't seem to fanboi MSE enough. its super light and i haven't had any cause for complaint in about what, 8-9 months of usage? it's on my main box where friends(?!) keep poking their malware infected flash devices in and it cleans it all without fuss. it's free too.
I dont think McAfee is such bad anti-virus to dump, after all microsoft also believe in McAfee. In 2011 Microsoft is wishing to offer McAfee with MS server OS.
but it is little costly so thats why I dont use McAfee B'coz when I am getting AVG at free cost so why to buy other AV.
yes . . . .
“La patria es dicha, dolor y cielo de todos y no feudo ni capellanía de nadie.”
- José Martí
I'm using Avast (free) these days, which also works with 64 bit. I like the fact that it now auto-updates the program, not just the virus defs. It also has a boot scan option, which I also like.
I've never used McAfee, myself, but I've removed it from other peoples computers, and in a few instances, it was much like Norton used to be, very difficult to remove (even with their removal tools). IMO nothing is as bad as Norton was back around 2004. Not only was it a huge resource hog, it was like a parasite that wouldn't go away. I actually had to format my own computer after trying to uninstall Norton System Works. I've never tried Norton again because of it.
I don't care what AV you use, at the end of the day, nothing is 100% effective. That is why there is no substitute for an (ghost) image of your hard drive.
-----------®N®----------
あなたをファック
Never saw why so many people used them, except they are often bundled with computer goods. I tend to dodge software like this because, if it was prime quality, it need not be lumped with computer gadgets for people to use it. I use Avira.
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; the Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; the Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks