Is McAfee selling 2009 products in a 2010 box?

wow sucks for people buying mcafee

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200938/4469

 

Any other company (Kaspersky, CA, Symantec etc.) will offer incremental updates too.

...silly argument.

 

Would you rather them offer updates only once a year?

Antivirus is a subscription based business model. You're buying a subscription to updates for a period of 1 year, not just the software.

 

you are misunderstanding, they are buying a 2010 version from a retailer selling it as a 2010 product people are getting a 2009 disc inside..

 

...which automatically gets updated to the newest version as long as their subscription is active.

 

imo its false advertising..the 2010 version is not due to out till next year 1-2nd quarter..according to mcafee

 

Thats false advertising and anyone who is doing that (whether it is mcafee themselves or the retailer) can be sued for a lot of money.

 

You guys obviously don't understand "false advertising".

First off regardless of how you look at it, even if McAfee offered no updates what-so-ever, and all you were buying was a box, they're entitled to call their product whatever they want to call it. I could make a box that said Lithus Software 2013 with nothing in it, and still legally be able to sell the box.

However, as I said previously, antivirus software is sold on a subscription basis. You are buying a subscription to updates (which is all that really matters, since antivirus that is even 1 week old can be rendered useless) and indeed, your subscription, if purchased now, will indeed run into late 2010.

 

But then you are selling an empty box.

Here they sell the product "McAffee 2009" as "McAffe 2010" - that's the problem.

If its a subscription service doesn't matter at this point.

You wouldn't want to buy "Office 2010" and get an Office 2007 disc with upgrade rights, would you?

 

If it automatically updates, then there's no difference.

I would understand if you said that "oh, I don't want to be required to have internet service to upgrade Office 07", but that point is pretty moot when we're dealing with an antivirus software. Furthermore, Office isn't subscription software. When you buy Office, you expect it to work (meaning at 100% efficiency - though that's an abstract point) till eternity.

Compare this to buying season tickets for your favorite sports team. If you buy 2010 tickets, it means you get to see all the 2010 games. It doesn't mean that the team will be different or the stadium will be upgraded in 2010 (though usually there are minor upgrades).

 

Not necessarily.

It shouldn't be a requirement to have internet access to use software or get what the box says you should get.

 

I added to my last post, but if you're buying antivirus software without internet access, you have more to worry about than false advertising.

I'm going to quote myself since this is going to be on two different pages.

And more to add: this isn't just last year's software. It's last year's software with all updates released between last year's software came out and now. Which by definition would make it this year's software.

 

Well, there is no reason to be required to have internet access for any software, anti virus software too.
Say I'm on holiday and my old software runs out - I want to buy a new one in case I get a CD whatever infected with malware.
Obviously, I'd need internet access for updates, as I can't expect them to mail mne CDs with the data - but I should be able to buy and fully use the programme without internet access.

About the updates.
On KIS I found that version 7 with all updates was slow compared to 2009.

I assume that as the library grows the same will happen with McAffee.

If they do include all updates up to the manufacturing date then the product should reflect that in an open manner, identifying a change from the original product.
E.g call it "McAffee 200 revision 1"

 

What do you expect to do during the other 364 days of the year when a new boxed version of the antivirus isn't released?

Antivirus requires frequent definition updates to be useful. It's a reasonable assumption that one has internet access if one's using antivirus.

Again, this is a subscription service. You get whatever new software comes out during your subscription, not just definition updates.

Yes, see original product is "McAfee 2009". Previous product with all updates since 2009 was released is "McAfee 2010". How does that not make sense? How would calling it McAfee 2009 Revision 1 make more sense? Wouldn't McAfee 2009 be McAfee 2008 Revision 1? Would McAfee 2010 be McAfee 2000 Revision 10?

 

Genrally there is more than just a definition upgrade between different versions.

Added features, improvement on existing features.
Changes to egines that scan for malware.

 

Yes, but for the last time, antivirus is on a subscription model. If I were naming the darn product, I'd just call it McAfee Antivirus and screw the year. But I can see why they would want to make it sound new.

This isn't false advertising. You will not get anything if you sue McAfee for this.

 

I wouldn't instal it on a computer unless they pay me enough for a better computer that doesn't have to run McAffee - just to poke fun at them:
German Affe = Monkey (the animal)
McAffe-e is a better spelling

But back to the advertising:
The year is used to indicate to the customer what kind of product they are buying.
You are right that the year theoretically isn't needed - look at Avira.

However, the customer in the shop would like to know what he is getting, and most people don't know a version number from a year. (Kaspersky changed from numbers to years).

Thus a customer buying a product labelled "2010" expects a redesigned or optimized product.
He expects a change beyond definition upgrades from a product labelled "2010" instead of "2009".

And what McAffee does is advertise a 2009 product as 2010.

Even if they give you the upgrade - if you bought a 2009 prodcut now you'd still get the upgrade. And the label does not mislead you.

 

YES, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF IT BEING A SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE!!!

Seriously, how many times do I have to say that? The year has never actually mattered. EVER. People with a current subscription get the new software. People without a subscription don't.

That's how a subscription based service works. That's how antivirus works. Am I done?

 

Well, no.
A continued AV/suite subscription will give you the right to another year of virus signatures/updates without any user interaction.
An upgrade of the software itself e.g. new/enhanced functionalities, better heuristics/engines etc. does require user interaction.
I don't agree with your assumption that People with a current subscription get the new software.
Loads of folks have old security suites with current signatures, simply because they didn't know how-to/could update the program.

I hope you can agree that for most users, a new version implies a different/enhanced program, not just a year worth of signatures.
But, if you want to call it a day, that's Ok with me.

 

"We regularly release new product features and functionality that gets distributed to all of our customers who maintain active subscriptions. With McAfee’s model, consumers who buy the retail 2010 box will automatically get any new features that McAfee releases, and that includes the new features we are testing in our beta and which we expect to release in the first half 2010."

Not an assumption. Straight from McAfee. This is the same with all antivirus programs. As long as you have a current subscription, you can run the latest client.

 

Not really....

I know that Kaspersky doesn't automatically update you're anti virussoftware from build 7.x to 8.x to 9.x - you have to do that manually.
It does update the definitions and databases automatically though.

And this is standard behaviour - update the database, but not the actual software.

 

Norton 2009 != Norton 2010.

Sure the definitions may be the same, but they are different products. Norton 2009(build 16.x) cannot update to Norton 2010(build 17.x). It requires user action to do so. Subscription or not.

If I bought a Norton 2010 box and found Norton 2009, or earlier, I'd be upset. I want the latest build(17.x, not 16.x). They are NOT the same product.

Windows, for example. What if you bought a Windows 7 box, only to receive a Windows Vista disc? Surely this would bother you, as you know Windows Vista will NOT simply update to Windows 7 via Windows Update because you own the license and are entitled to all Windows Updates.

 

agreed matt

 

Again, straight from McAfee:

"We regularly release new product features and functionality that gets distributed to all of our customers who maintain active subscriptions. With McAfee’s model, consumers who buy the retail 2010 box will automatically get any new features that McAfee releases, and that includes the new features we are testing in our beta and which we expect to release in the first half 2010."

Why do I have to repeat myself 3 times for every point? This is NOT Windows. This is NOT office. Neither of those programs are based off a subscription model.

 

all i know man if i was a customer and i PAID for mcafee 2010 in a box it had better be a 2010 disc i pull out of that box... otherwise it goes straight back and i look elsewhere period... its decieving and bad advertising to do that

 

If you buy McAfee 2010, you will get the latest build with the latest definitions (at the time the disc was made), and the latest client, which by definition, makes it a "2010 disc". Whatever that means.

Look - let me paint another picture, since obviously I haven't been getting through to you.

Situation:

First, I released Lithus Software v1.0 in 2009.

Now, I release Lithus Software v2.0 in 2010.

However, I'm using a subscription model. And I'm doing a half-year subscription (just to mix things up). This means that if you bought v1.0 in the second half of 2009, you get a "free" upgrade to 2010. This in effect, makes the two software packages the exact same thing.

Your argument is that v2.0 is not different enough from v1.0 and that it's false advertising for me to sell v2.0, and that I'm not allowed to call it v2.0.

I'm telling you that (1) I'm allowed to call my software whatever I want to call it. And (2) that there are updates, even if you don't consider them significant enough, that logically make this new software v2.0 since it's NOT the same as v1.0.

Get it now?

 

Not really.

By that Definition Vista with Service Pack is Windows 8??

Or is Office 2007 with the Office Service pack Office 2008, 2009 etc?

No.

The change in name/number implies a fundamental sofware change.

If the'y have caled if "McAffee 2009 Revision 1" or "McAffee 2009 Revision 2010" they would indicate that the basis is the same software as the 2009 product.

 

Let's see, lemme go find my post that says that McAfee is a subscription based service. I've only said that in every single damn post, so I can understand how it's easy to overlook.

Oh, hey, I found it. I essentially said that MCAFEE IS A SUBSCRIPTION BASED SERVICE.

You are paying for a 1 year subscription to updates.

I would understand that you may have a problem if McAfee never updated their program except once a year, but since it's always being updated, I should say this again: MCAFEE IS A SUBSCRIPTION BASED SERVICE. YOU ARE PAYING FOR A 1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION TO UPDATES.

Wait, you might have missed that. Lemme try again: MCAFEE IS A SUBSCRIPTION BASED SERVICE. YOU ARE PAYING FOR A 1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION TO UPDATES.

 

It doesn't matter if its a subscription service, you still get a falsely advertised product.
In a way Office or Vista are a subscription service too - you pay and get a few years worth of updates.

And as previous posters stated - no matter what McAffee claims (until they proove it) - upgrading from one version number to another requires user interaction.

 

Ok. Sue them for false advertising. I'll be the guy outside the courtroom pointing and laughing as the bailiff tosses you out.

 

imo you are paying for 2010 version. to me that does not mean okay fine ill use 2009 for the next 6 months then only get 6 months of 2010. i am buying 12MONTHS of service from the 2010 product. subscription or not doesnt matter

 

I think you're having a hard time understanding our side, Lithus. We KNOW it is a subscription based service.

But that doesn't change the fact that McAffe 2009 and 2010 ARE different products. Your McAffe quote says, "Consumers who buy the 2010 box..." The whole point is... consumers are paying for the 2010 box but aren't getting the correct version IN the new box.

Sure, it's a subscription based model, BUT... we're talking principle here. If I buy a 2010 box, I expect a 2010 disc. NOT a 2009 disc.

Again, when I buy Norton 2010, I EXPECT build 17.x or whatever on the disc. NOT 16.x as is the case with Norton 2009.

Say you had a magazine subscription, for 1 year. You bought it correctly assuming you'd get the latest issues of the magazine. But instead, you're sent the previous year's issues. According to you, Lithus, this is fine because it's a subscription service and you're entitled to new updates. So... what was the point of the OLD magazines if there were already new issues available?

 

That's actually the perfect analogy, since in buying McAfee 2010, you're getting the 12 magazines that they're releasing in 2010. In fact, you're also getting the 12 issues that were released in 2009, and the 12 issues released in 2008, etc...

And I understand your side. I'm not dense. Your argument, as I've reiterated many times, is that you don't believe that McAfee 2010 differs enough from 2009 to warrant a name change. I'm saying that the decision is not up to you, but instead is a choice for McAfee to make, and that if they choose to name their product McAfee 2010, it's not false advertising.

 

You're still not understanding the argument. In my analogy, time of your subscription would be used up by the OLD magazines. Say, 6 months out of the year you get old issues, THEN you start getting new issues, when you should have been receiving NEW issues the for the ENTIRE time. 6 old issues and 6 new issues. It SHOULD be 12 NEW issues.

If I buy a 2010 product, I expect my subscription to be for that 2010 product. I don't want to be updated TO the 2010 features half way through my subscription. What about the 6 months I'm missing out on?

Make sense?

 

I'm completely understanding your argument. You just have to connect the dots better - don't get completely wrapped up in the magazine analogy.

You're saying that a 2010 version can only be called the 2010 version if the client itself changes. I'm saying (and repeating over and over) that McAfee is not required to change the client in order to call its product McAfee 2010.

 

So, it's ok then to market an almost 2 year old product as being brand new? And that isn't false advertising? Then what is?

 

This is where the subscription model argument comes in. McAfee is constantly being updated, but let's say that it only gets one update per month.

It would then be perfectly fine if McAfee repackaged its software every month at McAfee 2009 January, McAfee 2009 February, etc...

Why is it then not fine to only produce McAfee 2009 January, and McAfee 2010 January, while dropping "January" from the name?

As a sidenote, I do wonder how long this argument will continue. Soon we'll be on page 100 discussing the merits of 2 digits in the name of a product that I don't use.

 

It's makes more sense to have only small, incremental updates (current definitions, small updates to the CURRENT engine etc), and then have a singular, large update once a year to incorporate NEW features and designs, etc.

Norton does this, and it seems to work well for them. Alas, McAfee isn't Norton, so I digress.

 

Here, I drew a picture since my crappy drawings in MSPAINT usually get ideas across better than words can.



What you're saying is that McAfee is only allowed to release a new product if their timeline looks like the second graph, even though the starting point and the ending point on the graphs are the same.

 

Then what's to stop MS from doing the same with Windows? Why can't they make my Vista into 7 via Windows Update? My license entitles to me periodic updates to the product.

 

Your license for Windows entitles you to use Windows. Nothing more. The fact that Microsoft releases updates every Tuesday is just a benefit for the consumer.

If Microsoft decided that next Tuesday, there would be no further updates to Windows, a month from now, Windows would still be just as usable and useful as the day it was released.

This is not the case with McAfee. If McAfee decided next Tuesday that there would be no further updates, a month from now, their software could be defined as useless - as in it no longer serves the purpose for which it was built.

That's why McAfee is on a subscription model and Windows is not. If Microsoft decided to charge $100 every year for Windows, then I would fully expect it to allow me to freely update to Windows 7.

 

Not quite true.

A good antivirus should also find malware by behaviour - and for that no update is needed.

Thus an antivirus without a definition update should not be useless.

(Less effective maybe, but not useless)

 

That's fine. I'm not going to take that tangent and argue the usefulness or lack thereof of McAfee.

However, the point still stands - it is not false advertising for McAfee to release a 2010 version without a new client.