RE: OT: malware checkers

| From: jt <jt@ee.net>

<re-arranged>

|
| But, we have gone on for too long. One more exchange and we stop.

Sure.  Thx for dialogue, btw.



| > Would
| > IBM, perhaps, want to prevent a "malware" checker...?  Because of NIH
| > syndrome, or to "save face"...?
|
| probably the latter. Remember: "there has NEVER been a successful
| hack of th AS/400"

Ah.  But as obscurity of 400 (possibly? / inevitably?) fades..  there is no
small "face lost" as the 400 gets hacked.  (Not to dredge up again, but
Fast400 appears to me to be such a hack, technically).

Former would be no small obstacle, either, imv.

| > As You know, marketing is a moot point without a product, and
| unless it can
| > be "sufficiently" supported.
|
| you are forgetting, that I *had* a product and that it could be supported.
| We had it about the perceived difficulty of marketing it.

I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding what You mean by "We *had* it about
the*..."  "That" company had a lot of discussion on it...?

| Now, if one
| (to use your term) had "higher expectations and set a high price
| e.g. $10,000 and tier based, I could see a problem, but for $39.95?

Also, I didn't understand previous comment about "We're not talking about
developing a bloody product"...  Didn't see we were relating to the past
history of this kind-a software.  Two entirely different topics.

Anyhoo...  Perhaps oddly, I don't believe many 400 shops will buy security
software at shareware prices, unless that market segment firms up one whole
helluva lot.  Anything at those prices will be assumed to be of little
value, and not-very-well-supported...  Doesn't even MATTER what the reality
is, marketing would hafta go up against that perception.  (To be brief.)

Setting up a different perception of under-$100 software, in the 400 arena,
WOULD take some time and resources.  Not necessarily saying it COULDN'T be
done, though.. just harder...



I didn't gather how moot the points were.  What I was looking at WAS how
hard (costly) such a product would be to develop and support...  IOW, how
hard to REALLY secure a 400.

(And SURE won't be discussing the notion that it's "fairly and/or reasonably
secure", anytime soon here...! ;-D)  All-in-all, still interesting
discussion, for me anyway.