Microsoft is doing a very smart thing.  One of the biggest complaints against the company's flagship product, the Windows OS, is that it has become a victim to malicious software including viruses and trojans.  To help solve this problem Microsoft has turned in-house to create their own security tool/anti-virus program called "Microsoft Security Essentials" (previously codenamed "Morro").  The free tool will help to keep PCs clean but could also put the likes of McAfee and Symantec out of business.  As a result a very quirky question has been raised: would the current anti-virus application developers have a solid case against Microsoft for holding a monopoly in the anti-virus market?

Sounds ludicrous, right?  Microsoft improves their product by increasing its security, a feature that users have been begging for, and in the end they could be sued for doing so.  Still, people have successfully taken down the Redmond-based corporation in similar disputes.  The EU still requires Microsoft to sell a version of Windows that doesn't include IE because it's considered anti-competitive.  Of course the question remains, without a bundled web browser how does your everyday user go about installing their browser of choice easily and conveniently, but I'm not going to argue for the EU's case logically in this post.

Honestly, I think Microsoft has learned from their prior exploits.  I don't expect Security Essentials to be bundled with Windows 7.  Instead it will more than likely be acquired in a similar fashion as their Live suite of services.  The user might be prompted to download some of the Windows Live applications (Writer, Live Mail, Photo Gallery, and of course Security Essentials) but the chances of it being installed with the OS is kind of low, at least in my opinion.  That's not to say I'm against the idea - I think it would be a great help to users to have a built-in anti-virus application that has a fairly small footprint which is integrated into the OS much like Windows Firewall is today.  However, I have a feeling there are some lawyers representing anti-virus competitors who would disagree with me.

Sometimes I feel as though Microsoft simply can't win.  If you look at all of the cool products they've produced since 2005 you'd think consumers would cut them some slack, but everyone loves to hate on them.  It must be residual feelings left over from their glory days when Microsoft was, for all intents and purposes, the only player in the PC marketplace, but it seems impossible for the company to shed its "big brother" persona.  Me personally?  I feel that if you have to speculate about a company holding too much power in the tech industry it's Google by far.  That doesn't seem to be a commonly shared sentiment, though.