 NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·Site5.com
 ·Comcast
 ·Callcentric
| ISPs should help users who pay extra for it. Lets break this down.
1. Users are asking for help when it comes to security.
2. Users obviously cannot keep up with the patches or updates on their computers.
3. Users are willing to pay extra for more security and keeping their computers up to date.
Those are the facts. Now, I have NO problem with any company that wants to step in to provide those services. It just makes sense the ISP be that company. However, I would be content if another company did that. The point is, give the users what they want.
As for pricing, there should be three price points.
1. Pay monthly fee for extra security and make it affordable. Maybe $5-$10 a month.
2. Pay one time only fee for those who don't subscribe to option 1 but want to fix one issue. Maybe $25-$35 per incident.
3. Obviously, this should be the opt-out option, with a statement saying the ISP can cut you off if you are infected with a Nimda like virus or other exploit. I would love to see this option to prevent people who think they can secure their systems, but obviously cannot. If they are infected, their connection should be cut until their computers are free of infection and security holes are patched. Why have this in the first place? There are STILL computers infected by the Nimda virus on the Comcast network. The patches have been out for how long? If it has been over 6 months and the problem is still out there, some people would be content to just let the virus run rampant on their computers. Putting in a "disconnect" clause prevents that buffoonary from happening. 
For those of us who want to do it ourselves, then all power to us. Keep us at the level of service that we have right now. Don't restrict ports on our connections.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
|
|
Reviews:
·Armstrong Zoom ..
| Would people be paying to have someone call them on the phone when there is an update?
Hardware firewall devices are cheap. Software ones are free. The Windows update option does not get any simpler and comes with the OS.
ISPs will cut you off if you are infecting others, maybe not Comcast, but a lot do.
It is not complicated and does not require a monthly fee to obtain the security. Click on the updates when it tells you to install them (Windows updates has an option for you to automatically download and INSTALL without the user having to do anything). Install a firewall. Install and update your anti virus (which eTrust automatically updates the virus definitions without without you having to do anything). Done for a one time fee of under $100. |
|
NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| said by keyboard5684:
Would people be paying to have someone call them on the phone when there is an update?
Hardware firewall devices are cheap. Software ones are free. The Windows update option does not get any simpler and comes with the OS.
ISPs will cut you off if you are infecting others, maybe not Comcast, but a lot do.
It is not complicated and does not require a monthly fee to obtain the security. Click on the updates when it tells you to install them (Windows updates has an option for you to automatically download and INSTALL without the user having to do anything). Install a firewall. Install and update your anti virus (which eTrust automatically updates the virus definitions without without you having to do anything). Done for a one time fee of under $100.
Then when you need to open ports on the firewall, who is going to support that? What about supporting the firewall itself? I understand your point, but it isn't a drop in and walk away solution. Yes, it is cheap. However, people continue to demonstrate that they can't keep a computer updated. A lot of users who buy virus protection don't reup the protection after the year is up. It means that their protection goes out the window.
I could make more points, but I am sure you understand by now.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
Reviews:
·Armstrong Zoom ..
| Maybe we are talking about 2 different types of people. There are not a lot of applications the users we are talking about use that require the firewall to be messed with.
The companies that sell the products support the firewall. You need to be able to run a web server chances are you can get the support from the company that sold it to you, the manufacturer, or reading the manual. I play online games, use a VPN and a ton of other things and a basic NAT firewall requires no modification in order to do those things.
People do demonstrate that they cannot keep there computer updated but paying someone to tell you to update your computer will not help much. The automatic update with Windows. in this case, is extremely easy. In my mind it is more annoying to ignore the reminder than it is to just do it. Paying a person to tell you the same thing that Windows already told you is not fixing the problem.
I think that supporting the firewall itself and opening ports on the firewall are the same thing.
You only made 2 points, the first I just gave my opinion on. The second, annual virus subscriptions, are the same thing to renew as an ISP telling you to renew your security subscription. You get emails and the virus software itself tells you over and over for 30 days then every day after that when you reboot your computer. I think it is more likely that you would update your subscription to the virus software than your subscription to security services that do nothing. |
|
 winkyTurn Left At The Moon
join:2001-02-11
Saint Louis, MO | reply to Nightfall
Sure, your "option" makes sense and while I don't think that people paying for an internet connection will see 5-10 as reasonable, it probably falls in line with the actual incurred cost of supporting these people. Per usual, "real" vs "imagined" supported issues are on the low side, so you end up paying for the clueless so you can get your "real" issue fixed. |
|
NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| reply to keyboard5684
quote:
Maybe we are talking about 2 different types of people. There are not a lot of applications the users we are talking about use that require the firewall to be messed with.
You would be suprised how many people want to be able to play internet games and can't connect due to a firewall. There are other instances to this as well.
quote:
People do demonstrate that they cannot keep there computer updated but paying someone to tell you to update your computer will not help much. The automatic update with Windows. in this case, is extremely easy. In my mind it is more annoying to ignore the reminder than it is to just do it. Paying a person to tell you the same thing that Windows already told you is not fixing the problem.
I am not talking about having support calling the user. I am talking about support DOING IT for the user. Two different things. You are puting the onus on the company that is being paid to keep these systems under its control updtated. Just like here at work. I am responsible for not only the network, but all devices attached to it. When I patch all the systems, I send out notices that the network will be down at this time. At that time, I do the work. I don't call the user to do the work for me.
quote:
I think that supporting the firewall itself and opening ports on the firewall are the same thing.
Same here.
The key point is that the users don't do it and want someone to do it for them. Heck, they are willing to pay for that service. I say give it to them and make them pay for it. It is a win-win situation in my eyes. The company providing the support wins because they get paid. The user has a secure updated system and in turn win.
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal |
|
Reviews:
·Armstrong Zoom ..
| I guess I wonder how the ISP should be updating the systems of there users and would a be worth it to the ISP to do it for $10? I cannot see the amount of costs involved in sending someone to a home to update there system. Apparently the people you are talking about are not able to update there system so if anything we are talking about phone support. I understand firewalls but most depends on anti-virus updates or OS updates. The ISP could begin filtering the stuff but we are talking way more than $10 a month.
The next problem is content. We do not hold our cable companies responsible for stopping Jerry Springer, we rely on ourselves to make sure our kids are not watching porn on Cinemax (okay, not porn but close). We have hardware but it still requires us to do something.
I do not think the interest is there, either the ISP or the customer. ISPs would not make money doing it and the customer does not care to begin with. |
|
NightfallMy Goal Is To Deny YoursPremium,MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI Reviews:
·Site5.com
·Comcast
·Callcentric
| said by keyboard5684:
I guess I wonder how the ISP should be updating the systems of there users and would a be worth it to the ISP to do it for $10? I cannot see the amount of costs involved in sending someone to a home to update there system. Apparently the people you are talking about are not able to update there system so if anything we are talking about phone support. I understand firewalls but most depends on anti-virus updates or OS updates. The ISP could begin filtering the stuff but we are talking way more than $10 a month.
There are other ways to admin systems such as remote desktop under XP, terminal services, etc. You are right, a system like this wouldn't be built overnight. It would take a lot of time, money, and effort. Maybe the price point wouldn't be what I said. Maybe it would be more or less expensive. All I know are the points I made. Backed by actual stastics.
quote:
The next problem is content. We do not hold our cable companies responsible for stopping Jerry Springer, we rely on ourselves to make sure our kids are not watching porn on Cinemax (okay, not porn but close). We have hardware but it still requires us to do something.
Thats true, but there is a certain learning curve. It isn't as easy as pushing a button and then activating parental control. There is so much that needs to be done to keep a system secure. So many different spyware programs and viruses. It just isn't as easy, so it isn't an accurate comparison.
quote:
I do not think the interest is there, either the ISP or the customer. ISPs would not make money doing it and the customer does not care to begin with.
No offense, but did you read the article? There is interest from the customer. There was a link in a past article about the ISP looking into it. Read the article, and here is a link on one of the information sources on the customers asking for help.
»www.net4nowt.com/isp_news/news_a···s_ID=876
--
My Domain
Nightfall's Hockey and Life Journal
[text was edited by author 2003-08-14 21:45:53] |
|
Reviews:
·Armstrong Zoom ..
| I think even with things like remote desktop it would be costly. A tech support person having to have a list of customers and spending all day going through machines fixing them (assuming the machines are on). It would take a large amount of staff to do this which costs money. 1 tech support person spending 20 minutes per machine (finding the user, loggin on, doing the updates) would cost an ISP at least $5,000 per month. Assuming all goes smoothly the service would bring in about $6,000 per month. I have never seen something like this always go smoothly so chances are it would cause things like on-site visits and walking customers through things.
If an update comes out and I have to instantly put staff on 100,000 machines before someone actually starts putting out an exploit I just lost my shirt.
I read the article but in practice I do not see any interest, at least enough that would cause an ISP to be interested. When people get a virus they shout "why did someone else not protect me" instead just accepting that they screwed up. Americans have a problem with accepting responsability (Sueing because I ate too many bigmacs?) lately.
Plus accountability. If one of my staff forgets a machine or an update just did not install correctly I am going to lose my shirt on that also. |
|
