Hypotheses generation

Antivirus software usage doesn’t involve emotional factors, as maybe the case with photo retouching programs, or Instant Messaging. Nevertheless, it is a core function of our computer. The OS recalls antivirus functions for several tasks: to open a downloaded file, to install a software, to open an email etc. Since we don’t directly ask to compute these operations, we may, at times, experience a negative mood, given by the slowdown of the performance of our computer. Too frequent notices and operations will be annoying while I assume a moderate level of occurrence to be well accepted. I hypothesize that:

H1-a: The antivirus is generally perceived as the primer cause for a sudden slowing down of the computer’s performance.

H1-b: There exists an inverted U-shaped relationship between the number of times an antivirus starts operating and the consumer’s positive mood.

As I previously mentioned, there are two distinct profiles: expert users, and non expert users. Several further hypotheses will distinguish between these two segments because I intensively believe the dynamics of the two groups are significantly different.
Features like “ease to use”, “lightness (meant as low impact in the OS), “graphic interface” will have different weights according to the ability accurately evaluate a software. Therefore I hypothesize:

H2-a: Non-expert consumers will place a greater importance on antivirus “ease to use” compared to expert users.

H2-b: Expert consumers will place a greater importance on “antivirus lightness” compared to non-experts.

H2-c: Non expert users will have a more positive evaluation of an antivirus with a high quality of graphic interface compared to expert users.

In evaluating some more technical aspects, we can now see that all the major vendors provide automatic, or manual, definition updates as well as program updates. What differs, is the size and occurrence of these updates. 'Pulse updates' deliver more frequent and thus smaller signature updates; they cause several notices but provide an invisible updating process while few but bigger updates will stress the user less with notices but may cause more intense slowdowns:

H3: Several small size-updates with fast installation will contribute to a more positive evaluation rather than few big updates.

Scanning capabilities such as Email Protection, “On-access Scanning”, “On-demand Scanning” “Heuristic Scanning”, on virus, spyware, adware are now common features provided by almost all vendors. Though features such “Instant Messaging Protection”, “P2P/File Sharing Protection” and “Registry Start-up Protection” are not yet provided by all. Several vendors are already providing IM protection while almost nobody thought about P2P protection. I don’t overlook the importance of IM protection, but I have an observation to make: Skype, Windows Live Messenger users (just to mention the most popular), have a selected contact list and external contacts have to ask for permission to be become “friends”; in P2P programs they have open doors for strangers and dangers are higher since the philosophy behind P2P is based on the exchange of files. Given the extensive use of P2P, particularly among youth, I suppose:

H4: P2P/File Sharing Protection will generate a more positive evaluation rather than Registry Start-up Protection and Instant Messaging Protection.

Technical support for home users takes various forms: FAQs, Tutorials, User Forums, Email support, Live chat, and Phone support. The last one is not always provided for free. Although a business user with a big infrastructure may be willing to pay to solve a company’s critical problem, a home user may experience the $30 per call charged by Symantec as frustrating. FAQs, Tutorials, Forums may be perceived as a boring and non customized solution while Email Support doesn’t provide an immediate answer. 24h Live chats with experts may be a good alternative because it provides instant feedback and interaction as for a call; as of now, only a few vendors are equipped with it. I assume that:

H5-a: The existence of “pay for technical support” is negatively related to customer satisfaction.

H5-b: If the company wants to charge for technical support, a pay-per-incident (per call) system is better perceived than pay-per-minute of conversation.

H5-c: 24h Live chat technical support will generate a more positive evaluation of the antivirus rather than Manual/FAQ/Knowledge Base, Tutorials, Forum and Email technical support.

Expert users, geeks and curious persons may like new software experiences and their knowledge lets them surf over different antivirus installing and uninstalling trial versions. For them, the switching costs (or “perceived switching costs” for the reasons discussed in paragraph 3.8) are low. For inexperienced users the obstacles to change a delicate program such as the antivirus are significant and it is much easier for them to renew the licence of their antivirus, even though they may have experienced some trouble with it. Let’s imagine the generation that grew up without the computer and now sporadically surfs the web; the path to undertake in changing the antivirus and making all the new configurations is more than tortuous. I therefore hypothesize:

H6: A lower level of IT expertise strengthens the loyalty between consumer and his current antivirus, likewise, the higher the level of IT expertise, the higher the willingness to experiment and test different antivirus.

I expect the idiosyncratic nature of women to appear in this field as well. The ties that women have with brands (for example clothing brands) are very strong. Women are fulfilled by being loyal, while men are generally less attached to brands. Moreover I believe men to be more demanding with their computer and they are more likely to look for new solutions to improve the performance of their computer. I expect women, even expert ones, to be less experimental and to feel satisfied with less.

H7: Women, both expert and non-expert are more loyal with their antivirus software compared to men.

In paragraph 3.16, I introduced an important hypothesis; consumers that buy Symantec or McAfee do so primarily for brand recognition and marketing. This doesn’t mean that they are fools, but that they may rely more on a well-known company with an exclusive curriculum in the field, or perhaps they don’t have enough experience to look up less well-known programs. People with more expertise may experience higher satisfaction using less known, less expensive and perhaps lighter software. Moreover, I assume that since Microsoft has top marketing skills and top name recognition, it may capture some customers of “industry leaders” but hardly any consumers from “second tier” and “follower” companies. In fact, after they have made a conscious decision for reasons that go beyond brand recognition, users would hardly go back to “industry leaders” or MS OneCare. I therefore hypothesise:

H8-a: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the usage of “second tiers” or “followers” software.

H8-b: The usage of “second tiers” or “followers” software, lowers the likelihood to switch to Norton, McAfee or MS OneCare in the future.

H8-c: Users of “industry leaders” are more likely to switch to Microsoft OneCare compared to “second tiers” or “followers”.

The new trends brought by industry leaders are all-in-one suites (see Norton 360 or McAfee Total Protection) where several functions are included. Symantec is continuously looking for opportunities to broaden its product portfolio. The recent purchase of PC Tools Veritas are clear signs of the expansion strategy pursued by Symantec. In the future, we can expect Norton to bundle other utilities regarding Pc maintenance. Costs of these big suites increase and well as the impact on the OS. I expect these solutions to have a different impact on the expert and non expert. Expert users may like the concept of “diversity” a little more, while non experts may perceive it as a powerful safety belt. Therefore:

H9-a: Expert users perceive an all-in-one suite as a too heavy and invasive solution.

H9-b: Non expert users perceive an all-in-one suite as a useful solution.

H9-c: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the consumer willingness to rely on separate security applications rather than all-in-one solutions.

The competition between freeware and shareware is compelling. Major freeware developers in the last years have also developed their shareware version, with more features. The presence of both freeware and shareware can confuse a non expert user that wonders if the freeware is trustworthy enough. Expert users may rely on freeware with a basic antivirus protection, with no other features (such Avast! Free edition or Avira AntiVir Personal) and they use their expertise to find and configure complementary security applications such as firewalls and anti-spyware and perhaps freeware as well. A free and effective solution generates a sense of gratification and satisfaction among experts. My hypotheses:

H10-a: The higher the level of IT expertise the higher the usage of freeware.

H10-b: Non expert users consider freeware antivirus more risky and less reliable than shareware.

Beside the attitude towards freeware, I want to test the general awareness of the existence of freeware. Freeware developers have less advertising and marketing resources to promote their products, and companies offering both freeware and shareware have few incentives to promote the freeware due to the obvious cannibalization effect. I believe that:

H-11: An increase in awareness of the existence of freeware antivirus will lead to a decreasing shareware usage.

Customer price sensitivity can significantly affect choice between freeware rather than shareware; but if we only look at the shareware group, given the similarity of prices, I expect price sensitivity of experts to be low and their decision is driven by personal preferences. Non-experts may have an higher price sensitivity. Therefore:

H12-a: Price sensitivity doesn’t support a direct relationship with the antivirus expert user and his intent to purchase.

H12-b Price sensitivity supports a direct relationship with the non-expert user and his intent to purchase.

The usage of pirated software is a disturbing coefficient for my results. It is obvious that the probability for a non-expert to use pirated software is inferior than for an expert, given the different skills. The nature of my research doesn’t let me study this phenomenon accurately, but I want to investigate the percentage of the usage of pirated software within the sample. In particular, I want to find the niche of consumers that make more use of piracy. Usage of piracy speeds up and facilitates the software turnover; therefore, pirate users are more prone to experiment new programs. I expect youth to make a higher use of piracy software of “second tier” or “follower” companies, while adults may rely more on Norton and other industry leaders:

H13-a Expert youth make more use of “second tiers” and “followers” software compared to adults.

H13-b Expert youth make higher use of antivirus pirated software than expert adults.

H13-c Expert youth are less loyal than expert adults.

Problem statement and sub-questions

Prices between antivirus software fluctuate by a few dollars; the user often does not have the capabilities to truly evaluate software effectiveness either before the purchase or after it. He does not feel any gratification in possessing it but he is ready to criticize it if it creates problems. These circumstances generate an anomalous scenario both for the company, that has to persuade the consumer and also for the consumer that has to make a choice with little information and stimuli.
Therefore, how does the consumer make his choice? Which aspects drive his decision towards one program rather than another? Which elements stimulate the antivirus switch? What needs does the antivirus software have to satisfy? It certainly has to effectively protect for viruses, but what does it mean for a non-expert to have his antivirus “working efficiently”? A program that works quietly in the background or a more thoughtful program that continuously intervenes?

A distinction was made between home users and business users. But within the home-user segment, there is another distinction to be made. People have different propensities and different expertise when it comes to technology. Therefore, I outline two new profiles: expert user and non-expert user. These two segments may have different needs and different perceptions regarding “what is important” for an antivirus. So, I want to study the factors, if there are any, that drive the choice of a expert and a non-expert user. Which factors determine their satisfaction?

The recent trend of the antivirus industry is to bundle several functions in one product. Norton 360 and McAfee Total Protection are clear examples. Symantec turned to storage software and recently to utility software; my expectation is that Norton will further broaden its functions. For some users the total protection of their ecosystem through a single product may be a safety belt while other users may prefer more “diversity” in managing their infrastructure. So, what is the consumer attitude towards all-in-one suites? Are there differences between expert and non expert user?

We’ve seen that there is a big split in the industry: on one hand we have shareware, on the other freeware. Although freeware programs may be inferior in their effectiveness and more limited in their functions, consumers may perceive shareware products as unnecessary, obsolete and unmarketable if similar functionality is available for free. What is the attitude towards freeware? Which segment is more favourable to freeware? Why? What’s the role of price sensitivity? Freeware developers have little possibility to generate revenues and therefore have less marketing and advertising power. So I ask myself: what is the level of awareness regarding the presence of freeware antivirus software? What are their perceived strengths and weaknesses?

Paradox?

The success of a antivirus manufacturer depends to a great extend on the proprietary software technology. To be competitive, a R&D effort to develop new products or refine existing products is mandatory. Symantec in the 2005 spent 334 millions $, in the 2007 the amount was 867 millions, an increasing of 160%. This R&D budget is nearly 6 times the total revenues of F-secure, that nonetheless has succeeded over Symantec in the antivirus software review 2008 made by “Top Ten Reviews”.

The era of the virus attachments is over

The scarecrow is called XSS (cross site scripting). It is a technique that uses a vulnerability of the website to run a code in background (with the user that doesn’t perceive anything). The are two conditions for the applicability: the page contains a form to send messages in which is possible to type a text and the message is successively posted in the page; third, the website has to be vulnerable for these kinds of attacks. Unfortunately the last conditions is often existent. Thanks to that, the hackers can type their string and the webpage will recognize it not as a message but as instructions. The more struck websites are Facebook, My Space, Forums and other so called Social Networks. The actions undertaken by the hackers can be a defacing or he can cause consequences to the real time visitors.

from McAfee criminology report 2007

• There is a growing threat to national security from cyber crime activities as web espionage becomes more advanced.
• There is an increasing thread to online services because of the growth in the sophistication of attack techniques. Social engineering, for example, is now used in conjunction with phishing techniques, making the situation even more complex and threatening the confidence of the e-user and especially the new e-users.
• We are facing the emergence of a refining market of software vulnerabilities. This market is legal but also dangerously illegal. Critical government infrastructure networks are menaced. The U.S. government has already established a SWAT team (Special Weapons And Tactics) called Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT) to cope the problem. Other countries such Australia are reinforcing their defences spending around 70millionA$.

Cybercrime

Cybercrime is more than a buzzword, “it’s a critical business concern”, said 1,387 IT professionals surveyed by the security firm Finjan. Ninety-one percent of respondents call cybercrime a “major business risk,” and 73% say they are more concerned about data theft than about downtime and loss of productivity from malware. In addition, 25% of respondents declared that there was at least a case of data violation in their organizations. 5 But the more worrying data is that the 66% thinks that the menace of the corporate security comes from the inside of the organization.

Join the survey!

Please support my work. Data will be collected till the 25th of October. Results of the survey will be available at the end of the month.

examples of hypotheses that will be tested

- There exist an inverted U-shaped relationship between the number of times an antivirus starts operating and the consumer positive mood.

- Several small size-updates with fast installation will contribute to a more positive evaluation rather than few big updates.

- P2P/File Sharing Protection will generate a more positive evaluation rather than Registry Startup Protection and Instant Messaging Protection.

- A lower level of IT expertise strengthens the loyalty between consumer and his current antivirus.

- The higher the lever of IT expertise, the lower the “perceived switching costs”, and therefore the higher the willingness to experiment and test different antivirus.

freeware vs shareware

Smaller companies are often more aggressive on prices. Proprietary software vendors, such Symantec and McAfee face competition from lots of minor organizations, freeware and open source authors that may develop convincing products. Even if these products are inferior for effectiveness or more limited for functions, consumers may perceive shareware products as unnecessary, obsolete and unmarketable if similar functionality is available for free. The challenge is to convince consumers to rely more on well-known companies and pay their expertise and their learning curve.

Symantec' growth

Let’s have a look to the Symantec last few years revenues: $5,874,419 (2008), $5,199,366 (2007), $4,143,392 (2006), $2,582,849 (2005), $1,870,129 (2004), $1,406,946 (2003). The main cause of the huge growth is certainly attributable to acquisitions. For instance the enormous growth between the 2005 and the 2006 is due to the acquisition of Veritas, Inc. Contrarily to McAfee, which focused mainly on antivirus, Symantec has focused on acquiring companies with complementary business segments. But there is also an alarming results that involves Norton: in the 2007 there was a drop in operating income in the consumer segment. In the 2006 it was 950Mn$ and in 2007 it was 931Mn$; that in correspondence of higher 2007 revenues. This weaker profitability is significant and it’s not justified in the annual report. My subjects regard a higher competitive pressure to assure arrangements with strategic partners, particularly a lower profitability with OEMs. In the 2008 operating income was 938.6Mn$, the results still show signs of a weakness.