It's been a while since the industry has seen a good David-and-Goliath fight, but you might want to line up for a ringside seat at this one. Microsoft is taking on Symantec and others in the security realm, but the interesting thing is it's not clear who the giant is in this fight--nor is it a necessarily a given which will win.Contrast this situation to the industry of ten years ago. Microsoft was everywhere, so much so that it was being taken to task by governments around the world for monopolistic practices. When Microsoft aimed at any given niche, the existing vendors in that market were pretty quickly goners. The integration into Windows of a Web browser, media player, and other elements that had previously been separate software packages left the vendors in those markets, if not completely dead, then at the very least gasping for air and looking for other ways to make money.

This is certainly not the case today. Microsoft has failed to make serious inroads in the enterprise applications space, for one, despite numerous attempts to do so. Its online offering, MSN, is a distant competitor to Google and others, and it's still battling antitrust issues in Europe, Korea, and here at home.

Still, a giant's gotta eat, and so here Microsoft goes into the security area. I don't think we're going to see a complete rout of existing players the way we likely would have a decade ago. In fact, Microsoft stands a good chance of being knocked into the ropes in this fight.

In the consumer space, Microsoft arguably has some momentum through name recognition by consumers and deals with resellers. (Symantec's certainly got a few of those deals, too, so I'm not willing to put any money on this one.) It also doesn't hurt that Microsoft's OneCare Live subscription service allows users to protect up to three home computers for one flat annual fee of $49.95. Perhaps Symantec will see the wisdom in changing its licensing policies to compete more aggressively on this front.

Also, Microsoft's OneCare Live does more than just protect the PC, it helps with system optimization and backup tasks, too. It's a nice little package for not a lot of money, our reviewer said a while ago.

Symantec is certainly battling back, with its own consumer security service due to launch in September, a couple of months after Microsoft's. Details of Symantec's offering haven't been announced.

Nor has Microsoft let on much about what it's doing in the enterprise security area, although it's planning something, initially in the antivirus space. Here, though, I think Symantec and McAfee are going to give Microsoft a good run for its money. Security pros know and trust these long-time vendors and the products work. Making an ROI case for replacing a core enterprise software package 'just because' is not a good way of endearing oneself to the boss.

Most important, perhaps, is that these third-party apps are agnostic. They run across multiple operating environments and hardware platforms, and they work with other vendors of related ecosystems. Microsoft has been notorious for its stubbornness to play nicely outside its own servers and software, one reason why most shops of any size can't seriously consider Windows to, say, run their data centers. It's a multivendor world, a fact Microsoft has long refused to consider, and that's why enterprise systems management and, yes, security, remain an enigma to Microsoft.

"Live," also known as hosted, software isn't going to help here, either. Too many large enterprises run their own software and it will require a huge change in their IT model, and it will be many years before that happens. I don't think it will, not with IT playing the central and core role it does in many large firms. Hosted software also doesn't address the integration and multivendor issues.

What do you think? Does Microsoft stand a chance in the security market? Drop us a line below and share your thoughts.