Windows Defender in Windows 8 - How many of you?

Windows Defender in Windows 8 = Microsoft Security Essentials in Windows 7/Vista. Its good that Microsoft enables it by default in Windows 8 for full protection but how many of you are using it as your only antivirus?

My main objection against it is the lack of update scheduler and in most cases I had to update it manually. (I know I can set MSE scheduler via Task Scheduler but that shows a command prompt screen splash every time and also sometimes it do not run at all.)

VB100 RAP results indicate significant improvements in the effectiveness of MSE. So, what do you say?

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/RAP/RAP-quadrant-Feb-Aug13-1200.jpg

 

I stopped using it for the following reasons:

• No right-click contextual menu in Windows Explorer (Not a big deal, but I prefer one)
• Windows Update services must be running on Automatic at all times, in order to receive automated updates. I prefer using Windows Update Manually, so this doesn't work for me.
• Background CPU spikes can sometimes become too high at times, at least for my liking.

Would I recommend it?

Answer is...

Yes, yes I would

Windows Defender is great for the following reasons:

• Detection is starting to get better and better, especially since Windows 8.1 introduced improvements.
• Integrates with the system quite well (Nice, Simple and stable)
• When CPU spikes are down, the background services can be relatively light on the system.
• No built-in advertising, like most free AV's out there tend to have
• Can be enabled and used in home and commercial environments.
• You can receive support through Microsoft.

 

@TyRidian: Thanks for your reply. Actually even with Windows Update set to automatic, it only updates once a day while WD releases updates 2-3 times a day. I was not aware of the CPU spikes because I haven't experiences any system impact yet and yes, lack of context menu scan option is a minus.

I have plans to stick with it for some time. Lets see how that goes.

 

It participates in RAP test so does it have heuristics?

 

Not using it since i already have EAM + OA.
I dont even update the definitions through Windows Updates.

 

Question, on your machine do you have Background Intelligent Transfer Service set to Automatic (Delayed Start) and Windows Update set to Manual?

If not, then the above should be set as I listed.

Because, with the above settings, I was able to get two Windows Defender updates a day, at least according to my Windows Update history.

As for the CPU spikes, it didn't happen that often, but when it did occur, I didn't like them.

 

Windows Defender in 8.1 doesn't seem to work properly with firefox. I can download eicar test file without any reaction from Defender. Even if I close firefox and try to access the file there is no warning from Defender. I tried to run a custom scan on the folder but Defender GUI froze

 

Read what MS says.

 

It may be basic, but it does its job just fine. But indeed, it's annoying to not having the context menu scan in Windows 8 Defender.

 

It deserves a lot of respect for exposing the third-rate BD parasites for what they are in the last month. I hope they'll all take a long hard look at themselves after failing the real world test.

PS. if even the W7 version could.

 

I'm using Windows Defender since Win 8. No Problems and what is more important, no infections so far. It can't be so bad.

 

I use it without realtime and let it scan nightly - it doesn't hurt to have a 2nd look.

(it has never found anything though)

 

I'd use it, if it weren't for the excessive CPU use and system hang when opening a folder full of .exe files (a problem present ever since the inception of MSE).

 

I'm wondering with all this talk about MSE/Defender being just a basic AV, as well as not doing so well on tests, is a paid setup by Microsoft.

What I mean is, has Microsoft set up a poor reputation about it's AV, just so hackers won't dare spend the time to touch it?

I don't know, maybe I am wrong.

The reason why I believe this is the case, because in my most recent testing, it did pretty good at catching thing's.

 

I don't use WD because I've found better ones.

 

According to OPSWAT data for October, MSE and Windows Defender have a combined market penetration of a bit over 25%, far outdistancing all others except AVAST.

http://www.opswat.com/about/media/reports/antivirus-october-2013

And some wonder why there is a malware problem.

 

Because free is a powerful motivator.

 

The problem is not it being free, problem is the quality of the free product you choose to use.

 

For any that followed the above link to OPSWAT, please note that the data they collect is harvested from the tools Security Score and GEARS. Note that these tools are only available in English, so would be of little value in a non-English speaking country (like China). So the "Worldwide" data is primarily from North America and Western Europe.

Reminds me of a World Map I saw for sale in New York City- 99% of it was the 5 boroughs, with a tiny space on the left and right for Los Angeles and London respectively.

 

True, but don't the other free products have nag screens? And though I haven't used it lately, the free version of Avast made you register, even though it was free (or at least it did in the past). The Microsoft solutions are silent and free.

 

Avast still makes you register but I didn't see any nag screen besides that in Version 8 (btw I don't count advertising in gui as a nag screen, gui doesn't pop up when you don't want it to)

Avira had a nag screen, don't know if it still does, haven't used it for quite a time.

Comodo has nag messages which can be turned off.

Bitdefender free/ cloud made you register but didn't have nag screens, don't know if it does now.

Panda Cloud didn't have nag screens don't know if it does now.

My point here is the "annoyance" is highly manageable for free products, paying 5 mins of your time to register for a free program is not a big problem.

 

Oh sister you've just showed the cruel reality.

 

That may be true for you and many others, but I guarantee that it is enough annoyance that many will choose the product that has none. That and its easy availability on Windows Update. If the annoyance factor was equal I'm sure that there would be a different set of numbers that we would be looking at. I can speak for myself when I say that I will not use free software that requires registration. I am the product at that point, and I don't know what they will do with my info.

 

What info? Fake Name Generator, Tor, VPN, Mailinator, etc. As for product, they already have full access to your PC after installation anyways. Annoyance is of course up to you.

 

Good point but if I can't trust them not to steal that info from my PC then it should not be installed.