Exactly! They are NOT making money from WD. That's a good thing because it means they don't have to code WD to score well on simulated lab tests! They don't need the glory and bragging rights for their advertising/marketing hype like all the other products do to make them stand apart from each other so consumers will buy their products instead of their competitors. Microsoft is not in it for the money. They are in it so Microsoft bashers stop blaming Microsoft for actions of the badguys. Only Microsoft benefits if malware goes away! All the other antimalware solution providers depend on the bad guys and malware to survive and thrive. If malware goes away, where will that put Avast, Avira, Norton or your favorite security program? Out of business, that's where. So what incentive do they really have in the end to beat malware? None! I ask again, if WD is so bad, where are all the infected users? Why aren't any of my 6 systems or the dozens I am responsible for infected? Are all the other users of this forum who use WD just stupid - like you think I am? Why are their systems not infected? Could it be that WD actually works in "real-world" scenarios? I say, yes! What propaganda? Show us all the ads Microsoft is pushing on us promoting WD. The only propaganda being believed is that by you claiming WD is so bad, users need God's help to survive! This is what I am talking about. It is all the people who immediately take every opportunity to denounce WD who are doing the preaching. This thread is not about WD but you and Emsisoft have made it so. Testing any solution against fresh malware is not a realistic, real-world test. That's the problem with all those lab tests. They throw 1000s of malware against an antimalware product when that is not how malware attacks the typical computer in the real world! Why are all of you ignoring the fact that the vast majority of WD users are NOT getting infected? That's the problem. You guys keep claiming that WD is so bad, but real world evidence does not support that. Where are all those infected WD users you imply must be out there? Are you really going to pretend that 100% of the users of your preferred product are not infected? I am NOT saying (and never have - for the record) that WD is the best there is. I am just says that it is more than adequate for the vast majority of users. And I have always said that, regardless your primary of scanner of choice, we all still need a secondary scanner just to be sure our primary or we (the user and always weakest link in security) didn't let something slip by. You don't have to drive around in an Abrams tank to be safe. You just need to drive around in a relative modern car that is properly maintained, and most importantly, you MUST drive defensively. Funny enough that is the same need regardless the antimalware solution of choice.