Actually Windows 8.1 has been proven to be as fast, and in some cases - as light as many Linux Distros. It's actually a very effecient operating system that runs very well on older hardware. My wifes old XP-Laptop actually FEELS like it got a hardware upgrade when I put Windows 8.1 on it. So much so, she asked 'what did I do' to it to make it so fast. So I really don't see your point here? Back on topic.. Regardless of how an AV scores on synthetic tests, that has no bearing on other, sometimes more important aspects to a product. How does it perform? Does it slow down a machine? Are there bugs? Browsing speed impacted? Support from the company? There are many aspects to considering a product, not just raw performance on synthetic tests. For me, I consider performance on synthetic tests to actually be one of the lowest metrics I look it. It's really much more important to have a solid, bug free, and easy to use product for my clients. If you base what you use on synthetic test scores - I have news for you - you will be switching products often, spending too much on licenses, and generally in a state of perpetual unhappiness with the products. But if you find a product based on more important metrics, I guarantee you will stick with it, save money, and live a happier life. We wouldn't be here discussing this if 360 worked properly, was supported properly, etc. Instead we find the company not even answering concerns about this for some time, and then not updating their process addressing these concerns. Shouldn't you factor that in your decisions? I certainly would! Then we find people, such as yourself, actually uninstalling a perfectly good, speedy, and well constructed operating system - reverting back to an old, unsupported, and fairly sloppy operating system so they can use a security product? That's lunacy. Pure lunacy. In 3 months or less you will be running something else, I won't be.