Windows Defender used to land near the bottom of AV comparison tests. As a result, many users chose a third party product, often paying for it, while others went further to uninstalling WD. But WD has been steadily getting better, and in the last comparison test I saw, it came near the top. And now under the Creators Update, it has received more than a mere face lift, with improvements extending to under the hood. If it has now become one of the best AVs, there’s no need to resort to third party products, let alone pay for them. In fact, they may even start going out of business. What are your views on the NEW Windows Defender?
Unfortunately the new Security center shows the same patronizing behavior some 3rd party AVs have for a long time. Even if you allow a file that got detected or change any Settings it will nag you about weakened security and only stop if you let it delete the detected file or reset the Setting to it's defaults .
it has one good thing device performance & health... i was having driver issues with my video card were my monitor look like it had rain and i did the fresh start option were it re-installs windows and fix it everything is real smooth now.
I remove security center, action center and defender. The paper did fail Nod32 but not sure how that compares to endpoint security. I tend to avoid consumer-y a/v products because of the patronizing behavior mentioned above. I do not allow any cloud type detection nor file transmissions (in eset that is "livegrid"). No firewall hits from the A/V and I blocked it from anything except getting updates.
@Phoenix - The OP is referring to the newest version of Windows Defender that is packaged along with Windows Creators Update. It didn't exist back in October 2016 when that comparison was published. Is it actually better? I don't know for sure. We'll have to wait until a new comparison comes along.
I won't ever a believe a chart i didn't fake myself . Impact still is a question of AV Settings. With no Cloud connection and restricted to protect the system partition only, i barely notice Defender.
I understand, but the point is, my performance issues are still there even with the latest version. The moment I disable WD I feel like I got a new PC. To each his own, I'll never use it.
Yes, this thread is exclusively about the new Windows Defender. There are many existing threads on the old one, which is no longer of real relevance. As for invasion of privacy, all AVs are equally suspect, while the entire W10 system is a major offender, as are many browsers, search engines, apps and websites. Not to mention infamous authorities. But this thread isn't about privacy either. Now, venturing a look in my crystal ball, if the new Windows Defender has really improved to the point that it can provide good protection, there will be no reason to resort to third party products and consequently no reason for their continued existence. So, are we about to see the end of another era?
WD and other AV software just lull you into a false sense of security - they wont stop you being infected with all the new variants of cryptolockers, ransomware and malicious exploits that plague the internet, they can easily bypass/disable any AV you have installed. the best security is using sandboxes, disposable VM's and offline system imaging and of course common sense!!
I think the best security is paying attention to what you actually run. A/V is just to scan files you are already suspicious of. Besides that the only other way to infect you is a remote exploit. As for the performance impact... of course on a fast machine with selective real time scanning you won't notice. Its the same with every other product. When its set up to scan every file you touch or see.... I don't think its anywhere close to the end of 3rd party products. First off, many don't trust microsoft, second you can't trust US created tools like this because they are highly likely to contain backdoors or exploits left unpatched intentionally. If your crystal ball is somehow right (ie microsoft bans 3rd party A/V) that is the absolute worst thing that can happen. Now you have 1 target for all of the malware authors in the world. With MS's track record and recent QA failures, in a defender only world the last option would be to run sandboxes and VMs or suffer.
This implies that it's required at all. It's not, tho I realize it's not an adequate solution for businesses or colleges. In those cases, I would say that it's likely good enough and definitely not worth shelling out extra dollars. For personal use, nothing will ever beat just using your brain and pre-scan files you suspect might have viruses before ever running them.
I'm still rocking no AV, merely because I don't need it. I do very little on Windows nowadays outside of a few trusted things, and I'm pretty confident I know how to avoid malware.
There is nothing that beats common sense when it comes to security online. The truth is that common senses aren't really common at times as hackers become very proficient in the process of deceiving their victims to initiate malicious software, most especially, in the clickbait exploit directed at people with little idea of information technology .
I'm amazed how ublock origin can mitigate most threats. And I don't know what voodoo MS uses but I've been spam free for ages. But teach your PC not to talk to strange flash drives.
defender even check when installing a update install package or uninstall packages internal tasks that's just nutz and waste of resources