Microsoft Admits That Security Essentials Is Just a Basic Anti-Virus Product

[froggyboy604]

Holly Stewart, senior program manager of the Microsoft Malware Protection Center, admitted in an interview with Dennis Technology Labs, a company that performs anti-virus tests on a regular basis, that Security Essentials is indeed designed to remain “at the bottom” of all rankings, so users should really install third-party protection.

Read More

Now is a good time to look for other Antivirus programs like Avast, Antivir/Avira, Comodo, NOD32, BitDefender, and Kaspersky at protecting your computer instead of using Security Essentials if you have a lot of important data on your computer, or you get infected often even when you use MS SE Antivirus.

 

[Guardian]

Its always been a pile of crap, and it was pretty much common knowledge that it was a basic AV. At LEAST they acknowledged it was intentionally designed to be a pile of crap. This is very misleading to non-technical users though and in my opinion is a huge violation of trust. 

 

[froggyboy604]

I think Microsoft was force to admit that their Antivirus is bad because it only has a 0.5/6 protection rating on the bottom of the page on http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/julaug-2013/ , and infected users are asking why MS SE did not to protect their computers from viruses, so MS had to admit it is a basic OS, and to try another better antivirus program.

I agree it is a violation of trust, and MS should make a post on their Security Essentials blog/website saying it is only a basic antivirus, and users should use another brand like Avast, Bitdefender, Kaspersky or ESet for better protection.

 

[hissae2]

I've never used it anyway. Maybe now those who have always relied on it will thank about getting a new antivirus. 

 

[froggyboy604]

I used Microsoft Security Essentials for a short amount of time, but I found it did not have the features I want like other free Antivirus like Avast and AVG.

Security Essentials also seem to make my older computers run slower because it uses more RAM.

I also notice downloading, and installing the Virus definition updates took longer compared to other antivirus programs I used.

 

[Guardian]

I think Microsoft was force to admit that their Antivirus is bad because it only has a 0.5/6 protection rating on the bottom of the page on http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/julaug-2013/ , and infected users are asking why MS SE did not to protect their computers from viruses, so MS had to admit it is a basic OS, and to try another better antivirus program.

I agree it is a violation of trust, and MS should make a post on their Security Essentials blog/website saying it is only a basic antivirus, and users should use another brand like Avast, Bitdefender, Kaspersky or ESet for better protection.

Holy wow that is bad! I've never actually seen it ranked against others before. 

 

[Black Angel]

This is nothing new.. well not to me. I always opted for third party protection for my PC because I knew that MS was first and foremost an o/s company and so, their primary focus would be on the o/s itself. Not antivirus or firewalls, and this is why, I always opted for the companies who are known for their protection on my computer instead of relying on MS.

It is the same reason I always went with companies known for their antivirus, for antivirus protection, and I went for companies known for their firewall protection for firewalls. So I would go for Avira, Kaspersky or Norton Antivirus (before I found out that they narc on their users to their ISPs if you don't update your subscription to their service) for antivirus protection and it is why I would go for Comodo, Zone Alarm, Black Ice PC Protection (before they disappeared) or Sygate Personal Firewall (before they were bought out by Symantec and were shutdown to be one Norton Systemworks.)

I would never go for a combination suite from these companies because I knew that at least one aspect would not be as good as others.. and that my pc would not be protected as well as it would if I didn't.

 

[Demon_Skeith]

.......


alright, so what is the best free antivirus I should look into getting?

 

[froggyboy604]

Avast Free Antivirus seem to be best free Antivirus according to http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=133160 because it stop 98-100% of viruses.

It is also the number 1 most downloaded Antivirus on http://download.cnet.com/Avast-Free-Antivirus/3000-2239_4-10019223.html?tag=mncol;1 with a 4.5/5 user rating from 24,862 votes from users.

 

[Demon_Skeith]

is it worth buying avast? Or just go with the free?

 

[ToCool74]

I had a feeling this was the case a long time ago.

That is why with each new computer I have gotten over the years I always installed the following 3 antivirus,antimalware,and antispyware programs.

1.AVG 2013 security
2.Malwarebytes Anti malware
and
3.SuperAntispyware free edition

 

[froggyboy604]

is it worth buying avast? Or just go with the free?

The free version should be good enough for most average home users, but if you are not a very careful computer user, and go on a lot of illegal websites, open up a lot of weird e-mails from unknown senders, and install a lot of software from unknown sources, the paid version would be better. The paid version has online shopping protection which is called SafeZone which is a private and isolated virtual window on your desktop, for securing your sensitive financial transactions online. Perfect for auction sites, buying tickets, booking hotels or airlines, online gaming, or any sort of monetary transfer : http://www.avast.com/en-ca/pro-antivirus

 

[Demon_Skeith]

I had a feeling this was the case a long time ago.

That is why with each new computer I have gotten over the years I always installed the following 3 antivirus,antimalware,and antispyware programs.

1.AVG 2013 security
2.Malwarebytes Anti malware
and
3.SuperAntispyware free edition

does the anti spyware work? I had webroot antispyware on my PC a few years ago but it never picked anything up so I got rid of it.

 

[ToCool74]

does the anti spyware work? I had webroot antispyware on my PC a few years ago but it never picked anything up so I got rid of it.

Mine works great.

Any time I start to notice some slowdowns I immediately do a scan and I'm surprised to find how many adware cookies I have lol.

I don't visit to many illegal sites so It always baffles me.

I tend to do a scan once a month just to be sure.

 

[froggyboy604]

I think tracking cookies are found on a lot of safe sites like Google, Yahoo, Bing, and most big sites since Tracking cookies are what companies like Google use to send you ads related to your browsing history, so you are more likely to click on ads which are related topics to what you are looking for by visiting sites.

Tracking cookies is a part of the internet economy for making more cash with related ads.

 

[Demon_Skeith]

well upon the recommendation, I installed super anti spyware and it did find over 150 spyware on both my PC and laptop and quickly removed them. Kudos for that cool.

I traded my MS security essentials for Avast and avast didn't find any viruses. So even though MS SE is cheap and low quality, it still did the job.

 

[Black Angel]

.......
 
 
alright, so what is the best free antivirus I should look into getting?

I use Avira as my a/v, Comodo as my firewall and Malwarebytes for malware.

I also have a hosts file that blocks a lot of spyware and malware sites from my computer.

Ive used AVG before and not only did it do a bad job at scanning and virus removal, but it used a lot of processes and was a major memory hog as well.

I remember posting about it on TC.

Zone Alarm used to be good but it can be confusing to set up and it caused a few problems as well and I ended up with a 38gb text file on my PC because of the logging and there was no way to disable thst particular log even though you could disable everything else.. so I went with Comodo as my replacement firewall and haven't had any problems.