Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="danb" data-source="post: 954771" data-attributes="member: 62850">I totally agree, I am just saying &quot;so far, so good&quot; <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite110" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />.Thank you, same to you!&nbsp; Once I am finished, there should be several features that make Microsoft Defender more robust and foolproof.Yes, I have not figured out how to handle that yet, but I have some ideas.&nbsp; It might just be best to ask the user uninstall DefenderUI if another AV is registered as the primary AV.&nbsp; Or if there are enough features once I am finished, maybe we can have a different mode and it will only show the relevant features.&nbsp; It is hard to say at this point <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite110" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="danb, post: 954771, member: 62850"] I totally agree, I am just saying "so far, so good" ;). Thank you, same to you! Once I am finished, there should be several features that make Microsoft Defender more robust and foolproof. Yes, I have not figured out how to handle that yet, but I have some ideas. It might just be best to ask the user uninstall DefenderUI if another AV is registered as the primary AV. Or if there are enough features once I am finished, maybe we can have a different mode and it will only show the relevant features. It is hard to say at this point ;). [/QUOTE]

Verification