Advice Request Security Software obselete on Windows 10?

[AriDfoix]

A big difference is always what users can get and enterprises actually get, that difference start with Windows and go on with security products; I feel that advanced users or developers here can do the right choice based on their tastes, but there are many obsolete security programs out there, that a big cut would help; the model is slowly passing to free AV with advertising, that I don't like much, but hey, it's my point of view

 

[Quassar]

Y some time i rly think i will back again to w7 :/ or install old build windows 10 and perma block update ;/

 

[509322]

I believe you all giving to much credit to Microsoft while relying on third-parties to properly configure the Software. The fact most of the options are hidden behind Group Polity and Regedit, should be a minus in terms of user usability.

On top of that we have the known performance issues, mediocre protection against 0-day and unknown malware (compared to third-parties), so I won't recommend Windows Defender to anyone until Microsoft fixes all the issues above.

Most of us on MT don't even an AV Software, and I would rather go naked than have the resource hog that is WD running in the background. As a developer it gets in my way a lot with false positives, bugs and affects my debugging performance.

Visual Studio Debug:

Naked: 30 secs.
With WD: 132 secs.
With Kaspersky: 32 secs.

Everything that you posted is just a small part of why so many in the industry have a major attitude with Microsoft and Windows.

A big difference is always what users can get and enterprises actually get, that difference start with Windows and go on with security products; I feel that advanced users or developers here can do the right choice based on their tastes, but there are many obsolete security programs out there, that a big cut would help; the model is slowly passing to free AV with advertising, that I don't like much, but hey, it's my point of view

Configuring and working with Windows at the enterprise level is absolutely atrocious. I just know it is every IT Pro's dream to spend countless hours trying to get answers and solutions to problems or spending days trying to get stuff to work.

There is some great security that can be had in Windows at the enterprise level, but configuring and working with it is like removing all the bolts on a tank with your teeth.

 

[DeepWeb]

Windows Defender would be perfect if:
1) It had faster scan speed
2) It didn't use 100% CPU and disk

 

[Deleted member 178]

security software obsolete on windows10?

could be if Win10 built-in security modules' implementation and usability were less stupid...

 

[shmu26]

If anyone here still thinks that WD has mediocre detection rate, that is because he did not even bother to look at the screenshot in @Windows_Security's original post. We are not talking in this thread about what WD does "out of the box," we are talking about what WD does after a little tweaking, most of which is very easy and takes maybe 90 seconds, if you use ConfigureDefender.

Yeah, it would be nice if MS made tweaking Windows security features a no-brainer. Fortunately for us, though, Andy Ful made it easy enough.

There are exceptional circumstances in which WD impacts system performance. But in most daily computing tasks, for most home users, it is amazingly light.

Most of us (myself included) use 3rd party security software, and will continue to do so. But that doesn't mean you must sneer at what you already got. There is a native layer of Windows security that is pretty awesome if you get into it.

 

[oldschool]

Well said @shmu26 and thank you! I might add that most (maybe all?) tests on WD are on default settings, or at the very least, testers don't mention what settings they use to test. How many 3rd party AVs score well with default settings? Isn't most of the discussion about various softs on this and other forums precisely about tweaking, the "best settings", etc.? And as you point out, the discussion in this thread is about more than WD alone.

 

[Deleted member 178]

There are exceptional circumstances in which WD impacts system performance. But in most daily computing tasks, for most home users, it is amazingly light.

ummm...no, disable it, and you will see the gain of responsiveness in all compartment of windows.

 

[Eddie Morra]

When it comes to performance, Windows Defender is something that even a snail can compete with.

I bet the snail would win walking across a 1,000 metre room before Windows Defender can finish scanning an empty folder.

 

[shmu26]

disable it, and you will see the gain of responsiveness in all compartment of windows.

Right. That's because you will have no AV at all, which is undoubtedly the best for system performance.

 

[shmu26]

When it comes to performance, Windows Defender is something that even a snail can compete with.

I bet the snail would win walking across a 1,000 metre room before Windows Defender can finish scanning an empty folder.

So you guys don't like WD. That's okay. Use SRP, and Exploit guard where necessary.

 

[Eddie Morra]

So you guys don't like WD. That's okay. Use SRP, and Exploit guard where necessary.

I use Windows Defender on some personal systems and I like it, but the performance really needs to improve.

The user base for it would be a lot higher if the performance was improved, better documentation was provided, and it was more user-friendly for configuration. That's all. It's nothing Microsoft couldn't do if they cared enough and wanted to.

 

[shmu26]

I use Windows Defender on some personal systems and I like it, but the performance really needs to improve.

The user base for it would be a lot higher if the performance was improved, better documentation was provided, and it was more user-friendly for configuration. That's all. It's nothing Microsoft couldn't do if they cared enough and wanted to.

+1

 

[Andy Ful]

I believe you all giving to much credit to Microsoft while relying on third-parties to properly configure the Software. The fact most of the options are hidden behind Group Polity and Regedit, should be a minus in terms of user usability.

The first statement is true. The second statement is also true, but slightly off topic. When one uses ConfigureDefender or SysHardener (configurators), then those options are not hidden. Using WD + configurators is as usable as in the case of most 3rd party AVs.

On top of that we have the known performance issues, mediocre protection against 0-day and unknown malware (compared to third-parties), so I won't recommend Windows Defender to anyone until Microsoft fixes all the issues above.

True, but again slightly off topic. This thread shows, that those issues can be solved nicely by using configurators.

Most of us on MT don't even need an AV Software, and I would rather go naked than have the resource hog that is WD running in the background. As a developer it gets in my way a lot with false positives, bugs and affects my debugging performance.

True, except the general statement 'resource hog'. The problems related to WD performance and resource consumption were analyzed several times on MT, and only some users complained about it. This is the real problem on some computers and then the user usually chooses another AV. There is no evidence that WD is generally 'resource hog', even AV labs test do not support this statement.
I do not think that WD is more buggy than other AVs, but I agree that for the developer WD can affect debugging for several reasons. I usually turn off real-time protection when debugging or compiling the new versions.

I think that this thread can be useful for people, who like the below idea:
Installing 3rd party real-time security software is not necessary, when it is pretty easy to use simple configurators that work well in the home environment.
Or in other words:
Taking the medicine is not necessary, when it is pretty easy to inure the body (preventing get cold).
If one does not want to inure, then it is still OK to take the medicine.

 

[Andy Ful]

When it comes to performance, Windows Defender is something that even a snail can compete with.

I bet the snail would win walking across a 1,000 metre room before Windows Defender can finish scanning an empty folder.

The last joke would be much more fun if it was true (1 sec on my computer).
On my computer WD process consumes usually 0% CPU, it jumps to 20% for a few seconds after opening the folder with many executables. I do not make full scans so I do not feel it. I could install a lot faster AV, but for what reason? The more important for me is the system stability issues that are more common with 3rd party AVs on Windows 10.
It is true that changing 3rd party AV to WD can be painful, but this follows rather from habits. The same was visible when Microsoft introduced Windows 8. For me that was any problem, but for many users that was the reason to stay with Windows 7.
I have no problem with anyone who likes to keep his/her favorite AV. If this works, then there is no reason to change it.

 

[shmu26]

I could install a lot faster AV, but for what reason? The more important for me is the system stability issues that are more common with 3rd party AVs on Windows 10.

+1
Stability is important. Full system scans are not.

 

[Quassar]

Dunno i just changed WD to other AV and kill telemetry and other potato service by few guides and tool
and my system work a lot faster i can see it how my apps insta open... whil whith WD i had 0,5-2s time freez before open app.

Most will dont change WD becasue
1)belive in marketing bulks
2)Are totaly "gray user" stay on naked system with admin right and , instead of adapting the system to your needs, they adapt myself to the system.

 

[shmu26]

Dunno i just changed WD to other AV and kill telemetry and other potato service by few guides and tool
and my system work a lot faster i can see it how my apps insta open...

Which AV are you using now?
There are some unsigned and unknown apps that will open slow after a reboot, with WD. This is because WD doesn't totally trust them, and it checks them another time. Other AVs "learn" that the app is safe, and they remember, so the app opens fast the second time.

 

[Andy Ful]

Dunno i just changed WD to other AV and kill telemetry and other potato service by few guides and tool
and my system work a lot faster i can see it how my apps insta open... whil whith WD i had 0,5-2s time freez before open app.

Most will dont change WD becasue
1)belive in marketing bulks
2)Are totaly "gray user" stay on naked system with admin right and , instead of adapting the system to your needs, they adapt myself to the system.

You probably made a good choice if you open applications frequently and you hate any slowdown. Most users simply open the web browser and do not close it until reboot.
I think that staying with WD was a good choice for me and my family, because I totally forgot about the problems with Windows Updates and occasional system instabilities.
Fortunately, there are so many ways to the happiness.

 

[Moonhorse]

You probably made a good choice if you open applications frequently and you hate any slowdown. Most users simply open the web browser and do not close it until reboot.

And WD, wont slow down that browser at all but lacks filtering. And when im browsing web + playing light games and dont open any files at all its hard to say wich antivirus is most light for me. Its more like wich one is less annoying is the best

I have all trust on comodo firewall so the antivirus i choise to go with is probably one with minimal resource usage, using windows defender right now but probably gonna give a sophos free a go

Windows defender obviously is made to be very simple, and have minimal false positives to make it very friendly for students/enterprices they target at.

When talking about buggy, it might be most buggy free av but same time its lacking alot that 3rd party antiviruses provide

They say edge is best browser for windows aswell because its built in feature, but everyone can just install chrome and admit chrome has better performance