Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="509322" data-source="post: 778146">It&#039;s not going to stop any ongoing debate because it has been proven over time - across decades - that people are better off with 3rd party security over Windows security. That was true 20 years ago and it is certainly true today despite all the &quot;improvements&quot; to Windows security.I have no vested interest whatsoever in what people use as an AV. I have always maintained that people should use what they like. But there is a central issue here... and that is Microsoft. My complaint is centered around Microsoft making Windows and its security for the IT Pro at the E5 level and passing it down to Home versions as a mere afterthought. Now, if anyone is paying attention, Microsoft&#039;s screw-ups are just absolutely fantastic for 3rd party business. My stance is pro-user and not pro-3rd party. The more that Microsoft keeps failing, the more money that the 3rd-party AV industry stands to make. Instead, I am promoting what is the best for home users that have no inclination to install, let alone buy, a 3rd-party security soft. So I find it curious that people on this forum continually bash my pro-user stance.&nbsp; The fact of the matter is that 3rd party vendors just do a better job. Plain and simple. Not to mention that Microsoft does a lot of underhanded stuff, whether they mean to do it by intent or not doesn&#039;t matter.Ever wondered why Microsoft has not fixed the 5+ year WD GUI, exclusion and other bugs ? It&#039;s not as if they cannot do it... and they are certainly aware of it as it has been a resounding complaint for years. It&#039;s a fascinating woven tale that people should research but the bottom line is that Microsoft is no one&#039;s friend.Everybody has the right to use whatever they wish and to get themselves infected. I can tell you this... smashing fully tweaked Windows Defender is trivial.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="509322, post: 778146"] It's not going to stop any ongoing debate because it has been proven over time - across decades - that people are better off with 3rd party security over Windows security. That was true 20 years ago and it is certainly true today despite all the "improvements" to Windows security. I have no vested interest whatsoever in what people use as an AV. I have always maintained that people should use what they like. But there is a central issue here... and that is Microsoft. My complaint is centered around Microsoft making Windows and its security for the IT Pro at the E5 level and passing it down to Home versions as a mere afterthought. Now, if anyone is paying attention, Microsoft's screw-ups are just absolutely fantastic for 3rd party business. My stance is pro-user and not pro-3rd party. The more that Microsoft keeps failing, the more money that the 3rd-party AV industry stands to make. Instead, I am promoting what is the best for home users that have no inclination to install, let alone buy, a 3rd-party security soft. So I find it curious that people on this forum continually bash my pro-user stance. The fact of the matter is that 3rd party vendors just do a better job. Plain and simple. Not to mention that Microsoft does a lot of underhanded stuff, whether they mean to do it by intent or not doesn't matter. Ever wondered why Microsoft has not fixed the 5+ year WD GUI, exclusion and other bugs ? It's not as if they cannot do it... and they are certainly aware of it as it has been a resounding complaint for years. It's a fascinating woven tale that people should research but the bottom line is that Microsoft is no one's friend. Everybody has the right to use whatever they wish and to get themselves infected. I can tell you this... smashing fully tweaked Windows Defender is trivial. [/QUOTE]

Verification