Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="RoboMan" data-source="post: 828794" data-attributes="member: 53544">As <a href="https://news.softpedia.com/news/microsoft-s-windows-defender-is-now-one-of-the-best-antivirus-apps-in-the-world-526882.shtml" target="_blank">Softpedia reports</a>, the independent IT security institute AV-TEST spent May and June <a href="https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/" target="_blank">continuously evaluating 20 home user security products</a> using their default settings to see which offered the best protection. Only four of those products achieved a top score, and one of them was Windows Defender.The other three are <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/review/362176/f-secure-safe" target="_blank">F-Secure SAFE 17</a>, <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/review/325541/kaspersky-internet-security" target="_blank">Kaspersky Internet Security 19.0</a>, and <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/review/327977/symantec-norton-security-deluxe" target="_blank">Norton Security 22.17</a>. The big difference between these and Windows Defender is the fact Microsoft includes Windows Defender for free with <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/review/336416/microsoft-windows-10" target="_blank">Windows 10</a>, where as the others require a paid subscription to continue being fully-functional.[ATTACH=full]219442[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]219443[/ATTACH]According to this &quot;professional test&quot;, Windows Defender was tested under &quot;307 zero-day malware files, and 2428 ordinary malware files&quot;... detecting, apparently... 100% of it. I mean, every single zero-day malware file and the rest... lol.Opinions?READ FULL ARTICLE: <a href="https://www.pcmag.com/news/369979/windows-defender-achieves-best-antivirus-status" target="_blank">Windows Defender Achieves &#039;Best Antivirus&#039; Status</a></blockquote>

[QUOTE="RoboMan, post: 828794, member: 53544"] [I]As [URL='https://news.softpedia.com/news/microsoft-s-windows-defender-is-now-one-of-the-best-antivirus-apps-in-the-world-526882.shtml']Softpedia reports[/URL], the independent IT security institute AV-TEST spent May and June [URL='https://www.av-test.org/en/antivirus/home-windows/']continuously evaluating 20 home user security products[/URL] using their default settings to see which offered the best protection. Only four of those products achieved a top score, and one of them was Windows Defender. The other three are [URL='https://www.pcmag.com/review/362176/f-secure-safe']F-Secure SAFE 17[/URL], [URL='https://www.pcmag.com/review/325541/kaspersky-internet-security']Kaspersky Internet Security 19.0[/URL], and [URL='https://www.pcmag.com/review/327977/symantec-norton-security-deluxe']Norton Security 22.17[/URL]. The big difference between these and Windows Defender is the fact Microsoft includes Windows Defender for free with [URL='https://www.pcmag.com/review/336416/microsoft-windows-10']Windows 10[/URL], where as the others require a paid subscription to continue being fully-functional.[/I] [ATTACH type="full" width="494px"]219442[/ATTACH][ATTACH type="full" width="414px"]219443[/ATTACH] According to this "professional test", Windows Defender was tested under "307 zero-day malware files, and 2428 ordinary malware files"... detecting, apparently... 100% of it. I mean, every single zero-day malware file and the rest... lol. Opinions? [B]READ FULL ARTICLE[/B]: [URL="https://www.pcmag.com/news/369979/windows-defender-achieves-best-antivirus-status"]Windows Defender Achieves 'Best Antivirus' Status[/URL] [/QUOTE]

Verification