Woody79_00
join:2004-07-08
united state
| Why does Windows Defender Get such a Bad Rep?
I see everyone says "Oh Windows Defender sucks" or it failed this test of that test...windows Defender is a good app if configured correctly.
It finds some of the most prevalent spyware(don't be fooled by corrupt testing sponsored by such companies as symantec, webroot and others) Windows Defnder is not that bad
you need to make "One" change to its default settings and it is an excellent product...better than webroot, counterspy, and amny others
Join Micrsoft Spynet with "Advanced Membership" as shown in this screenshot
With this you get "Full blown" HIPS Protection...for these things
the default settings(Spynet Basic Membership) ignores most of these by default so the "Average Joe User" who is not a computer guru is not overwhelmed with pop-ups, yet Windows Defender handles what it knows to be good or bad
with the "Advanced Spynet" Membership...you get full blown control over these things, and what is more is...if more people join with the "Advanced Membership" anything you classify as "Bad" will get sent to Micrsoft and added to the Definition Database, thus we all can take our part in "Greatly Improving" Windows Defender.
some people have concerns that it spys on you, that really isn't true...all it wants to know is why you classfied the particular thing as bad, and they analyze it to ensure if it is mlaware or not...Have you ever submitted malware to a av companies? well this is no different..just Windows Defender does it in the background for you which = "less hassle for users"
overall i feel Windows Defender has gotten a bad rap, ...Micrsoft offers it for "free"..gives users 3 free support incidents for it...it provides a nice "Additional Layer" of security for nothing....just joining spynet as an "Advanced Membership" will reap huge rewards for the user as it allows Windows Defender to "Stop" most unknown spyware and trojan threats that try to install themselves without the users knowledge
Anyway, i guess the whole point of this post is Windows Defender is a nice free software app that just needs a little configuring to a very fine job. Its light on system resources, and makes a fine part in system layer security for a user.
I use Superantispyware, Windows Defender, Trend Micro, A2 and a few others...they all have their place...heck Windows Defender even runs fine side-by-side with Winpatrol...you can never have enough HIPS Protection..no one hips app can catch everything..why not take advantage of something that is free is what i am asking.
comments suggestions, etc are most welcome |
|
HA Nut
Premium
join:2004-05-13
USA
| I agree that Defender is pretty decent as a real-time scanner. But as a cleanup tool, I just don't have warm feelings for it.
You're right that testers often have their own agendas, but I have yet to see any results from anyone that says Defender does a good job at cleaning up after a mess that already exists. This is quite unlike a program like SUPERAntiSpyware, which has lots of nice testimonials.
One thing you already showed in your photos that I would like to reinforce is to make sure the "Software that has not yet been classified for risks" box is checked. This really helps make Defender even better by warning the user about unrecognized changes made to the system. |
|
Indy Sabre
Sabre Rider From Indianapolis
join:2003-10-02 | reply to Woody79_00
Nice info.
Fairly sure the older version allowed realtime protection without having to join spynet though. |
|
InfinityAz
join:2005-09-07
Peoria, AZ | reply to Woody79_00
Check out latest tests at PCWorld:
»www.pcworld.com/article/id,13620···cle.html |
|
no go
@Level3.net | reply to Woody79_00
The reason I don't like WD, and am not running it now, is because last time I tried it I needed to have automatic updates turned on in window. I don't like having wu turned on, I do manual updates only. So a no go for me. |
|
MagMan
Life is simpler when you tell the truth.
Premium
join:2003-10-01
Westlake, OH
 ·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T Midwest
| said by no go :
The reason I don't like WD, and am not running it now, is because last time I tried it I needed to have automatic updates turned on in window. I don't like having wu turned on, I do manual updates only. So a no go for me.
Here is how you get manual updates for WD without auto updates turned on. 
»www.microsoft.com/security/portal/
On the right side of the page that says latest definition updates.
--
"The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is." |
|
balloonshark
Lets Go Mountaineers
join:2006-08-11
WV
| reply to Woody79_00
WD worked fine for me with Avast and I also used it with WinPatrol. Scotty is good at those pesky startup entries. The only other viable alternative for free is Spyware Terminator and I just haven't warmed up to it yet.
With WD, I didn't join the Spynet, (maybe they should change the name Lol) but tweaked the program a little. If you use WD, I would advise using other good and free on-demand scanners regularly. SuperAntiSpyware, A-squared and AVG are all good. Even better, run your browser in Sandboxie and scan only occasionally.
Cheers
--
If we quit voting, will they all just go away? |
|
Just Bob
Premium
join:2000-08-13
Spring Hill, FL
| reply to Woody79_00
I don't think Joe will mind if I post this here:
From: "Joe Faulhaber[MSFT]"
microsoft.private.security.spyware.general:50227
Hi all,
Heuristic detections are NOT a function of SpyNet membership - these
detections are governed by their own checkbox in Tools->Options only.
Detections by heuristics are displayed as threats, not unknowns. I can see
your point, it gets confusing as to what's going on with the language used,
however.
There is a single interlock between SpyNet membership and functionality -
the notification for software not classified for risks is turned on when you
join Advanced SpyNet, but you can turn this checkbox off and remain in
Advanced SpyNet.
Advanced SpyNet membership is pretty much just like Bill says - there's a
bunch of legal text in there, but some of the highlights of the additional
information sent to SpyNet for Advanced users is data on what IP
addresses/ports a process connects to, which modules an exe loads or which
exes load a DLL, and data on potential rootkits. SpyNet focuses on
exectuable files and applications, not on you or your data.
Hope this helps,
Joe |
|
HA Nut
Premium
join:2004-05-13
USA
| reply to MagMan
said by MagMan  :Here is how you get manual updates for WD without auto updates turned on. » www.microsoft.com/security/portal/On the right side of the page that says latest definition updates. Thanks for the link. Handy!  |
|
Mercurybird
Premium
join:2004-06-24
Hooks, TX
 ·Allegiance Communi..
·CableOne
| reply to Woody79_00
I'll give you my experience with it.
I'm a paid Windows OneCare user. Well I WAS. Windows Defender is included in that package. So my experience with it for over a year is valid for either and both.
I used to wonder why it never popped up and found anything, why it never blocked anything. I run a pretty locked down system with all the usual whistles and bells. I am a poster child for practicing safe hex.
OneCare always maintained a green status of everything good to go. But the strangest thing happened- when I would run an occasional scan with A-Squared OneCare never said a word. One day A-Squared was running and finding the usual cookies and such, and I noticed that every time A-Squared would find something, OneCare would pop up and say it found the same thing about a second later. That went on with everything that A-Squared found.
Now granted that wasn't a lot of things. But it seems that OneCare can't find anything on its own. And I decided that there was enough doubt in that program that I couldn't afford to trust it. So I dumped it. I installed Comodo BoClean in its place, along with Avast.
--
You're an American. You get a free pass, but nobody rides for free. |
|
sjoeii
Premium
join:2007-08-07 | reply to Woody79_00
it si a ok scanner not a good one. Also it is bloathing other security apps
--
Kaspersky Labs Fan Club Project Manager
forum.kasperskyclub.com |
|
JTM1051
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-08
Moorpark, CA
| reply to no go
said by no go :
The reason I don't like WD, and am not running it now, is because last time I tried it I needed to have automatic updates turned on in window. I don't like having wu turned on, I do manual updates only. So a no go for me. When I was using WD on home PC got WD updates without WU on auto from WD's Help "Check for Updates".
Right now only have WD on office PC which is on 24/7 and WU set to notify only. I have WD Options set to do Daily Scans @ 2:00 AM and to "Check for updated definitions before scanning"; hence its always updated. |
|
jouno53
Palin 2012
join:2006-03-04
United State | reply to Woody79_00
I love Windows Defender. It's fast, doesn't bog anything down, and has awesome Real Time protection. It's a set and forget... what's wrong with that?
I hate when people bash things for no reason. It's really, really immature. |
|
AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA
| said by jouno53 :I love Windows Defender. . . . . . I hate when people bash things for no reason. It's really, really immature. Could you point out please where anyone posting in this thread is bashing Windows Defender for no reason? Or for a reason, for that matter. Thanks.
I just read through the posts and don't see any bashing-- except for you bashing bashers, that is. |
|
StraitShoot
Who Loves Ya Baby? - Theo Kojak
Premium
join:2003-02-08
Clinton, MA | Can I "Bash" The "Bash Basher"?...LOL |
|
jouno53
Palin 2012
join:2006-03-04
United State | reply to AB
I didn't specify that people were bashing in this thread. I just said "I hate when people bash things for no reason." That doesn't pertain to this thread at all, it's a generality. I see people bash defender all the time in anti-spyware threads. |
|
AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA
| said by jouno53 :I didn't specify that people were bashing in this thread. I just said "I hate when people bash things for no reason." That doesn't pertain to this thread at all, it's a generality. I see people bash defender all the time in anti-spyware threads. When you're the 1200 lb. gorilla, you and your products are going to get bashed a little-- sometimes for good reason, sometimes not. Just the way it is.
It gets a little out of hand occasionally, I'll grant you. Been guilty myself a time or two.
said by StraitShoot :Can I "Bash" The "Bash Basher"?...LOL Depends on how bashful you're feeling today, I guess.
But if you do-- please don't hold back.
There's nothing worse than a perfectly good rant or bash that loses all steam right in the middle.   |
|
JTM1051
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-08
Moorpark, CA
| said by AB :... Depends on how bashful you're feeling today, I guess. ... If he truly is bashful, doubt if he would bash the basher ... would he? |
|
jouno53
Palin 2012
join:2006-03-04
United State | If he did, I would bash the bashful bash basher.  |
|
AB
Premium
join:2006-04-04
Leesburg, VA
| reply to JTM1051
said by JTM1051 :said by AB :... Depends on how bashful you're feeling today, I guess. ... If he truly is bashful, doubt if he would bash the basher ... would he? I meant 'full of bash'. "Bash-full". (Mye englesh iz knott so goode sumtymes.)
He could bash those who would bash the bashers. If he weren't bashful, that is. Or maybe if he were. Bash full, that is.
(*O.T.-- Anybody know what the sound of one hand clapping is? TIA!) |
|
