Still no hack to uninstall Defender?

remm said:

pparks1 said:

remm said:

Gee, please list for me "all of these extra pointless crappy features that [I] have absolutely no need for" ... I am waiting with bated breath for YOU to tell ME what my needs are.

I'm sorry, I must have misunderstood what you said in your previous posts. I based my comments on these quotes which led me to believe that you feel the MS solutions are substandard.

MS programs for AV and AS are substandard. Third party programs rate higher in the vast majority of independent tests. And what you quoted over and over, was the same gripe about just this point. Defender should have been uninstallable, but MS wants to force the public to use it. It's an anti-consumer, pro-MS principle MS works off of... but that's nothing new. They've always tried to push inferior programs on people over better third party alternatives.

That's why I say, they should stick to OSs.

I see your point here as well. However the average computer user would like to have some protection installed on their machine out of the box without having to worry about subscriptions and what not. It is easier for us to disable something than it is for them to find protection for their machine.

antharr said:

I kinda see where he is coming from but I don't see where all the animosity is coming from because of only 20MB of HD space.

I can see that. It's the principle of it. And it's a disrespect for MS that MS itself has earned from over 20 years of putting profit ahead of what's best for the consumer, imho.

I am not showing loyalty to Microsoft in any way shape or form. I think all of the prominent OS's out there have their +'s and -'s. I use them all and enjoy digging and finding what I like and dislike about each one.

Agreed. And Apple with their propriety control is no better than MS. Open source is the way to go, if you happen to be able to use it.

One being the Windows Defender issue but man that's a really small dislike to get so worked up about.

It is the latest irksome thing MS has done. Far from the only irksome thing. That makes it more irritating than if it happened in a bubble.

I guess what I am trying to say is that there are always gonna be dislikes in every OS. There is no such thing as a perfect OS.

No. But this isn't even a gripe about the OS... as I have said in other threads, I like the OS. This is a gripe about a function commonly served by third party software, that MS tried to tie to their inferior program. It is precisely because Defender is not a necessary part of the OS that it should not have been integrated. The only purpose integration serves is to thwart market competition. Again, putting the dollar ahead of what's best for the consumer. They could have included Defender in the normal fashion, having it pre-installed and pre-activated, then let people uninstall it the normal way, should they opt for another, more highly rated program that does a better job.

[/QUOTE]
I guess what I am trying to say is that there are always gonna be dislikes in every OS. There is no such thing as a perfect OS.[/QUOTE]No. But this isn't even a gripe about the OS... as I have said in other threads, I like the OS. This is a gripe about a function commonly served by third party software, that MS tried to tie to their inferior program. It is precisely because Defender is not a necessary part of the OS that it should not have been integrated. The only purpose integration serves is to thwart market competition. Again, putting the dollar ahead of what's best for the consumer. They could have included Defender in the normal fashion, having it pre-installed and pre-activated, then let people uninstall it the normal way, should they opt for another, more highly rated program that does a better job.[/QUOTE]

Agreed. I have to say that it is indeed an inferior product or we wouldn't be trying to uninstall it in the first place. I would like to see them maybe give recommendations for other 3rd software on install rather than integrating Defender into the OS.

[QUOTE=pparks1;608575]

My request would be to sit down and retool the entire security aspect of the system overall. Implement changes to more or less eliminate the need for all of these 3rd party tools...prevent the machines from being infected in the first place. That would be a really great step in the right direction.

It has been the MS way, since the days of Windows 3x, to release product -- whether OSs or programs -- as fast as possible at the expense of the code. MS products have a reputation for being buggy, loophole-filled and unsecure, more so than other vendors. The company policy seems to be more concerned about getting ANYTHING out, than waiting until it's ready. The longer programmers sit toiling away at code, the more it costs. A product does not start making money until its release. And the public always ends up being the "beta testers." And that hasn't changed, but was really highlighted in a big way with VISTA.

So good luck on that wish list you have there! Like the bumper sticker says, "I feel much better since I have up all hope." The only thing I want is the ability to uninstall their tack-on programs!! :)

[QUOTE=remm;608607]

pparks1 said:

My request would be to sit down and retool the entire security aspect of the system overall. Implement changes to more or less eliminate the need for all of these 3rd party tools...prevent the machines from being infected in the first place. That would be a really great step in the right direction.

It has been the MS way, since the days of Windows 3x, to release product -- whether OSs or programs -- as fast as possible at the expense of the code. MS products have a reputation for being buggy, loophole-filled and unsecure, more so than other vendors. The company policy seems to be more concerned about getting ANYTHING out, than waiting until it's ready. The longer programmers sit toiling away at code, the more it costs. A product does not start making money until its release. And the public always ends up being the "beta testers." And that hasn't changed, but was really highlighted in a big way with VISTA.

So good luck on that wish list you have there! Like the bumper sticker says, "I feel much better since I have up all hope." The only thing I want is the ability to uninstall their tack-on programs!! :)

I cannot disagree.

Vista was a mess at launch. I am putting all the driver issues aside and concentrating on just the OS itself. It was a buggy and got better with tweaking and the release of SP's. I don't think anyone can deny the fact that 7 is the finished product of the beta that is Vista.

If you want to HACK the system just go to Program Files/Windows Defender and delete the folder. It looks like all the DLL's are there. I won't do it but what the hell it is a HACK. Just backup your system first.

Jim

remm said:

Yeah, I know. It's "integrated into the system" and "turning it off is good enough." Maybe for some. Why should I take up my hard disk space, storing crappy Windows programs just because MS wants to foist their trash on people? What are they going to "integrate" next that we can't get rid of, and how much space will it take up? This is a non-consumer-friendly road to head down.

I find it hard to believe Defender is "integrated" into the system in a way that makes it impossible to uninstall. It is a module and as such must have key components that can be removed. And when the services are disabled, there should be no calls to it.

Anyone know of a way to uninstall it yet?

1. They are trying to protect people by default. Microsoft didn't make Windows Defender.
2. With that mentality maybe you should switch to Mac?