So many still don't know about MS Security Essentials

[IggyAZ]

After Microsoft Security Essentials been out for FREE for a few months it surprises me how many don't know about this great tool.
I think many who have used it and tested it have decided that it is a good package in fighting off the foe.

I know that many will jump in here and tell me how they like all the rest and that is OK. I do know that no one software package will keep you totally free from those gremlins. Like others have said here just using a little common sense on where you go will dramatically reduce your chances of getting a trojan, virus or the flu.

Anyway I just wanted to keep MS Security Essentials on everyones try list.
I think you will like it.

Here is the Microsoft link if you decide to try.
http://www.microsoft.com/Security_Essentials/

and it is easy to install and uninstall not like the other big boy packages that like to hide stuff around.


FAQ

Q: How is this different from Windows Defender?
A: Windows Defender detects and removes known spyware only. It is not designed to protect against the full breadth of malicious software, and specifically does not prevent viruses, worms, Trojans, and other malicious software from infecting your machine. The new no-cost solution will be a comprehensive anti-malware solution.

Q: Is Microsoft Security Essentials designed to replace Windows Defender?
A: No but if you are running Microsoft Security Essentials, you do not need to run Windows Defender. Microsoft Security Essentials is designed to disable Windows Defender in order to manage the PC’s real-time protection, including anti-virus, rootkits, Trojans and spyware.

Q: Does installing Microsoft Security Essentials disable Windows Defender
A: Microsoft Security Essentials should disable Windows Defender on Vista and Windows 7 and uninstall it from XP. In some cases, this does not happen automatically.
Q: Do I need to manually disable or uninstall Windows Defender if I am using Microsoft Security Essentials?
A: If Microsoft Security Essentials did not automatically disable Windows Defender on Vista or Windows 7, you should disable it to prevent conflicts. Windows Defender cannot be uninstalled from Vista or Windows 7.
If Microsoft Security Essentials did not automatically uninstall Windows Defender on XP, you should manually uninstall Windows Defender via Control Panel/Add or Remove Programs.

Q: What happens if I do not disable or uninstall Windows Defender if I am using Microsoft Security Essentials?
A: If Microsoft Security Essentials and Windows Defender are both running, your system may experience performance degradation and other problems caused by the conflict of two services providing real time protection simultaneously.

 

[madtownidiot]

I've decided to install it on all the computers I refurbish for resale. After testing it for about a month on several computers, it seems to work pretty well

 

[JonM33]

After Microsoft Security Essentials been out for FREE for a few months it surprises me how many don't know about this great tool.
I think many who have used it and tested it have decided that it is a good package in fighting off the foe.

I know that many will jump in here and tell me how they like all the rest and that is OK. I do know that no one software package will keep you totally free from those gremlins. Like others have said here just using a little common sense on where you go will dramatically reduce your chances of getting a trojan, virus or the flu.

Anyway I just wanted to keep MS Security Essentials on everyones try list.
I think you will like it.

Here is the Microsoft link if you decide to try.
http://www.microsoft.com/Security_Essentials/

and it is easy to install and uninstall not like the other big boy packages that like to hide stuff around.


FAQ

Q: How is this different from Windows Defender?
A: Windows Defender detects and removes known spyware only. It is not designed to protect against the full breadth of malicious software, and specifically does not prevent viruses, worms, Trojans, and other malicious software from infecting your machine. The new no-cost solution will be a comprehensive anti-malware solution.

Q: Is Microsoft Security Essentials designed to replace Windows Defender?
A: No but if you are running Microsoft Security Essentials, you do not need to run Windows Defender. Microsoft Security Essentials is designed to disable Windows Defender in order to manage the PC’s real-time protection, including anti-virus, rootkits, Trojans and spyware.

Q: Does installing Microsoft Security Essentials disable Windows Defender
A: Microsoft Security Essentials should disable Windows Defender on Vista and Windows 7 and uninstall it from XP. In some cases, this does not happen automatically.
Q: Do I need to manually disable or uninstall Windows Defender if I am using Microsoft Security Essentials?
A: If Microsoft Security Essentials did not automatically disable Windows Defender on Vista or Windows 7, you should disable it to prevent conflicts. Windows Defender cannot be uninstalled from Vista or Windows 7.
If Microsoft Security Essentials did not automatically uninstall Windows Defender on XP, you should manually uninstall Windows Defender via Control Panel/Add or Remove Programs.

Q: What happens if I do not disable or uninstall Windows Defender if I am using Microsoft Security Essentials?
A: If Microsoft Security Essentials and Windows Defender are both running, your system may experience performance degradation and other problems caused by the conflict of two services providing real time protection simultaneously.

The reason why is because they have Norton and McAfee shoved down their throats from OEMs like Dell, HP, etc who put that on there by default.

The negative is that they are paying for something that could be free but the key is that at least they have some sort of AV protection.

 

[malexous]

The last test by av-comparatives shows that while MSE has a decent heuristic detection, it's signature based detections aren't as good.

There is no reason not to use MSE. There is also no reason not to use Norton, Avast!, BitDefender, etc. It's all down to preference, although some can't comprehend this.

 

[JonM33]

The last test by av-comparatives shows that while MSE has a decent heuristic detection, it's signature based detections aren't as good.

AV-Comparatives is a fraud. There's no reason to use them as a resource.

 

[malexous]

Why are they a fraud? Are there any links that back that statement up? As far as I know they are one of the most trusted av testing sites around. I could be wrong, though. Am I?

 

[XboxOmac]

All I know is who can protect better Windows? Third-parties, or Microsoft? Particularly, I'm on Microsoft's side on this one.

 

[whs]

I am holding my breath and wait for the Nortons, McAfees and alike to go to court - especially in the EU. If MSE gets a dominent position (which it does not have yet), they could be vulnerable. After all, it cuts the feet from under those that want to make money with security programs.

 

[madtownidiot]

If Microsoft could build a secure OS, companies like McAfee and Symantec wouldn't exist in the first place. Hopefully the code for MSE isn't written by the same people who devoloped the OS

 

[XboxOmac]

If Microsoft could build a secure OS, companies like McAfee and Symantec wouldn't exist in the first place. Hopefully the code for MSE isn't written by the same people who devoloped the OS

Microsoft is divided into different things. MSE was made by the Microsoft Security Team. They're different jobs and sections in Microsoft.

 

[Tarka Dal]

The last test by av-comparatives shows that while MSE has a decent heuristic detection, it's signature based detections aren't as good.

AV-Comparatives is a fraud. There's no reason to use them as a resource.

Totally agree!
It's funded by a certain AV company!

 

[Tarka Dal]

I am holding my breath and wait for the Nortons, McAfees and alike to go to court - especially in the EU. If MSE gets a dominent position (which it does not have yet), they could be vulnerable. After all, it cuts the feet from under those that want to make money with security programs.

If Microsoft could build a secure OS, companies like McAfee and Symantec wouldn't exist in the first place. Hopefully the code for MSE isn't written by the same people who devoloped the OS

If Microsoft could build a secure OS, companies like McAfee and Symantec wouldn't exist in the first place. Hopefully the code for MSE isn't written by the same people who devoloped the OS

Microsoft is divided into different things. MSE was made by the Microsoft Security Team. They're different jobs and sections in Microsoft.

#


All I know is these companies fair badly in the AV world! It would not be so bad if they had excellent AV techniques. This is probably why Microsoft came out with it's own AV. To do the work that others should be doing!

 

[Jacee]

There is no such thing as a "secure" OS.

 

[madtownidiot]

There is no such thing as a "secure" OS.

When's the last time you heard of a linux machine that was infected with spyware?

 

[Frostmourne]

There is no such thing as a "secure" OS.

When's the last time you heard of a linux machine that was infected with spyware?

Any linux machine can have dormant spyware, especially if the user decides to visit random websites. Just because its inactive doesn't mean its not there. Microsoft should bundle MSE into Windows, along with a PDF reader. The OS should have functionality out of the box.

 

[pparks1]

Microsoft is divided into different things. MSE was made by the Microsoft Security Team. They're different jobs and sections in Microsoft.

No doubt thought that the teams work together when they release an OS. On the flipside...if MS tries to secure something and tighten down security..people just want to turn it off and make it the way that it used to be. It's a real conundrum.

Microsoft should bundle MSE into Windows, along with a PDF reader. The OS should have functionality out of the box.

Bundling things within the OS is what gets them into trouble. Personally, I would rather not have these things bundled...but instead have an option of what tools I install for these functions.

 

[Frostmourne]

Microsoft is divided into different things. MSE was made by the Microsoft Security Team. They're different jobs and sections in Microsoft.

No doubt thought that the teams work together when they release an OS. On the flipside...if MS tries to secure something and tighten down security..people just want to turn it off and make it the way that it used to be. It's a real conundrum.

Microsoft should bundle MSE into Windows, along with a PDF reader. The OS should have functionality out of the box.

Bundling things within the OS is what gets them into trouble. Personally, I would rather not have these things bundled...but instead have an option of what tools I install for these functions.

For PDF's you have the bloated Adobe or Foxit or Sumatra - so where is Microsoft?

 

[pparks1]

But why would MS put time and effort into building a PDF reader? it's a simple file format and it's supposed to be universal. With that said, I agree about Adobe being bloated and hence the reason that I use FoxIt. But I don't really feel that I wish I had lots of other options since the PDF viewer does nothing more than show me the PDF.

 

[madtownidiot]

Word 2010 will be be able to read, edit and create PDF files.

 

[lsufrontier]

Can the Word 2010 Beta read PDF files?