Microsoft Free Anti-Virus now available

If you don't have an antivirus, or you do, but its crappy, then check out the new one from MS

http://www.microsoft.com/Security_essentials/

Works on XP and up. I have been using it since beta, and I am impressed. It works well, catches more than the likes of AVG and similar, is not super resource intensive, and doesn't annoy you every 5 minutes that you didn't do some "backup" or other stupid thing that has no place in an antivirus product.

I was also a Windows OneCare user for a little while, and this is much better than that was.

Microsoft is a virus.

Rivals mock Microsoft's free security software


Personally, I think it's amazing that the operating system is so flawed that its vendor has to hand out add-on security tools.

Bah! The article states one top rival welcomed it. Since when has a rival gave props to its competition.

Im running it and I havent run any AV in ~8 years now.

Actually most exploits aren't in the OS itself, but in Microsoft and 3rd party code such as non-core libraries and applications.

If this does nothing else it might take the edge off the creation of malware, since more users may have it installed and it should address the more common attack vectors. The "big name" products are no prizes themselves, and tend to be resource gluttons.

I'll shed no tear if they are put out of business. <conspiracy theory alert> It might even result in less virus creation for hire out there. ;) </conspiracy theory alert>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

Rivals mock Microsoft's free security software


Personally, I think it's amazing that the operating system is so flawed that its vendor has to hand out add-on security tools.

---

Oh but if it was a part of the OS that did virus scanning that would be ok to you? I am sure Microsoft considered it, and then considered how they get sued everytime they try to include something in the operating system.

The ones bashing it (Symantec) make the worst antivirus product out there. It is so horrible I wouldn't put it on my computer for free. I have never seen a product try to integrate itself so bad into the OS (well maybe AOL) to make service pack updates fail, internet access go from faulty netfilter drivers, etc...

I uninstalled AVG and Windows Defender and installed this instead - so far it seems ok. I must say that AVGs resident shield (avgrsx.exe) and defenders shield (MsMpeng.exe) were a pain due to hogging CPU cycles, to the extent that I'd turned them off and just scanned occasionally. Although this offering still uses MsMpeng.exe this version doesn't seem to be obtrusive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

Oh but if it was a part of the OS that did virus scanning that would be ok to you? I am sure Microsoft considered it, and then considered how they get sued everytime they try to include something in the operating system.

---

I can understand why they would get grief from the US Dept. of Justice and E.U. Average people don't care about antiviruses, firewalls, and antispyware tools, they just want their PC to behave. When people don't have that need or worry to go out and get a product since a similar type of product is already on their PC, then this means competition is down, and hence Microsoft is being anti-competitive. It's probably the same reason why at PC World, they only give away 30 day trials of antivirus software, so after 30 days, you either choose to be with them, or look for another competitor.

This would not be such an issue if Microsoft weren't known for their Embrace, Extend, Extinguish tactics. It's the same reason why Internet Explorer has a high market share, instead of Netscape Navigator (Oh what's this? A program that allows me to go on the internet? I don't need anything else then).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

The ones bashing it (Symantec) make the worst antivirus product out there. It is so horrible I wouldn't put it on my computer for free. I have never seen a product try to integrate itself so bad into the OS (well maybe AOL) to make service pack updates fail, internet access go from faulty netfilter drivers, etc...

---

This I agree with you. I've tried Norton Antivirus many times, only to have it removed by force (manual file deletion, registry entries removal, and even in a few cases, reformatting the PC).

Minimum system specs - 1 GB of RAM ... I know thats not much these days but it seems a lot for the absolute minimum

I agree that Symantec make an awful product. I haven't seen any comments from more reputable vendors. I consider F-Secure and NOD superior to Symantec and Kaspersky (only) slightly less so.

I have Norton AntiVirus Online. I get it free with my internet package. I haven't experienced any problems whatsoever with it. I tried turning it off and on and compared the speed that some very cpu intensive graphics run at and it didn't make any difference at all and I was clocking it to the fraction of seconds. I'm using it with Vista Business. Maybe Norton has improved. I never used any of their software until just recently.

Personally I use AVG free v8.5, I know it's not perfect but I really don't need a catch-all-antivirus-because-I-don't-know-how-to-safely-browse-the-internet virus scanner. If someone has any knowledge on how to safely browse the web, you'll avoid 95&#37; of the viruses to begin with.

I used to use AVG but the last version (as people have already mentioned) is a bit of a resource hog.

I am now using Avira and it works great, it picks up more than AVG and is less obtrusive and resource hungry .

I used to have Norton and had issues with it.
I switched to F-Secure which did the job perfectly. I'm now on Kaspersky which is also running great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers

I used to use AVG but the last version (as people have already mentioned) is a bit of a resource hog.

I am now using Avira and it works great, it picks up more than AVG and is less obtrusive and resource hungry .

---

If your AV is picking up things at all, you're relying on it too much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers

I used to use AVG but the last version (as people have already mentioned) is a bit of a resource hog.

I am now using Avira and it works great, it picks up more than AVG and is less obtrusive and resource hungry .

---

AVG got the VB100 award, so maybe Avira's are false positives?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

Rivals mock Microsoft's free security software


Personally, I think it's amazing that the operating system is so flawed that its vendor has to hand out add-on security tools.

---

That is so true. They're just as flawed as car manufacturers whose products are so flawed they have to supply seatbelts with the cars - how ridiculous is that!? Surely if the cars are so safe, we don't need seatbelts.

That's rubbish and you know it.

My point exactly ;)

Originally by Juggalo Brotha

Quote:

---

If your AV is picking up things at all, you're relying on it too much.

---

I suppose i should have worded that statement better, when i first installed it after uninstalling AVG for being to slow, i noticed that it picked up on a few things that AVG missed.

The best thing about it to be honest is that i don't notice when it is scanning anywhere near as much as i did AVG.

The main reason i have any Anti Virus at all is that our main PC is also use by my partner and they are on Facebook and other sites which are probably not secure.

I personally have never had a Virus in 15 years of owning a PC, but when other people also use your PC its probably better to be safe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by penagate

That's rubbish and you know it.

---

You know when Microsoft came out and stated for Vista they planned to make the kernel more secure by not allowing ANYTHING to touch certain parts of it, and antivirus makers (like syamtec in particular) were up in arms that their software products would not have access to certain parts of the OS. Microsoft was trying to make things more secure, and these guys still wanted it to be less secure because insecurity is what drives their sales.

If Microsoft was not getting sued left and right to leave things like media players, browsers, mail clients, out of their operating system, they probably would have baked security essentials right in.

At least it is just a nice quick download that installs in under a minute.

Quote:

---

If Microsoft was not getting sued left and right to leave things like media players, browsers, mail clients, out of their operating system, they probably would have baked security essentials right in.

---

To be fair for both these cases (Media Player & Browser) they were not sued, they were fined by the European commission for restricting competition.

Then they were told they needed to stop bundling this software with the OS as it was clear that it distorted the market.

Quote:

---

these guys still wanted it to be less secure because insecurity is what drives their sales.

---

Fair comment, but which company is going to want so see it's sales decline. I bet if Car manufactures could come out tomorrow with a way to make your unstealable & unable to crash the Insurance companies would not be happy.

The whole thing is a joke. Apple bundles everything inside their OS, and not one little squeek from anyone about the fact their OS comes preinstalled with a media player, browser, mail client, instant message application, video editing, etc...

Wasn't it opera who made the biggest stink over the browser in Europe? The browser that can't get past firefox or even google chrome in usage both which came out after opera...

Quote:

---

Apple bundles everything inside their OS

---

While true it doesn't stop the fact that bundling products can harm competition.

The only reason Apple have not been brought before the commission as well is that they are not as dominant as Microsoft.

If Apple manage to become more dominant in the market (try to use your imagination here :) )then they would also get fined.

If you look at the recent action against Intel by the European commission, which is a more serious charge (in my opinion) they are not going after Microsoft just because it is Microsoft, but they are looking at Big Business and anti-competitive practises which i think generally is a good thing.

My point is it should not matter. If they tell Microsoft "you can't include this, this, this, and this" then they should also go to Apple and say the same thing.

The iPhone is the clear market dominant leader for AT&T smartphones in the united states. They include the safari browser in that. Is that anti competitive?

Also Netscape lost market share because they decided to rewrite it from scratch and took nearly as long as duke nukem.

As for the AV, I like it, quick install and silent after that, its nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedSomeAnswers

Fair comment, but which company is going to want so see it's sales decline. I bet if Car manufactures could come out tomorrow with a way to make your unstealable & unable to crash the Insurance companies would not be happy.

---

I HAD that car...or at least I thought I did, until it fell off the tow truck and struck another car.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DeanMc

and took nearly as long as duke nukem.

---

Hahaha! Nice. Props DeanMc! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jenner

Hahaha! Nice. Props DeanMc! :D

---

And here I thought that joke was lost on everyone, did you see the ZP video on it?

I understood the reference, but only from other jokes.

Could someone tell me if this thing works for Server 2003 without any SP?

It is for client versions of Windows. XP, Vista, and Win7.

Quote:

---

My point is it should not matter. If they tell Microsoft "you can't include this, this, this, and this" then they should also go to Apple and say the same thing.

The iPhone is the clear market dominant leader for AT&T smartphones in the united states. They include the safari browser in that. Is that anti competitive?

---

I agree but unfortunately i am not on the European commission... yet !!!!!