Microsoft is Sending Mixed Messages Regarding Security Essentials AV Protection

26

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Pablo54

I've used several AV programs over the years, some paid some free. Ultimately you can't protect people from themselves. I would say 90 percent of the people who read online computer/ tech articles like this one could navigate the Internet sans AV protection and be just fine- for awhile.

avatar

TsunamiZ

http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/home-user/windows-7/julaug-2013/

according to av-test.org, MSE is the worst security software

avatar

Sir Hobbes3

I don't know why people are hating on MSE so much. MSE does what it's supposed to: keep you protected. It does it with minimal hassle and works well. Most of the time people get viruses because of them going to a bad website or downloading something not legit. MSE is also a compact program compared to AVG or Avast!.

avatar

reutnes

the only mixed signals are coming from echo chamber tech blogs, MPC included! The actual microsoft statement was very clear! They're running MSE on thousands of PCs and sharing the results with other security company, to strengthen every product. There is nothing confusing about it except that the shitty HowToBlog took one sentence and blew it out of proportion.

avatar

Mikey109105

Yeah, sorry, I'm not touching MSE with a five foot pole. I've used AVG Free for a few years and haven't once been disappointed.

avatar

PCWolf

Not using AV software when surfing the web is like not using a condom when fornicating with a Bangkok Hooker. But as always, choosing the condom that's right for you is not always clear cut. Some AV software can make your PC feel like it's running slow & sluggish. In some cases, AV can prevent legit software from installing properly, such as Video Drivers, but lets Malware in. & this is the AV we would all like to avoid. But honestly, I can't trust anything coming out of Redmond these days.

avatar

Damnlogin

Sandboxie

avatar

Morete

Sandboxie + Virtual Machine + Shadow Defender + Tor Project = protection and privacy.

avatar

dgrmouse

The need for strong virus protection is evidence of MS failing to create a strong computing environment. User-level security isn't enough - any useful account on a system is going to have valuable user-data that needs to be protected. We need proper app-level security and robust virtualization. Instead, Microsoft is going the other way and making the OS less secure so that they can inundate their own apps (Minesweeper, for example) with tracking advertisements and other security holes. And for all their blustering, the competition is even worse.

avatar

JMK60

Meh, they probably say things like that to downplay their own product to help avoid another antitrust lawsuit. This way if the get accused, they can point to those types of comments and say "See, we support the use of third party software". So dont worry McAffe and Norton.....There's still plenty of newbies out there you can rely on. Worry more about the incursion of the "Phone and Tablet boy" (ad nauseam) out there, thereby the declining use of the PC.

avatar

John Pombrio

Good point. I had not considered the bundled protection as anti-competitive but makes sense.

avatar

definingsound

Of course Microsoft Security Essentials is a baseline. It's free, so any other less-effective AV solution will exit the market due to zero sales. This is a result of a near-monopolistic grip on the OS market, and any free bundled solution in Windows will (indeed, must) become the baseline. Stewart's comment is bang-on accurate.

Maximum PC should know not to parrot other news sources, Maximum PC is itself the source of testing and no BS, is it not? This article should have stayed at How-To Geek.

avatar

j_j_montez

Microsoft is just responding to the tests that were circulated a while ago, where they just right underneath the line of "passing" by some random group in Germany. I've been using MSE for years, after leaving AVG because they got too fat. Any of the major Anti-virus programs are better than nothing, but I prefer MSE for myself and my clients because it never bugs them with offers or reminders while doing a decent job of scanning USB drives when they're plugged in, and doing low-resource intensive scans. Recently, I had a client who couldn't get online, wired nor wireless. After checking the drivers, settings, and even testing an external USB wifi card, I uninstalled Norton, and everything worked just fine. You can have absolute protection, but usually at a financial and convenience cost. I think it is better for careless people to get infected, pay for a repair and learn a lesson. For those who never learn, technicians services will always be available.

As a side note, my complete anti-virus program is MSE, an ad-blocker, WOT, and Malwarebytes for occasional deep scans.

avatar

froggz

Using MSE is the equivalent of wearing a bullet proof vest to a gun fight. It will protect you, but don't get too cocky cause you can still get shot in the face. But it's still better than nothing.

avatar

BadCommand

MSE's Webpage tagline

"We keep petty thieves out of your home, definitely. Kidnappers, yes sometimes. Murderers, not so much. Sleep well!"

avatar

MiGreen

He said, she said, you said. Seems like people don't believe maximum pc posts as much as they once did. Bias will out.

avatar

LatiosXT

I think this mindset comes from something Microsoft said a while back about MSE that "some protection is better than no protection".

avatar

kolt

MSE is the best from all my testing. It may not be able to remove the virus on its own but it will deffo tell you where it is. I'd like for microsoft to keep MSE low key. It uses little to no resources, lightweight, & easy to use. Otherwise they'll turn into Avast or AVG and make it use 2GB of memory and 49 seperate dedicated processes. That honestly gets really annoying for low resource systems. Anti-virus should never use anything over 100mb of memory, imo. Security Essentials on my laptop right now is using 47MB which is awesome. AVG and avast use around 160MB+ after you add up all the processes and constant 4-7CPU. I work at a computer repair store and honestly I've had computers with every anti-virus you can think of come in infected. This includes stuff like Norton, AVG, Avast, Avira, MSE, Panda, McAfee, etc.

avatar

DogPatch1149

As a comparison, my laptop* runs Avast 8 Free (UI and service) at the following memory/CPU levels:

Idle (realtime only): 9-11MB, <1% CPU
Interface open (realtime, no scans in progress): 17-20MB/<1% CPU
Interface open (realtime, quick scan): 15-120MB, <1 - 10% average CPU with momentary spikes up to ~25%
Interface open (realtime, full scan): 15-120MB, <1 - 10% average CPU with momentary spikes up to ~25%

* Dell Inspiron 17R (Core i5-2430M, Intel HD3000 graphics, 8GB RAM, 600GB HD, Win 7 Ultimate SP1)

As always, YMMV...just giving another person's experience with Avast as a comparison.

avatar

JosephColt

It really comes down to the users preference with anti-virus.

The only true form of security is common sense, 95% of the time it's the users fault for getting malware on their system.

What do we live in, early 2000? - 160MB+ of system memory is nothing.

You will always get infected computers, but you should be thankful as it gives you business.

avatar

tweeve

Well it might be slow on scan speeds, but it survived the college network when I was at college without any issues. It never allowed any viruses into my system, and found a few that I accidentally downloaded.

avatar

MaximumMike

double post

avatar

misterz100

From what I understood from that, and I don't know if anybody got this, is they say they are at the bottom because they are NOT there to compete with other products, they are there to just protect your PC and not try to compete.

avatar

MaximumMike

Yea, but in this case "compete" and "protect your PC" are synonymous.

avatar

reutnes

For the past decade windows has had the stigma of being virus-laden simply by the virtue of it being windows. It is in microsoft's best interest to not carry that and I feel they've been doing a good job with that since releasing MSE. Almost every major virus lately is being blamed on third party software while windows itself is relatively safe.

avatar

misterz100

Not really, you can have the best protection ever and the interface be extremly simple and bland and still not be top.
As reviwers they look at interface, customization features, etc