3 ms·

How does Defender compare against other antivirus options? Perhaps it's the least bad? Obviously running more software will have a performance hit over not ru

How does Defender compare against other antivirus options? Perhaps it's the least bad? Obviously running more software will have a performance hit over not running software. Especially when it almost requires constantly inspecting the system.

basch 7y ago
From a performance impact standpoint, based on just one test suite, it is the worst on the market. https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-october-2019/ https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-octob... (and I linked to the same article in your parents comment...) Avira and Bitdefender manage to rank in the top tier of performance impact and protection every time I check. Both offer free products, and Bitdefender Free is considerably less annoying, in my past experiences. Free antivirus is actually one of the places where market competition forced a bunch of them to clean up their acts and offer a good non invasive product. Avira still has ads, but if you wanted one product on your pc and one on a home server, it might make sense to use two vendors products. https://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/free.html https://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/free.html https://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows https://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows For one off system scans, besides the two mentioned above; ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky, Panda (and Emsisoft which has Avira and Bitdefender built in) all offer great spot check products. ADWCleaner is indispensable. It's interesting that "anti-virus" has now become the free component in suites. You pay for things like VPN, password management, and home network security. Kaspersky goes a step further and offers VPN and password management in a free tier. https://usa.kaspersky.com/free-antivirus https://usa.kaspersky.com/free-antivirus
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  Pretty hard to get people to pay for services Microsoft provides for free
- hrez 7y ago
  The reason I no longer use Bitdefender is because they forced MITM httpS in the browser. It wasn't optional in free product and I don't know if it is in paid. Has that changed?
  - basch 7y ago
    My understanding was that web attack prevention could be disabled, but then the program icon showed you as "unprotected." It wasnt so much forced MITM as misleading representation of your current state. If the user doesnt want web protection, dont keep scolding them for it.
    - hrez 7y ago
      AFAIK free version didn't allow any granularity to disable web protection.
skocznymroczny 7y ago
For me the main advantage of Windows Defender is the business model. It's in Microsoft's best interest to keep Windows virus-free as much as possible. It's in commercial anti-virus vendors interest to keep machines as virus ridden as possible.

basch 7y ago

From a performance impact standpoint, based on just one test suite, it is the worst on the market. https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-october-2019/ https://www.av-comparatives.org/tests/performance-test-octob... (and I linked to the same article in your parents comment...) Avira and Bitdefender manage to rank in the top tier of performance impact and protection every time I check. Both offer free products, and Bitdefender Free is considerably less annoying, in my past experiences. Free antivirus is actually one of the places where market competition forced a bunch of them to clean up their acts and offer a good non invasive product. Avira still has ads, but if you wanted one product on your pc and one on a home server, it might make sense to use two vendors products. https://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/free.html https://www.bitdefender.com/solutions/free.html https://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows https://www.avira.com/en/free-antivirus-windows For one off system scans, besides the two mentioned above; ESET, F-Secure, Kaspersky, Panda (and Emsisoft which has Avira and Bitdefender built in) all offer great spot check products. ADWCleaner is indispensable. It's interesting that "anti-virus" has now become the free component in suites. You pay for things like VPN, password management, and home network security. Kaspersky goes a step further and offers VPN and password management in a free tier. https://usa.kaspersky.com/free-antivirus https://usa.kaspersky.com/free-antivirus

tinus_hn 7y ago
Pretty hard to get people to pay for services Microsoft provides for free
hrez 7y ago
The reason I no longer use Bitdefender is because they forced MITM httpS in the browser. It wasn't optional in free product and I don't know if it is in paid. Has that changed?
- basch 7y ago
  My understanding was that web attack prevention could be disabled, but then the program icon showed you as "unprotected." It wasnt so much forced MITM as misleading representation of your current state. If the user doesnt want web protection, dont keep scolding them for it.
  - hrez 7y ago
    AFAIK free version didn't allow any granularity to disable web protection.

skocznymroczny 7y ago

For me the main advantage of Windows Defender is the business model. It's in Microsoft's best interest to keep Windows virus-free as much as possible. It's in commercial anti-virus vendors interest to keep machines as virus ridden as possible.