Do I use Windows Defender for anti-virus protection?

[yeewiz]

Hey Folks.

I upgraded my Dell laptop from Win7 to Win8 way back when Win8 came out. I've been on Norton anti-virus all this time. Should I uninstall Norton and activate Windows Defender? Are there any downsides to Windows Defender? TIA!

 

[berty6294]

I prefer Windows Defender over Norton. Norton is a resource hog.

 

[xandros9]

Same, I'm not in a position to be seeing virii that often, (haven't at all in my time with 8.x) so Defender meets my needs just fine.

 

[Laura Knotek]

Even if someone needed something more robust than Windows Defender, I wouldn't recommend Norton, since it's a resource hog.

 

[berty6294]

Even if someone needed something more robust than Windows Defender, I wouldn't recommend Norton, since it's a resource hog.

True that, if you need something more than Windows Defender, I'd say go for Webroot!

 

[yeewiz]

thanks all! I'm uninstalling Norton NOW!

 

[TechAbstract]

Avira is excellent. Avast is also good but kind of bloated. AVG is also decent. All those have free version. Use one of these with Malwarebytes. Add Spywareblaster if you even need more protection. Windows Defender is not that great, even Microsoft recommends other antiviruses.

 

[Laura Knotek]

NOD32 is also good.

 

[berty6294]

Omg Avira and Avast are a headache! AVG is sweet for being free. I've heard good things about NOD32! Vipre is supposed to be quite good as well. Same goes for Kaspersky. I could go on forever lol

 

[yeewiz]

Thanks all for the additional discussion! So my question is, under what circumstance do you need to buy/add additional protection to enhance Windows Defender? Or, in other words, why isn't WD good enough?

 

[xandros9]

Thanks all for the additional discussion! So my question is, under what circumstance do you need to buy/add additional protection to enhance Windows Defender? Or, in other words, why isn't WD good enough?

well I do know Avast has a boot-time scan functionality built-in that has saved my **** a long time ago, its not a feature here.

 

[berty6294]

Antivirus are a lot like condoms. You can get ultra thin condoms that you barely notice are there but don't protect as well, you can get ultra thick that protect very well but are very noticeable in your performance, and you can get ribbed that may appear to do wonders but are really just a waste of money... (McAfee)

I prefer just the good old fashion standard condoms, equal protection, and just barely noticeable.

 

[tgp]

Antivirus are a lot like condoms. You can get ultra thin condoms that you barely notice are there but don't protect as well, you can get ultra thick that protect very well but are very noticeable in your performance, and you can get ribbed that may appear to do wonders but are really just a waste of money... (McAfee)

I prefer just the good old fashion standard condoms, equal protection, and just barely noticeable.

Hmmm, I never thought of it quite like that before! I agree on McAfee, and I would include Norton products above Norton Antivirus (Internet Security & 360).

Windows Defender should be fine if you're at least somewhat aware of where you're browsing. It's what I use. I work in IT, and when I get in on PC repair I often am doing virus removal. The best antivirus will not protect users who click away with reckless abandon.

 

[yeewiz]

thanks all again for your additional comments. berty6294, interesting analogy, I like it, although some may differ with you on the ribbed products ;-)

 

[hopmedic]

On my main PC I'm only using Windows Defender. Otherwise, every computer in my house has Kaspersky on it. I've used K for years, and as an IT pro I recommend it. I can't speak for any of the free anti-virus packages, as I don't use them and don't research them, but what I tell people is that they should watch for the rebates at Fry's and can often get Kaspersky free after rebate. Myself, since I'm running a server at home, I can't use a freebie or a consumer version, because they don't run on the server OS, but I use a small business approach and get Kaspersky for something like $200ish for either two or three years (I don't remember which I bought, but I won't be needing to think about it for a while) to cover up to 10 computers. That's less than $10 per computer per year, so not bad.

The reason I'm not using Kaspersky on my main PC is that back when I was still running Win8, Kaspersky conflicted with the Windows Phone Emulator, which I need for development. So I just uninstalled K, but knowing that I have a good level of confidence in Windows Defender. No anti-virus is perfect, but some are better than others. I haven't been infected in any of my computers (my wife and I together have six computers) for years, and I also install Kaspersky from my license on my step-daughter's computer, since I have extra licenses.

I am rabidly opposed to both Norton/Symantec and McAfee. Both of these are such a pain to deal with, and wrap their tentacles around so much of your PC that I tired of them probably about 7 years ago, I'd guess, which is when I started using Kaspersky. As an IT pro, I can't tell you how much I cannot stand either of those two products.

 

[yeewiz]

Lots of venom here towards Norton and McAfee. Not sure why that is, but I don't disagree that Norton is a resource hog. At least that's my impression. On a fast i7, I don't think I can tell. On my Netbook (remember those?), definitely did a cardiac arrest number on it. Norton is free for Comcast customers so it was easy and painless to choose and install for me. Now that I'm running on WD, I'll monitor events and see if I actually can tell if things are different WD versus Norton.