Report: Microsoft Security is Unexceptional
Microsoft's free anti-virus solution merely raises the lowest rung on the ladder.
eWeek is reporting that Microsoft's forthcoming free Security Essentials anti-virus solution is "unexceptional in the best sense of the word," adding that the software works but won't blow your mind, that it raises the security bar albeit the lowest rung on the ladder. The opinion is based on the recently released Security Essentials beta, and after a couple of days testing, the author of the eWeek article was struggling to find something interesting to say about the software.
However, eWeek manages to bring up two interesting points: the price of the software (free), and the fact that Security Essentials scored (surprisingly) well on early wild list tests, finding everything that was thrown at it, an achievement rarely made when testing retail solutions. While Security Essentials doesn't appear to compete with the top contenders in the anti-malware market, the software does manage to elevate the absolute minimum level of security using old-school signature-based detection.
"I have my doubts that Microsoft will ever pull the trigger and include Security Essentials in a base OS or a service pack update for fear of the backlash," said Andrew Garcia. "But I certainly see the product appearing in Microsoft Update as an option once it is a little more battle-tested, then eventually morphing into a critical update within a year or so of release. Of course, all of this depends on Microsoft making a concerted effort to ensure its solution plays nicely with others."
Garcia also added that, with some modifications, Security Essentials could be a win for third-party security companies, allowing them to focus on next-generation technology with minimal worries concerning compatibility with Microsoft's scanner.
- Hulu Explains its Cease in PS3 Streaming
- Pictured: The Guitar Hero 5 Drum Kit
- Facebook Hits 250 Million Members
- WoW Player Threatens To Blow Up Plane
- $23 Quadrillion Charged on Visa Statements
- Microsoft Stores Coming This Fall, Near Apple
- State Department: FireFox Costs Too Much
- Cyber Attacks May Have Originated in U.K.
- Google Launches Mobile Apps for Google Voice
- Sony Removes Content Approval for PSPgo
- Nintendo Has No Plans to Ship Black Wii to U.S.
- Ford Developing Laser Ignition System
- U.S. Military Working on Flesh Eating Robot
- Blu-ray Beats Recession; Sales Up 91 Percent
- Tony Hawk Ride Developer: White is Friendlier
- Microsoft Details Next Xbox Live Dashboard Update
- Belkin Cans FlyWire Wireless HDMI
- LG's 30-inch OLED Coming in Distant 2012
- There's no LOL in "Textual Harassment"
My Review of Microsoft Security Essentials:
"Sucks."
The end.
-I think my review is easier to read. Take that, inefficient eWeek guy.
What do you expect from a antivirus. The first rule of security is defense in depth. And that you cannot obtain from one program. Combine that with a good firewall, software updates, antispyware, policies preventing access to unauthorized websites, analyzing programs you install for potential holes, full disc encryption, and a Smith and Wesson; then you will then have a truly secure system.
Any antivirus vastly inferior to free offerings like AVG, Avast, and Avira is a waste of time. Where exactly would this POS fit into an intelligent person's security arsenal? I'll answer that for you... In the trash.
=)
Is it possible that Norton and Symantec might sponsor those guys, and they are trashing the free solution to protect their sponsor's profit? Or for that matter, is Intel sponsoring Tom's ?
PS: The Windows Security model is crap, Windows + Antivirus is about on par with Linux + no firewall + no antivirus. OSX is obviously crap no matter what...
I fail to see where it says anything about it being 'vastly inferior' to any other free product, infact, the quote says 'scored (surprisingly) well on early wild list tests, finding everything that was thrown at it, an achievement rarely made when testing retail solutions.'
I tried the beta for about a week. What I like about the idea is that it is a free AV program that isn't trying to sell you anything, all the other free AVs have an upgraded version they want you to buy. It absolutely killed my boot times in win7-64 tho, my system would hang until I opened the window and manually turned on the AV program. I also had one BSOD while it was trying to initialize, and win7 never crashes for me. I'll give it another shot once it is out of beta, until then I'm back to Avira with it's pop up ad after every update.
Nope, the title isnt misleading whatsoever!
microsoft has already said that this built in anti-virus wasn't necessarily designed to compete with anything. it's just there to help people who have ZERO protection
You mean, people should read the article before commenting on it? Blasphemy!
LOL DUH
Nuff said
Are you sure you want to open this? It may be dangerous! "Yes" ARE YOU SURE?! "Yes" Would you like to turn this feature off? It will make your computer insecure. "Yes" ARE YOU SURE YOUR SURE!??! "Yes" Ok we'll turn it off (HAHA he doesn't even know it's actually still running in the background!!!! teehehe) Windows security features at it's best.
I think I would still give this a try. I refuse to pay for Norton and McAfee and the like because of their subscription based pricing model. I have AVG but I'm not sure I have it setup as a firewall and I never get viruses so I rarely run scans. This is semi-bad practice so I am looking for a refresh on my security that is light and simple but works. Also FREE. The review basically says that it doesn't have all the bells and whistles but it works when put to the test. Sounds good to me.
People like fulle have no clue what they're talking about, so best to ignore them.
For a free AV that's meant to provide basic protection, it seems good.
If this AV software is the same as Microsoft Live it should be good according to this site that ranks it right up there with Kapersky and Avira and other good ones.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
I've been using this for my netbook and there's no difference in performance, it's not slowing down the system which is my #1 priority for AV. Also I was able to detect a fix one of my clients computers with it while Kasperky/AVG/Norton/McAffee I was getting a BSOD... I'm looking forward this AV getting out of BETA and being pushed through Windows Update, I really like what MS has done over the past years with their Windows Update programs. It's just getting more and more awesome. I'm going to support them at this for sure, it's a perfect anti-virus that you don't need to worry about and it fixes stuff on his own
Windows defender never detected anything
Windows update is useless because they fix issues 2-3 week after a known problem.
This antivirus.. probably worth the price : 0
Im sticking to Avast and free anti-spyware
Report: THG states the obvious better than any other site.
Wow, such negative feedback for free beta software.
As far as I'm concerned this is the best thing from Microsoft since sliced bread. And I haven't even tried it yet but I'm sure I will once it comes out of beta.
Too bad it will probably put a few other companies out of business once it gets going.
Microsoft will get slammed by lawsuits if they rolled this into the OS or made it an automatic update though, mark my words for it.
Since this is likely to compete with other free AV solutions, I doubt this will put anyone out of business.
Keep in mind that MS Security Essentials Beta is based on Forefront 2.0 Beta. I don't recall which AV rating site it was, but if I recall correctly Forefront 1.0 rated as the best performer for the month of May. Even the reviewer was surprised at the result.
In the end there is no OS or AV solution which can protect stupid people from themselves when they are determined to act on their stupidity
If this is only offered as a free download off Microsoft's site, then AV companies have nothing to fear, as the average user won't be bothered to go searching for it.
However, if Microsoft decides to roll it out on Windows Update, you can bet the **it will hit the fan. The only reason people buy anti-virus software is because the average user doesn't know there is free software out there that is just as secure as the pay stuff. The Microsoft brand with the easy roll out will eliminate that problem, and that should make all security companies very nervous.
Obviously shilling for their corporate sponsors:
"the software works, but doesn't blow your mind"
OK, it keeps out the nasty stuff, aka "works"? What constitutes "mind blowing"? Would a mind blowing antivirus launch a counterattack and steal the virus writers personal info and take control of their laptop?
When this is out of Beta and many reviews are in I will give it a shot. Should m$ rate Higher then Antivir or AVG ill move to it permanently.
I don’t understand why many people are so ANTI m$. Seriously, if this program beats out the other free programs why wouldn’t you use it? I’m sure many of you are using Avast or Avg… well guess what Antivir is the best free AV right now. Perhaps we should hack up AVG or Avast even though they are perfectly good programs.
Is it possible that Norton and Symantec might sponsor those guys, and they are trashing the free solution to protect their sponsor's profit? Or for that matter, is Intel sponsoring Tom's ? PS: The Windows Security model is crap, Windows + Antivirus is about on par with Linux + no firewall + no antivirus. OSX is obviously crap no matter what...
You, sir or madam, don't know what you're talking about.
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] ,2356.html
She does. Both Vista and Win 7 as well as OS X are superior to any Linux solution currently out there (or should I say any Linux distro other than OS X, heh), in terms of security. Note, she also says OS X is NOT better than Windows, contrary to what Apple would have you believe. She uses Macs too, so she's no Apple hater, just a realist. Refreshing!
She also says A/Vs are worthless (I'm not sure I agree but I bow to her superior knowledge) - so, if an A/V makes any difference at all, and apparently Microsoft's is a small step better, I think that's worthy of an 'attaboy!'
Fact is, people don't want to do what will really make them more secure. Gripes about Defender and the UAC proved that.
nice Marcus52
The 'attaboy!' is that from 2 and a half men?
Marcus52: What about pwn2own? Epic fail on your part, read this interesting comment in the comments section:
"A interesting and informative article but there is a lot of self praise and back slapping, seems that these folks are not the geniuses they make them selves out to be:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Pill_(malware) "
Of course, if you back up your comment by referencing a Tom's article *snicker, snicker*, then you must be right. /sarcasm
How often does Tom's have to do a "follow up" article on an initial article because it was flat out wrong? About 50% of the time?
OMG, just went back and read that entire article...
First: Joanna debunks her own cred.
2nd: The article debunks itself
3rd: The comments section debunks the article again out of spite
What a sorry excuse for an article, I can't believe you'd be dumb enough to cite that to back up your point. I bet you've jerked off to Joanna's picture atleast 3 times since it was posted 2 days ago.
Of course, Marcus52, if you think you're up to the challenge, I'll whip out my Backtrack3 live cd and try to "pen-test" your Mac, and you are welcome to try the same on my Linux box(not that you'd even have a clue how).
you know what:
If MS would care about costumers, and therefore done something good for them, they probably have positive comments...
from what i know, it's not the case....
Sounds exactly like what I want:
Lean AV software that doesn't have a bunch of stupid and pointless features that will slow my system down. But it does catch "everything" thrown at it and is free. Microsoft is finally starting to get it - lean, fast, bloat-free. Now let's stop with stupid reviews looking for "exceptional" bloated features to write about. Just say it's fast, free, catches everything and how could it be any better than this?
As far as I'm concerned this is the best thing from Microsoft since sliced bread.
FYI: Microsoft isn't the one who gave us sliced bread.
And Kevin, your journalism skills are vastly improving. You managed to take an ordinary comment and twist it into an insult. "It works" is about as much as anyone can expect out of AV software, but you made it sound like "Ah damn... this frickin program actually works, but it's not mind blowing. M$ is shite!"
...
My neighbor spends more on anti virus software than what I believe her computer is worth...
It will likely vastly improve through time, because from my understanding, this is only a beta so far. With a larger test group however, Microsoft can ramp it up likely, making it somethign decent (hopefully).
This article is extremely twisted. Basically, eWeek said "the software works but won't blow your mind" and "Security Essentials scored (surprisingly) well on early wild list tests, finding everything that was thrown at it, an achievement rarely made when testing retail solutions".
Yet they then go on to say the program is crap. And they give absolutely no justification for why it is crap, except that "it won't blow your mind". WELL, a security solution isn't supposed to blow your mind!! The best security solution, is a security solution that you don't even notice is there! In a perfect world, a security solution would never ever pop up asking you to register or update the program. It would have zero effect on performance. And would obviously make your computer perfectly secure. And from this article, eWeek basically said that this MSE is the closest a security product has ever gotten to this perfect world program.
Kinda reminds me of the Oatmeal Crisp commercials.
"MSE, it won't miss a single virus attack, has extremely little negative performance impact, is completely free with no ads built in... But you won't like ittttt....."