Windows 10 Is Windows Defender Necessary with Avast and Malwarebytes on Windows 10?

When you use a 3rd party AV solution WD automatically gets turned off. Most 3rd party solutions are better than WD but as always it's you choice.

Thanks Big Bear for a very enlightening response. Will stick with Avast and Malwarebytes.

I have Avast on my home system and like it however I removed it from my laptop when I upgraded the 8.1 side to 10 on day one and just use Defender now... haven't missed it yet... I expect the difference in experiences here is because I'm a more advanced user then what the Bear tip deals with... it's hard to see how any one could have 1000+ and not know somethings up?

The only issue I've ever had with years of free Avast use is on dual boot systems and even then it fine as long as you don't have it on both sides when there are storage drives that they both share... in this case I recommend putting Avast on one side and Defender on the other.

Hi

All I can add is that I use Windows Defender plus the Pro (active, $50 a year for 3 computers) version of Malwarebytes and I never seem to get anything in the way of malware or viruses.

It's been years since I've been hit with anything, other then the cookies that CCleaner removes every day.

That's not true of my friends who only use Defender alone.
I'm converting them to Malwarebytes one at a time.

Mike

I must agree with that comment! "it's hard to see how any one could have 1000+ and not know somethings up", although, for the naive user, the "victim" might just complain that the computer is running exceptionally slow - I have just had a local colleague with this complaint. He is a music teacher and a total nerd, in that area. He "uses" a computer in the sense that one, some years ago, would have used a typewriter. He still uses XP, and has never run a disk cleaner. His only, outdated, anti virus program is AVG. But that type of user is the bottom of the column but is, unfortunately, where the lowest denominator of help has to be applied.
But BIGBear is probably referring to Malware, rather than pure virus. This can be as little as Adware, which, whilst irritating, is not necessarily harmful.
No offence, Bigbear, but, if I am seeking quality in anything, including software, my last resort is to ask the opinion of the operative, or anyone so connected. As you admit in your final sentence, you are definitely weighing in on the side of Avast.

It rates well in comparison charts, Defender does not. A lot can depend on what kind of usage the use has. Nothing pious in my use, but I do not visit "naughty" sites, and avoid any downloads of software, unless I have a thorough background. It is a few years since I had a serious Malware issue. (Other than the annoyances working through the Windows 10 builds -lol).
I do subscribe to Kaspersky, a well known and topnotch program, but, it is heavy and on fresh installs I initially leave it uninstalled.
Only thing I would add, and I am sure many will disagree, is, that, if you want a pure anti virus program, then look no further than a free offer.

My own observation is that all you get if you pay for the more advance versions, is extras which do not contribute a great deal to the actual anti-malware control.

wilhelm1 said:

Thanks Big Bear for a very enlightening response. Will stick with Avast and Malwarebytes.

Click to expand...

>>>Sure thing; glad to help, wilhelm!>>>
<<<BBJ>>> 😀

davehc said:

I must agree with that comment! "it's hard to see how any one could have 1000+ and not know somethings up", although, for the naive user, the "victim" might just complain that the computer is running exceptionally slow - I have just had a local colleague with this complaint. He is a music teacher and a total nerd, in that area. He "uses" a computer in the sense that one, some years ago, would have used a typewriter. He still uses XP, and has never run a disk cleaner. His only, outdated, anti virus program is AVG. But that type of user is the bottom of the column but is, unfortunately, where the lowest denominator of help has to be applied.
But BIGBear is probably referring to Malware, rather than pure virus. This can be as little as Adware, which, whilst irritating, is not necessarily harmful.
No offence, Bigbear, but, if I am seeking quality in anything, including software, my last resort is to ask the opinion of the operative, or anyone so connected. As you admit in your final sentence, you are definitely weighing in on the side of Avast.

It rates well in comparison charts, Defender does not. A lot can depend on what kind of usage the use has. Nothing pious in my use, but I do not visit "naughty" sites, and avoid any downloads of software, unless I have a thorough background. It is a few years since I had a serious Malware issue. (Other than the annoyances working through the Windows 10 builds -lol).
I do subscribe to Kaspersky, a well known and topnotch program, but, it is heavy and on fresh installs I initially leave it uninstalled.
Only thing I would add, and I am sure many will disagree, is, that, if you want a pure anti virus program, then look no further than a free offer.

My own observation is that all you get if you pay for the more advance versions, is extras which do not contribute a great deal to the actual anti-malware control.

Click to expand...

>>>Dave, I agree with what you say, and no offense taken. Being old school, I tend to include spyware viruses and other types of malware such as Rootkit and DayZero attacks as viruses, in today's lingo they are officially called "malware". To me anything in the malware category that can hamper the normal operation of your computer or tracks your web surfing or web purchase habits or attempts to perpetrate Identity Theft are all "viruses", so you are right about that. The other issue is when Customers get a virus, as you know many of them have a nasty habit of mass replication, so when Customers turn off their anti-virus or remove it completely, of course they get hundreds, thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of copies floating around. In cases of severe infection, it's simply not worth th e time to remove them all, so I usually perform a drive wipe and reinstall the OS (Windows) either from factory Recovery Media or manual rebuild using Microsoft media and add in the drivers. Also, lots of viruses also like to perpetrate on Customer's home networks (LANs), and so if 1 PC has 500 actual viruses, I often find that when the Customer has me clean up 1 machine, then ask me back to clean their other machines. So, if machine #2 is also infected, that's another 500, and machine #3 is another 500; bam-you're at 1,500 for the network (if the router hasn't also contracted a virus, which also happens up here where I live). A machine with 50 different viruses may have easily 10 copies of each, but more often it's 10 different viruses with 50 copies each; assuming a 500 virus count from your A-V.

It's also important these days to have more than 1 kind of malware protection (only 1 A-V program of course), AV, antispyware, anti-rootkit, anti-spam, anti-DayZero, anti-Identity-theft, etc. I mention that in my response as well. I probably go a step beyond what most repair Techs do anyway, as I collect the really nasty viruses or malware, and report them to the AV and anti-malware companies such as Norton, McAfee, Avast, and others. I've been doing so since 1980 when F-prot first came out if you recall that program! Today, I particular like to report the newest Ransomware viruses or malware such as the FBI virus and the Cryptolocker virus. This has long been a concern of home computer users, and since 2003, there still hasn't been all that much education to the public on how to properly protect your PCs from various malware threats on the Internet. Thought I spent 10 years teaching adults this in the public education sector and continue to do so today.

My personal formulation of multiple anti-malware products works good for me and my Customers, but it may not work for everyone. In the area I now live in (since 2011), it's a low-tech area and people do a lot more stupid things including visiting sites they shouldn't, and clicking on things they shouldn't both in websites and E-mail; so protection here for Customers is a lot more work than the large urban area I used to live in LA-OC-San Diego. Folks there are better educated in Computers, and more hi-tech, so it was much more rare to see people turn off their AV/malware programs or completely remove them all. Massive infection on a single home computer was much more rare. Not so, where I live now in a rural area. For Computer literate folks like the volunteers here on Windows forums, that sort of thing is quite rare.

Anyway, you make some really good points, and I'll endeavor to change my wording about massive virus infection numbers to massive malware infection in the future.

Cheers!>>>
<<<BBJ>>>

Lol.Nothing wrong with your wording - jusy another point of view.

Good post.

Thanks for mentioning it--it's always good to have a 2nd perspective on things!😀

Cheers! <<<BBJ>>>

Update... Nov 2015

can someone tell us for sure if Windows 10 and it's 'Windows Defender' is better and more capable than previous versions?
In Windows 8.1, i used BitDefender 2015 Total Security & free version too before that. It has ranked among the top 3 in the world by the leading Labs year after year. Kaspersky being the other top Antivirus.
We, the user's of Windows 10 want to know if Defender is as bad as always, & is just better than a Winows machine with no anti-virus. Or has Microsoft done amazing thing's to Defender's engine (core) and it now can play with the big boys (the third party Antiv-virus Suites paid/free ).
I currently use Windows Defender + MBAM MalwareBytes.

Hope someone can enlighten us... thx in advence

hi lightspeed,

I've been doing AV stuff since 1980, and in my opinion the answer is "No" to your defender questions. It's certainly not more capable than earlier versions; virus-writers still haven't time to write W10 specific viruses yet; so there's no proof of protection for the most part unless you are "trolling" for viruses as I do, to report them, or using "honeypots".

Back in 2005, the average time that any computer with no AV or security software of any kind on it could survive as soon as it was connected to the Internet was about 8 seconds. In 2015, now 10 years later; this is reported to be about 4 seconds; infection vector rate twice as high reported globally. This is well documented.

We have wildly varying reports from different sources that say that a W10 computer with defender can last from 10 seconds to 10 hours before initial connection of the computer to an Internet connection (broadband). So, defender does only a slightly better job than a wholly unprotected computer does at 4 seconds. Certainly not the protection I want on my very expensive computer investment!

And no, Microsoft's defender is not ready, nor will ever be ready to compete with the "big boys" of security software (Norton, McAfee, F-prot, Avast, TrendMicro, Panda). If they ever did it would kill a 6-billion dollar a year niche industry when Microsoft agreed to stay and not play in this marketplace all the way back in Win3.1.

With regard to Kaspersky, don't know what reports you are reading; but your information is very wrong on Kaspersky. Their stuff is terrible, and hasn't rated on anyone's top AV independent testing report in 10 years plus! The only way Kaspersky gets their name in the top 3 is by bribing the e-zine or computer magagine editor or writers to do this! I've seen laptops come in less than 1 year old running Kaspersky Internet Security (their top of the line product) with massive virus infections of over 600,000 viruses. That certainly is not a product I want protecting my computer. I've been removing Kaspersky from every computer I see in my repair business as well as corporate networks since their products appeared here 15 yrs. ago.

The MBAM is high-quality stuff, you can keep that; but bottom line you are attempting to use Free AV products to protect your computer. This is OK for home users, but if you use your computer for work or college, you really need PAID protection from the "big-boys" to keep your computer safe; regardless of what version of windows you are running. Bottom-line: your AV protection is only as good as what you pay for! IMO the only good free AV left is Avast; all the rest charge you or are worthless.

Hope that gives you some perspective.

By the way, it might be useful to know that Kaspersky has yet to land a contract for their AV software from any Fortune500 company--ever!! Kaspersky gives their programs for free to these companies, and time and time again reject them! Can you think of a reason why that is??

Hope that provides some insight. 🙄

<<<BIGBEARJEDI>>>

Thankyou for the insight. Alot to digest but very informative nonetheless. Will strongly consider Avast paid than, as the free nags u i hear people saying. + free will never be as good as paid.

BIGBEARJEDI said:

By the way, it might be useful to know that Kaspersky has yet to land a contract for their AV software from any Fortune500 company--ever!! Kaspersky gives their programs for free to these companies, and time and time again reject them! Can you think of a reason why that is??

Click to expand...

Yes was thinking the same thing.