[reGEN]

Don't know why people are expecting Defender to be bad. Haven't you heard the ghastly cries from the hoard skids?

[Tracefl0w]

Don't know why people are expecting Defender to be bad. Haven't you heard the ghastly cries from the hoard skids?

They expect Defender to be bad, because it used to be bad. Microsoft's functionality of Windows Defender was only an antispyware up until Windows 7, which is not to be confused with an antivirus. At that time you couldn't remove it because it was integrated with the operating system, the most you could do was to disable it. I assume their intention at that time was to supplement your AV of choice.

Fast forward to Windows 8 and Windows 10, the made some huge upgrades when it came to WD. First then was the time it started living up to its name "Windows Defender" which deployed anti-virus and anti-malware protection. While they may have the same name to this date, the core and foundation of the AV has been completely rebuilt, hence it's not the same as Defender in previous operating systems.

[mothered]

I also expected McAfee and Defender to have much worse results.

Particularly McAfee, It's let me down at the best of times.

I'm very surprised with It's result.

[reGEN]

Don't know why people are expecting Defender to be bad. Haven't you heard the ghastly cries from the hoard skids?

They expect Defender to be bad, because it used to be bad. Microsoft's functionality of Windows Defender was only an antispyware up until Windows 7, which is not to be confused with an antivirus. At that time you couldn't remove it because it was integrated with the operating system, the most you could do was to disable it. I assume their intention at that time was to supplement your AV of choice.

Fast forward to Windows 8 and Windows 10, the made some huge upgrades when it came to WD. First then was the time it started living up to its name "Windows Defender" which deployed anti-virus and anti-malware protection. While they may have the same name to this date, the core and foundation of the AV has been completely rebuilt, hence it's not the same as Defender in previous operating systems.

Windows 10 and Defender has been released for more than a few years so why is everyone so shocked now? It's been noted to be outperforming expectations for quite some time already, both Defender and Microsoft's approach to security.

[Trik3r]

That shows how Windows Defender has gotten good over the number of years, i always encourage people to have a updated AV installed at all times but now! its different as long as they don't download from or visit any un-trusted sites they are fine ... but i still encourage the use of a Good AV tho ... Am a bit surprised that i didn't see MalwareBytes on the list ?

[Tracefl0w]

That shows how Windows Defender has gotten good over the number of years, i always encourage people to have a updated AV installed at all times but now! its different as long as they don't download from or visit any un-trusted sites they are fine ... but i still encourage the use of a Good AV tho ... Am a bit surprised that i didn't see MalwareBytes on the list ?

That's because it's not an AV. MalwareBytes is an Anti-Malware program. The difference between an antivirus program and an anti-malware program in short is that antivirus targets a specific type of malware designed to replicate and spread. While Anti-Malware can include everything from malware, adware, spyware, trojans, worms and much more. Anti-malware is from a software perspective much more complete than AVs because it's more complete than AVs.

Malwarebytes isn't really capable of handling file infecting viruses, which involves files that have been modified by viruses. Usually it's done by inserting malicious code to the files, attaching or even injecting the malware itself to the files. MalwareBytes is simply incapable of removing viruses of that nature. On the other hand, AVs have the ability to remove the malicious code attached and bring restore the file to its original state. In those cases the most MalwareBytes can do is to find an unaltered clean version of the file by a checksum comparison and it tries to replace it. I believe that explains why MalwareBytes can't be a replacement for an Antivirus, but also why it's not included in their test. Also another important aspect is that it does not target old malware The true nature of Malwarebytes is to prevent 0-Day malware from infecting your computer and any new malware which comes out of the box from nowhere.