Microsoft Securities Essentials

Hi all,
Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
change but want to make the right move?
Mick.

On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
> Hi all,
> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
> change but want to make the right move?
> Mick.

I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use
it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall
these days.
(That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)

"charlie" wrote in message news:c%kXr.5348$...

On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
> Hi all,
> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
> change but want to make the right move?
> Mick.

I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use
it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall
these days.
(That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)

I agree I was not too happy the trial version was installed, but hoped it
may have now been ok, it seems to take over, I turned backing up off, but it
is still running.
Mick.

"Mick" wrote:

> "charlie" ...
>
> Mick wrote:
>
>> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate protection
>> for my Win 7 64 bit. I have a trial version on Norton on this new
>> desktop but would prefer to change but want to make the right move?
>
> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use
> it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall
> these days.
> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)
>
<Next is Mick's reply, not part of charlie's reply>
>
> I agree I was not too happy the trial version was installed, but hoped it
> may have now been ok, it seems to take over, I turned backing up off, but it
> is still running.

Regarding your newsreader, Mick:

WLM v15+ does not properly quote the cited content from a parent post in
your replies. Notice above that your reply is at the same level hence
jumbled into the reply by charlie.

If you continue using WLM with its lack of proper quoting, either add
yourself the indentation and prefix character in each line for proper
quoting or somehow indicate which was the quoted content and which is
your new content.

Regarding your inquiry, Mick:

PC makers bloat their software inventory by dumping trialware onto their
hosts. Users eventually find out it was bloatware, it expires, and they
have to choose to continue or find something else (and hope the
trialware can be correctly and completely uninstalled). They get the
software for free to bloat the software they claim comes with their
hardware. Symantec knows a percentage of such victims will choose to
continue with the existing product (it's what those users are used to).
With Norton, if you uninstall it, make sure to get their cleanup utility
(I think it's called 'rnav'). That doesn't purge your host of all
remnants of their product but it helps to ensure nothing gets left
behind that still gets in the why (i.e., can generate side effects after
uninstall).

I'd go with Avast Home (free). Better coverage, more infection vectors
are covered, and a sandboxing feature (that's supposed to get much
better in the next version - instead of just auto-sandboxing that you
have to watch out for if enabled, you'll be able to blacklist which
processes always get sandboxed).

Besides rating higher detection coverage at av-comparatives.org, Avast
also rates higher at VB100: the farther up the better the reactive
coverage (what the product detects now with its latest program and
database versions), the farther right the better proactive protection
(what it finds by heuristics), so you want a product that is furthest to
up for best coverage now plus the more rightward it is then the more
likely (but not guaranteed) it will find malware not currently
identified by its signature dataabase.

VB100 RAP (reactive and proactive) ratings:
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml

Avira is better than Avast but only when you compare the paid version of
Avira against the free version of Avast. Avast, in its free version,
covers more infection vectors than Avira which more than makes up for
the added 1.4% on-demand detection advantage of Avira over Avast. You
can get one of free Avira's features available in Avast (web traffic
monitoring) if you agree to eat some real estate with their adware
toolbar in your web browser (which means that add-on is only effective
when using your web browser, not for other web traffic). Yet I'll grant
that Avira's proactive detection is better than Avast's.

There's no sandboxing in Avira (free or paid versions).

With Avira, you'll have to find out about the workarounds to eliminate
their startup adware banner and also their annoying adware popup window
that appears during signature updates. Avast is adware, too, but you
only see their ad when you open their config UI. One puts ads in your
face. The other hides their ads until you open their program.

MSE has lower false positives than Avira or Avast; however, that's not
unexpected since MSE has less detection coverage than the others. It
can't [false] alarm on what it can't detect.

> On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
>> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
>> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
>> change but want to make the right move?
>> Mick.
>
> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use it
> on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall these
> days.
> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)

Each to their own on security preferences.
I have been using Norton Internet Security for the past four years.
Nothing has got by it in that time and I go to some dodgy places at
times. I run Malwarebytes about once a month and no nasties have ever
been found.
Norton does not slow my system up at all. I know previous versions did
and were terrible, but that was a long time ago.

--
mick

On Fri, 17 Aug 2012 07:37:54 +0100, Mick. wrote:
>
> "charlie" wrote in message news:c%kXr.5348$...
>
> On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
> > protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
> > I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
> > change but want to make the right move?
> > Mick.
>
> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use
> it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall
> these days.
> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)
>
> I agree I was not too happy the trial version was installed, but hoped it
> may have now been ok, it seems to take over, I turned backing up off, but it
> is still running.
> Mick.

You might not be aware of a big problem with your quoting style.
The way your newsreader is doing it, when someone else follows
up, it looks like you *said* what you actually only quoted.

The problem is that Windows Live Mail 2011 (version 15) has a
quoting style that is completely broken. Unfortunately that poses
a painful choice to you: either fix every quote manually, or get
a real newsreader such as Gravity, Xananews, and Forte Agent (to
mention some that come to mind at the moment). OR, if you really
want WLM, some say that WLM 14 will serve; see "SC Tom" below.

update 2011-04-02: I've seen a newsgroup posting claiming you
can un-break WLM 15 by installing and using an Autohotkey script:
http://www.dusko-lolic.from.hr/wlmquote/

Thanks for your consideration!

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:48:13 -0500, SC Tom wrote:
> Along with what the others have suggested, you can uninstall
> WLM 2011 and install WLM 2009 instead, which handles quoting
> a lot better:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?
> FamilyID=56883de5-2024-4631-806e-757693072a1c

[or use http://tinyurl.com/25zfouw which redirects to the above]

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...

"mick" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
>>> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
>>> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer
>>> to
>>> change but want to make the right move?
>>> Mick.
>>
>> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
>> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I
>> use it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean
>> uninstall these days.
>> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)
>
> Each to their own on security preferences.
> I have been using Norton Internet Security for the past four years.
> Nothing has got by it in that time and I go to some dodgy places at
> times. I run Malwarebytes about once a month and no nasties have ever
> been found.
> Norton does not slow my system up at all. I know previous versions did
> and were terrible, but that was a long time ago.
>
> --
> mick
>
>




Why did you ask then? MSE works just fine and it is not a resource hog
like Norton. IMO, is a virus.
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Oct. 1, 2004 ~ Sept. 30, 2010
Imperial Beach, CA

> "mick" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>>> On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
>>>> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
>>>> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
>>>> change but want to make the right move?
>>>> Mick.
>>>
>>> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
>>> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I use
>>> it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean uninstall
>>> these days.
>>> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)
>>
>> Each to their own on security preferences.
>> I have been using Norton Internet Security for the past four years. Nothing
>> has got by it in that time and I go to some dodgy places at times. I run
>> Malwarebytes about once a month and no nasties have ever been found.
>> Norton does not slow my system up at all. I know previous versions did and
>> were terrible, but that was a long time ago.
>>
>> -- mick
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Why did you ask then? MSE works just fine and it is not a resource hog like
> Norton. IMO, is a virus.

Wasn't me who asked, it was Mick. with a capital M
You can borrow my glasses if you like, just send me a stamped address
email LOL

--
mick

"mick" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> "mick" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>>> On 8/17/2012 1:17 AM, Mick. wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
>>>>> protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
>>>>> I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would
>>>>> prefer to
>>>>> change but want to make the right move?
>>>>> Mick.
>>>>
>>>> I don't care for Norton at all, to say the least!
>>>> There is no way that I can tell you that MSE is adequate, however, I
>>>> use it on my systems, along with SpyBot. I hope Norton has a clean
>>>> uninstall these days.
>>>> (That was just one of many of my peeves concerning past versions.)
>>>
>>> Each to their own on security preferences.
>>> I have been using Norton Internet Security for the past four years.
>>> Nothing has got by it in that time and I go to some dodgy places at
>>> times. I run Malwarebytes about once a month and no nasties have ever
>>> been found.
>>> Norton does not slow my system up at all. I know previous versions
>>> did and were terrible, but that was a long time ago.
>>>
>>> -- mick
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Why did you ask then? MSE works just fine and it is not a resource hog
>> like Norton. IMO, is a virus.
>
> Wasn't me who asked, it was Mick. with a capital M
> You can borrow my glasses if you like, just send me a stamped address
> email LOL
>
> --
> mick
>
>



Sorry, small m mick.

"Mick." wrote in message news:...

>
Hi all,
Is the Microsoft Securities Essentials antivirus adequate
protection for my Win 7 64 bit.
I have a trial version on Norton on this new desktop but would prefer to
change but want to make the right move?
Mick.
>

Try it (MSE) out.
Everyone has their like and dislikes for an AV (be it Norton, ESET, MSE, Avira, etc.)
Not a single one can claim it catches everything.

Regarding the Norton trial.
After downloading a different AV but before installing any other AV product it would be prudent to remove the Norton product.
Download and run the Norton Removal tool for the installed trial Norton (Symantec product)
- http://goo.gl/Sw5W8

Fyi...here's the link to download MSE
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/w...tials/download
- use the selector to choose the correct version for your o/s

--
....winston
msft mvp mail