backtop

Software Microsoft Releases Windows Defender Beta 2
Brandon Hill (Blog) - February 15, 2006 12:05 AM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 23 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Feb 17 at 9:40 PM

Windows Defender receives a redesigned user interface
Microsoft spruces up its antispyware software

Microsoft is moving along rather smoothly with the development of its consumer antispyware software. Windows Defender was previously known as Microsoft AntiSpyware which itself was a rebranded version of software from GIANT Software -- a company which Microsoft acquired in December of 2004. Here are the features/enhancements new to Beta 2:

  • Enhanced performance through a new scanning engine.
  • Streamlined, simplified user interface and alerts.
  • Improved control over programs on your computer using enhanced Software Explorer.
  • Multiple language support with globalization and localization features.
  • Protection technologies for all users, whether or not they have administrator rights on the computer.
  • Support for assistive technology for individuals who have physical or cognitive difficulties, impairments, and disabilities.
  • Support for Microsoft Windows XP Professional x64 Edition.
  • Automatic cleaning according to your settings during regularly scheduled scans.

You must be running a genuine copy of Windows in order to download the free software. There are versions available for Windows XP and Windows XP Professional x64.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
But it's such crap..
By KashGarinn on 2/15/2006 4:54:36 AM , Rating: 1
I've tried it, and it has the same flaws as antispyware beta.. doesn't find half of the crap out there.

Adaware and spybot search & destroy is crap as well, sadly.

I know of a great one, but I don't want to help spyware programmers to find ways around it by mentioning it.




RE: But it's such crap..
By Spinne on 2/15/2006 8:36:51 AM , Rating: 2
Of course you do.


RE: But it's such crap..
By marvdmartian on 2/15/2006 8:56:56 AM , Rating: 2
The difference being that adaware and spybot are free, and likely not as full of bloatware that seems to plague most MS products.
Sorta like the wonderful "malicious software" program that MS made for windows xp. Instead of making it a "must have" update (like a security flaw repair), they should have made it an optional update. That way, I don't get nagged every time I do a windows update to install it, and have to check the box (for the umpteenth time!!!) that says to ignore it, and never tell me about it again.
Thanks for thinking of us, MS. Too bad you guys couldn't have gotten serious about the issues of spyware and adware 5 years ago, when they were beginning to become an issue. I'll stick with known, proven, programs, like spybot and ad-aware!


RE: But it's such crap..
By Bonrock on 2/15/2006 12:27:38 PM , Rating: 3
Thank you for that insightful, well researched anti-Microsoft diatribe. I'm sure your opinion on Windows Defender/AntiSpyware will come as quite a surprise to all the computer magazines and web sites which have deemed it to be quite a worthy product. Not to mention that it's the only free antispyware program that will run in the background and monitor your computer; with others, you have to upgrade to the paid version to get that capability.


RE: But it's such crap..
By Tegeril on 2/15/2006 8:51:22 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft Antispyware, AdAware, and Spybot Search and Destroy are the three programs that make up the holy trinity of everyday spyware removal - no other free options come close. It's too bad that Microsoft hate blinds people from using a very efficient program.

Webroot is also fantastic, but does not fall into the free category.


RE: But it's such crap..
By mindless1 on 2/17/2006 9:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
It is crap, not the software but the philosophy MS is taking that is the same as ever- dont' fix the flaws, bolt on more crap to the point even basic tasks need a 2GHz or better CPU. LOL, it's looking more and more every day like we should just go backwards to win2k and use only 3rd party software because MS looks to only pile on further code rather than fixing existing code.

For example, the browser should NOT have the ability to exectute most of the things it can. Nor should the email client. What do they care? They dont' have to be competitive, to offer what the public wants. The public does not want a perception of attempt, they want the original product, out-of-box, to not have the glaring holes. It is extremely offensive that MS didn't strip the features out until there was a better way. DOn't you even realize MS alone is responsible for allowing the vast majority of spyware and viri to exist at all?

We could argue that some other code has flaws and would be exploited, but so it goes with any product, we don't say "it's ok our vacuum cleaner catches on fire" because some other vacuum cleaner has some other flaw. It's not ok. MS knows, knew, and chooses to only propigate the problematic situation.


Why trust the company that screwed you to cure you?
By huges84 on 2/15/2006 9:53:38 AM , Rating: 1
We all know that the major reason people get spyware on their computer is from two sources: using Internet Explorer and downloading programs that are bundled with spyware.

It is Microsoft's fault in my opinion for making it so easy for websites to install software onto your computer and then not doing anything about it for years even when it became an obvious problem. And they still only gave the extra protection to XP SP2 users. The other problem is of course people installing programs that they shouldn't be trusting, which is entirely the user's fault.

But since Microsoft made it so easy to get infected in the first place, why would you trust them to fix the job? If you bought a house that had a crappy layout you wouldn't hire the architect that designed it to do the remoldeling!

Instead people should switch to a browser that is not IE based. This basically means Opera or Firefox. Both are free and make it extremely hard for websites to install software on your computer (they have to find and exploit a bug in the browser or in Java). PLus there are so many great features in Opera that make web browsing so much better. And if you are on a modem, it has lots of features to make webpages load faster.





By segagenesis on 2/15/2006 10:55:46 AM , Rating: 3
Because 99% of mainstream users dont give a damn and consider Linux/Firefox/Macs to be geek dweeb software. The mainstream will buy this stuff up in droves even if it was priced at $50 extra on top of the OS and the 1% who don't like it would be the most vocal about it on websites. It's like including A/C on your average new car, people buy it because it comes with the car and not from a 3rd part Joes Garage.


By bob661 on 2/15/2006 12:55:32 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, Mr. 99%, loads of non-geeks use Firefox. Firefox is NOT dweeb, geekware anymore. It is a mainstream product. Hence its popularity. You are also wrong about Linux and Macs as J6P doesn't know what those are to even form an opinion on them. Thirdly, you are wrong about people buying this software in droves because most people get their computers from Best Buy/Circuit City and the like and don't modify them in any way. To the average user, a computer is just like a refrigerator or microwave, it's an appliance. The only way this software will take off is if it's pre-installed on the computer they buy.


By huges84 on 2/15/2006 8:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
Well I for one think that it is just lack of exposure to new things that keeps people from using them. I was a pretty novice computer user when I saw Opera running on a friends laptop. It only took about 3 mins to make me wanna use it myself. I think that is the same reason that the sales of Macs has increased. People saw the iPod and iTunes and saw what they were missing out on.

But yes, there are plenty of people that just want to use whatever came on their computer from the manufacturer, becuase they figure that if it is from them then it must be the best. That even includes all the stupid toolbars and crap that they install. That stuff drives me nuts!


By IsDanReally on 2/15/2006 12:27:34 PM , Rating: 2
You forgot the other main reason...users are ignorant. I've used Internet Explorer for over 10 years, and yet I've never gotten my computer infected with spyware, adware, or a virus. Granted, if I "need" to go to a site that I think might be questionable, I use Opera, which I have set to not use Java. That, and I use common sense when I download things (like an mp3 should be called .mp3.exe, and games that a huge should be a tiny .exe file, patches should come from the righ source, etc).

It never ceases to amaze me when I see people who think, for example, Blizzard would release updates at legitdiablopatches.com or something similar, or that Microsoft would email you updates. A little bit of brain power goes a long way.

But, people's lack of understanding keeps me in the money, so I cannot complain too much (except when people think everything is Microsofts fault).


By huges84 on 2/15/2006 8:05:27 PM , Rating: 2
I do know the users are ignorant part, I just lumped it in with the downloading stupid crap part.

But you are still at more risk using IE. For one thing exploits for it are actively exploited for significant amounts fo time before they are patched. Microsoft is known to let exploits that haven't had too much publicity stay vulnerable for months.

You say that you use Opera when a site is questionable, but how do you know that the sites you visit will not be hacked? Sure the big ones probably will never have that happen, but I know that I visit a ton of smaller sites in the span of a week. The fact is security is a multi-layered solution, and you admit that one of those layers is faulty. That isn't good.

Anyways, I didn't really even know about the security advantages when I switched. I switched to Opera because it had mouse gestures, tabbed browsing, and completely customizable layout. Then I read an article called "30 days to becoming an opera lover" and I saw all the cool things I could do and I was hooked. And things have gotten even better all along. I can't tell you how convenient it is to have my email and browser be integrated. As well as the abilty to search and categorize everything in so many different ways. And the keyboard shortcuts are such a time saver.


New Name, Same Game?
By dev0lution on 2/15/2006 12:34:51 AM , Rating: 2
Any word on whether this update has the same bug that reports Norton AV as spyware and tries to remove it?

If not, I'll pass until it's fixed since my older Anti-Spyware Beta has been playing nice with my system thus far.




RE: New Name, Same Game?
By jamesbond007 on 2/15/2006 12:36:38 AM , Rating: 2
MS apparently addressed that issue with a new update for the beta1. (or so I remember reading)

My guess is that you should be fine. =)

...of course, I could be wrong!


spyware
By ryanbrancel on 2/15/2006 5:11:25 PM , Rating: 2
Spyware is a scam. There have always been scams throughout human history. Like when you got duped in grade school for swapping a priceless baseball card for a chocolate chip cookie. It's not entirely Microsoft's fault that spyware is a problem. Is it AT&T's fault that phone scams occur? Whose at fault for Spam e-mails? Firefox and other browsers will also not stop you from stupidly clicking on a pop-up to download malware, etc.




RE: spyware
By huges84 on 2/15/2006 8:42:22 PM , Rating: 2
You are right that companies can't be blamed for the actions of nefarious people.

But most of those popups are Internet Explorer asking you to install an ActiveX control. You won't get htose unless you are running IE. And Opera also has a built in popup blocker (for years now) that will block most other popups. So actually, yes switching browsers can stop users from doing stupid things.

And don't forget that it's the fact that it was so easy to get your software installed on people's computers that has made spyware so financially attractive and accelerated the market. Things would be better without IE.


doh
By MIKEMIKE on 2/15/06, Rating: -1
RE: doh
By jamesbond007 on 2/15/2006 12:35:13 AM , Rating: 2
Wow, nothing like gloating on the Internet about running a pirated copy of Windows and then to put the icing on the cake, listing a 'nice price' to acquire it for. Seriously, if it's that cheap for you, why bother downloading a pirated copy, putting up with the work-arounds for some software...all so you can eventually purchase a legitmate copy for $12 and force yourself to reinstall your OS later on?

E-penis ++;

:: rolls eyes ::

Anyways, props to Microsoft for keeping this damn nice software free and up-to-date!


RE: doh
By PurdueRy on 2/15/2006 1:44:26 AM , Rating: 2
He goes to Purdue...he can get that legit copy for the perfectly legal price of $12


RE: doh
By MrSmurf on 2/15/2006 7:31:27 AM , Rating: 3
...even worse. He's too cheap to shell out $12, lol.


RE: doh
By SGTPan on 2/15/2006 2:22:39 AM , Rating: 2
I could be mistaken, but I believe what Microsoft is doing is offering Windows defender free right now, in its Beta stages, but the final release will require a paid subscription. I think there's going to be a "Basic" version of it built into Vista (since it's definatly in the two Vista builds I've previewed), but without most of the features of the "Premium" version. If anyone has any more information about it, please share the wealth.


RE: doh