You mean people actually pay for Windows, and think Microsoft can do security, WTF!

Microsoft should be paying me for all the time I've wasted fixing the fallout the bugs in their OSs, the obstructive interface, and worse not allowing me to fix these myself!

Corporations, if their shareholders and executives want to be legal (psychopathic, dead) persons, then they should face the same liabilities too, and not get off Scott-free for all their externalisations!

Damned cheeky Vampires I say!

Man, I can't get over the blatant harshness displayed on these comments these days.

How many of you own tin-foil hats? Anyways, back to the point of my posting...

I got in on the technical beta for MSE and have used it on XP, Vista and 7 and for a free anti-virus solution I have found it fast, reliable and caught everything thrown at it (I verified this by also performing online scans using ESET's online scanner).

I found it a lot more responsive, less intrusive and faster than comparable free solutions from AVG, Avast and Avira (each of which caused me some sort of software problem, how? I dunno, I'm not sure myself honestly).

And for those who say it is forced on users, etc. It isn't, there isn't that much promotion for it (I haven't seen any really) and it's a solution for those who can't afford a full blown anti-virus.

If you want to complain that Windows isn't that secure, why not ask McAfee and Symantec why they complained to anti-trust committees about the fact they were locked out of low level parts of the OS when Vista was in beta?

If there are shills here, they must be for those companies that DEPEND on the OS being insecure. MSE isn't a complete package anyways, it's an anti-virus/anti-malware solution that helps protect the system, not a complete firewall replacement+anti-everything app.

It's better to have some basic protection rather than none, and if you had any appreciate for software development your moaning and groaning about it being insecure, you would realize that because a) windows has the most market share and b) is immensely complex, it is inherent it will have weaknesses. We're not perfect and neither are our creations.

I'm done ranting now.

Tried the program, and I found that it doesn't like my "Try before you Buy" software. and deleted parts of it right away. I would rather have the choice of keeping or deleting since I have quite a good relationship with my machine.The other fear I have is if MS went lax on Windows Defender, how long before it slows down on the support of this program.

Love it, now I can (possibly) afford something more expensive then the "stick your generic brand here" brand I normally buy for toilet paper. Currently tallying up the extra spare change in my pocket as we speak...

Oh wait, yrs of media subliminal messaging and email spam gagging has taught me that I NEED MSE and any updates for my beloved OS that I worship unconditionally.

I will obey…
I will obey…
I will obey…
Exterminate!
Exterminate!

@me, @ Doug Glass, @ BB, @ Anonymous coward:

Yes, there is the "rub" to using proprietary, closed-source software. You are using no applications, yet "your" machine mysteriously is doing something that is hidden in some arcane Heinz-57 Microsoft process (hard drive light is blinking furiously, possible network activity). What is it doing...scanning your HD for DRM-infractions, reporting back to MS and media company friends? Only Microsoft knows, and that is just the way they like it.

When auditable, open-source applications and operating systems like Linux are freely available, I really do not see how home users or systadmins can continue to trust their data to a "black box" OS like Windows which has been repeatedly proven to be insecure (as Microsoft's own "your Windows is not secure without our Security Essentials" strong-arm tactic proves all the more). Trust and Microsoft should at this point be mutually-exclusive terms.

But -- as BB's comment would seem to verify -- MS-paid comment posters are alive and well(fed) by Microsoft in an attempt to convince people that they "need" to give more of their hard-earned dollars to the needy Ballmer and Co. during an economic downturn for a glossed-over version of Microsoft's highly-unpopular Vista.

Want to impress your boss/wife/husband? Tally up the annual savings that result from the use of reliable, secure open-source software (or, conversely, continue to patch and rebuild XP if you must). Get off the "hardware-software" upgrade treadmill that is milking your corporate/household budget. Buy a $200 game console (from anyone but Microsoft) to play games if you must (which is a little bit cheaper than dumping $2000 on a gaming PC). Tell Microsoft and it's paid "brainwashing squad" to stuff it. Buy PC's loaded with Linux and avoid the Microsoft Tax.

You're making the assumption I have plans to, and actually will, upgrade at least some of my hardware or software. If what I have works, and I have all the drivers and software I need (and and am satisfied with all of it) why upgrade anything ... ever. Not unlike my vintage, pristine 1957 Chevrolet, old things can be made to keep working as they originally did for a looooong time. Forever? Hardly, but I venture to say none of us are speaking unto eternity here. But you have a point and I certainly concur. For the most part things mechanical have to be replaced sooner or later.

But that's not the issue. The crux of the matter is do I want to keep what I have and am I able to do so for as long as (now here comes the kicker) I want to? Do I have a sufficient "stockpile" of spare parts to pull that off in the foreseeable future? I as an individual can definitely pull that off. You see I'm a scrounger and the child of great [American] depression era parents. That translates into not exactly a survivalist's mentality, but close. But, that's just me and certainly not common amid today's rampant (and apparently self-destructive)consumerism.

You see AC, I do something very foreign to a whole lot of people. I plan ahead. And I don't mean false planning that's little more than a feel good exercise for the next two weeks, I mean for the next 5, 10 and 20 years. And I follow through. And it works. I hope when you hit 62 you'll retire (if you want to) and have no change in life style or maybe have a higher scale lifestyle. That's where I am because of good planning and the all important execution of the plan.

So yeah, things get old and eventually have to be replaced. But with prudent planning and proper execution, that eventuality can be postponed for a very substantial period of time. Is that applicable to electronics? It is, but people have been taught by corporate marketing departments to think it's not. Hell that holds for a lot of stuff. But, when my wife's socket A AMD XP 3200+ computer died recently (motherboard failure), I elected not to install a spare board but instead upgraded her to a fairly high-end AMD dual core processor system. We do need at least one "modern" computer now don't we. But it runs XP Pro SP3 (fully patched and updated) and that's what she wanted. But I did that for her you see. You do see that right? Oh well ... it is nice.

Windows 7 sucks balls, not to mention sucking on your hard drive all the time.

I can't sit idle and think in front of my computer -- it immediately starts doing something disk intensive which makes quite a noise when you have Raptor.

Yes, I turned off auto-defragmentation, idle-optimization, indexing, search, system restore, etc, etc, but it still trashes the drive as soon as you leave it unattended for more then a minute.

Nice argument and I agree with you 100% - in theory.

In practice, you will eventually (and probably sooner rather than later) be *forced* to upgrade by the lack of driver availability and application support for XP.

After all, 2K has the same kernel and driver model as XP and is only 2 years older, and its hard enough finding support for that.

Windows 7 is basically Fista, but nobody wants to know that. Look at the comments from Microsoft shills on this very thread. Its going to suck, and people are going to buy it anyway.

Face it: you have *seen* the future.

shock. The horror of it all. No MSE, what shall i do now? This amounts to cruel and unjust punishment

Why not create an operating system which is secure and safe from virus in the first place?

Away from my utopic vision, I use AVAST (free) on my desktop and nothing on my Macbook Pro!

Neither Vista nor 7 has a single feature I can actually use for something. They won't make my software run better. They add a lot of useless eyecandy which I'm sure many people think is pretty but I actually perform work on my computer and I prefer it to be functional. Also, when it comes to functionality, both the Vista and the 7 start menu are seriously flawed compared to the one in XP, and as I have some 100+ pieces of software installed the ability to customize the start menu to my needs is important to me. The classic mode in Vista is much akin to an insult.

I guess my primary workstation will continue to run on XP for many a year and perhaps I shall grace the laptop with 7 when some application says I must have it.

In short: Both Vista and 7 are the biggest non-events in computing history, they're useless.

"The company has said that it does not want unprotected PCs to host viruses and make the work of computer criminals easier."
So its giving up software altogether?

Don't listen to Microsoft ringers, plants and stooges; it's their job to deride people who makes comments like yours.

The thing is, millions of us agree completely with you and Microsoft is about to get that lesson all over again. Business will not be in the wholesale adoption market for at least two years and that's got Microsoft really, REALLY worried. As well they should be.

Yeah, I have no understanding of computers either. I guess all that gross ignorance has kept my XP installations fast, stable, and malware free for several years now. I just can't help it, I keep what's working and don't fix what ain't broke.

If you're happy with XP's poor security model, software-rendered graphics, hardware limitations, and beautiful 16-color loading screen, by all means, stay with your 2001 OS.

For many of us, it's time to move on. Even Linux has hardware accelerated graphics these days, and OSX had those kinds of features when it first came out. It's really nice how in Windows 7 I can see previews of all the windows instantly by rolling over the items in the taskbar. Exposé? Completely capable of it. Ever try using an "Exposé" utility in XP? It takes a few seconds to composite all the graphics. Forget animations!

Now I don't have to put in an XP registry hack to keep 40 windows open simultaneously without losing the ability to open up menus (WinXP GUI resource limits). Why would I need 40 windows open? Because I demand more of my OS than most people. To that end Windows XP is showing its age, and I'm looking forward to current and future technologies that'll take advantage of it--like my graphics card. I shouldn't need to see my CPU spike to 100% because I dragged the browser window around.

But hey, if you're satisfied with your current system, by all means, stay with it. I'm sure you're not the kind of person Microsoft is catering to anyway.

What a great excuse to switch to Linux and OpenOffice.org .

distrowatch.com
redhat.com

Nonsense. How much do you really undersand about computers or windows? Windows 7 aero does not use 80% cpu when moving windows, but your XP does. Why? Because aero interface is drawn by graphics card in hardware using shaders. XP interface on the other hand is drawn by cpu in software. The result is XP interface is actualy slower and requires much more cpu even if it has little additional effects. And I am lazy to talk about security details, but 7 and Vista are much more secure than XP. Even despite the user.

Avast works better than AVG

Check this out, Avast beats the holy crap out of AVG.

http://www.brighthub.com/computing/smb-security/articles/34746.aspx

Come on really.. MS? Anti-virus? LOL just get the free AVG, it's -free- and does just as well.

@ Someone Special: "smart" computer users don't see or notice DRM, that's only if you watch blu-ray with "media player" on your computer or *cough* pay for movies in the first place. If ya use VLC or media player classic, ya can watch blu-ray discs, downloaded 1080p movies and never even notice DRM. And FREE.

You know...windows 7 is pretty...not pretty enough to run it with it's minimum 35% CPU hoggage & 80% CPU use for moving windows around...BUT...what was wrong with XP again?

Take away the the hogging aero desktop...how is windows 7 this gigantic leap ahead in functionality?

Sure, some features are nicer...there is the security through obscurity since windows 7 was not around long enough to be hacked much...

I have XP, had it for years and years...the last virus I got was literally two years ago. My system is stable, smooth, does everything I want. Why do I need windows 7?

Windows 7 is full of draconian DRM measures & "security features" that essentially ram the user up the exit with MS drone BS.

I fear the greeks, even when they bring aero.

Genuine, About As Phoney AS Insurance. Its One Purpose, Pay for What You already OWN.

Secirity. MicroVole, Come, On. Almost Fell Off Onto Floor Laughing.

DRASHEK MD.