Is it worth it for an typical PC user to pay for an additional antivirus, or is Windows Defender enough these days for most people’s usage?
In: Technology
It’s not a scientific answer but in general most scams these days are of the “enter your credit card info “ variety , with the major vulnerabilities around tech being related to ad networks.
So for the average home user, you probably get more out of having an adblocker and the standard windows defender than you would a paid antivirus. At most I would say you probably will get more return by saving that money and periodically upgrading hardware to make sure you’re on the latest software.
The best form of antivirus is you the user. Be smart, avoid sketchy sites and downloads, use adblockers, and windows built in software will probably cover the rest if you keep it up to date.
If you do take some risks on the internet, it’s possible a third party antivirus might catch something windows doesn’t. But also maybe not. Or maybe windows would catch it anyway. Generally a dedicated piece of software will be stricter than the built in windows stuff. But then you also might get more false positives. I’d recommend doing some more in-depth reading from people who actually test various antivirus softwares instead of just asking on a forum.
I say that as someone who didn’t bother to do the reading and pays Bitdefender 60 bucks or whatever a year for (possibly false) peace of mind. Do what I say, not what I do?
It’s not. Windows Defender is good enough and protects you from basically everything the others do as well.
The main security risk is the user doing something extremely stupid and no antivirus is going to save you from people just saying do it anyway.
TLDR: Windows Defender is about as good as any other option.
If you know basic internet and PC safety and you dont have room temp IQ, Win Defender is all u really need.
Windows defender has been good enough for the last few years. As long as you don’t go crazy with the kind of sites you surf to…. it’s more than enough.
The only issue I find with Windows Defender is performance. When it does a scan it hammers the CPU. When I’m working on music, for example, I’ll sometimes get audio dropouts because Defender has started up in the background. On a slower laptop, it can render it the machine almost unusable.
Windows on nvme storage re-installs so quickly that your smartest move is to nuke and re-install when something is detected or you are suspicious. If you can have two drives, keep your personal files on the second drive so you don’t have to worry about the nuking.
Defender is very often better than paid AV solutions, while also often being less of a resource hog.
However, an antivirus doesn’t replace common sense. It helps prevent issues borne from lack of it, but there are always ways around it for a sufficiently determined or misguided user.
The best thing to pair with Defender is a good ad blocker, like ublock.
It really helps remove a lot of the scam and phishing vectors that are everywhere nowadays.
Use firefox with Ublock and adblock+, combined with windows defender and you not clicking on links on pornsides or sent to your email, you will be fine. Also dont use usb sticks that you find or get as a gift by strangers
In the last ~five years, no. Windows Defender has a bit of bad rep based on the early versions, but it has really come up and is currently tracking among the top AV products based on various third-party testing sites.
It may not *feel* as good because it doesn’t produce much noise. Third party paid AV products try to justify their worth by the way of showing various prompts, popups and notifications to show that they’re there and vigilant. WD just does its wofk, silently.
Latest Answers