Windows Update and AntiVirus and Firewall, what r their difference

what are their difference?

Can I live without installing AntiVirus or Firewall but only updating Windows security packs??

What is the thing that AV or Firewall can help while Windows update / security packs would not??


If I disable AdBlock and so there could be lots of popups in some websites. A lot of time you will accidentally clicking on some of the popups before you close it. Could it infect virus in that case

 

Windows by default has Windows firewall turned on. MSE for W7 or older and Defender for W8 and newer and will turn on your Windows Update to Auto update so any updates will notify you of pending updates. This is only possible with Windows MSE or Defender no other A/V program can do this-other then you the user setting Windows Update to Auto Update but most users forget to do this or thinks it on when it really is off by default. And no in this day and age not having firewall and also A/V is asking for trouble and being the target of Ransomware/malware/viruses. You think your lucky then one day zap no control and it has all your information and you have no guarantee making the Ransomware payments to those criminals will even fix it for you.

 

Sorry I don't quite understand what you mean for the latter part of your description? Can it be more clear? I o sorry a lot I don't actually understand English very well. I am Japanese

 

What he is saying you need a Antivirus program.

 

Guess went to technical....

 

toughasnails and StormJumper are indeed correct. We live in an age where malware is plentiful and the base Microsoft protection is insufficient, nevermind going without protection at all. Plus, security suites do automatically update virus definitions (different products have different update frequency), and overall is the way to go for malware isn't only found on sketchy sites and such

 

Microsoft Protection is just Firewall until one installs MSE or Defender to get a A/V protection. Security suites are bloatware smart users would avoid this like a plague. All you need it just a A/V not a suite to get protection. Sooner or later people will go to blacksites even if they say they will never do that.

 

If you actually want to go there, all security software, be it antivirus, firewall, extended suite, all are bloatware for they all impact a system's performance. And for reference, by suite I actually mean antivirus plus firewall, not those extended packages that have extraneous tools that are tangential to factual protection.

Plus no, the base Microsoft firewall won't suffice if you need any sort of fully detailed configurable firewall.

Also, Windows Defender is so laughably bad that everyone uses it as the absolute minimum protection rate as comparison to literally every security software on the market, free or otherwise.

 

Yes MS Defender is the baseline protection. Along with WD, consider adding an on-demand scanners like Zemana or MBAM. You could keep a copy of Kaspersky Rescue Disk which can disinfect a system if WD failed to remove/detect malwares. But WD is the only AV that can withstand windows upgrade process w/o conflicts and lesser load as well.
As for FW, I use Windows 10 FW Control from sphinx,

 

I love those people that uses test that has been discredited already as their only sole claim why MS firewall and MSE/Defender is so bad. Again another user listening to test that have be known to be biased against MS and favoring Norton/McAfee two of the most notorious bloatware and most hacked. If you have no real usage evidence that MS security is no worse then those so called top software that fails themselves miserably then your towing their bias reports.

Actually that is based on biased test and used that to support one one misleading facts does no one any good. This post is based on faulty test organization that was already known to be biased against anything MS security software in favor of two leading brands of which themselves been shown to be far worse in being malware actions instead of actually protecting. And they themselves are the two most hacked and attacked protection software making themselves unable to even provide baseline protections.

 

You are correct, what if, MS chose to block all 3rd party AVs from functioning then AV-test.org will get horrible results and MS will be at the top.

 

Ah, nothing like reading long winded jokes, wasn't expecting that on this sort of thread. All independent tests show how atrocious MS protection is, thinking otherwise is usually done by reckless people that help the tech support business thrive, people who are MS fans or people on their payroll. Maybe you also think Windows 10 is the best thing to ever exist in terms of OSes.

However, you did say a single thing that was true, namely how Norton and Mcafee are bloatware, you're quite correct there.