Vista - Is Windows Defender built-in to Vista?

I seem to have Windows defender running on my Vista Ultimate SP 2
laptop. This is despite the fact that I cannot see it in the list of
installed programs, and my download archive does not have a version
that runs in Vista. I used to have Windows Live OneCare installed, but
I've uninstalled that and ran the cleanup tool, yet I still see
Defender in my taskbar (although it complains that its definitions ar
eout of date).

I'd like to clean this up before I install the new Security Essentials
package, so any pointers would be useful. Thanks.

Click Start - All Programmes and you should see it as Windows defender. Note that it is not an antivirus programme.

If you have been running Windows Live One Care I would suggest changing to the new Microsoft Security Essentials. It seems to be getting good reports.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials

When you install security essentials it will turn off Defender for good.
Steve

"MikeB" <mpbrede@newsgroup> wrote in message
news:ee57809c-7401-4d85-a5e2-aa504f386212@newsgroup

Yes but most advanced users disable it.
I removed it at multiple locations - from Windows Components
(Controlpanel-->Programs/features), from Services, but most fundamental is
to disable it in Administrative Console.
I don't have time how to explain how to get to Administrative Tools, turn
off UAC which may interfer with disabling Defender, etc, etc.

All I can say is for advanced users all this garbage is the entire reason
Vista was a fiasco. This nasty things gets in the way and slows you down
versus WinXP.

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:28:54 -0500, "STAN STARINSKI" <NoSpam@newsgroup>
wrote in <OY3UtFgQKHA.488@newsgroup>:
Defender actually has little overhead.

--
Best regards,
John <http:/navasgroup.com>

OK.

"STAN STARINSKI" <NoSpam@newsgroup> wrote in message
news:OY3UtFgQKHA.488@newsgroupNot most advanced users I know. Can you document this?
Not possible in Vista unless it was an upgrade from XP. Once removed, it
cannot be reinstalled. Why go through that trouble when disabling the
service is sufficient?
Disabled, not removed.
Same function as in services.
Then why bother answering at all? Helping other users involves giving up
your time.
Turning off UAC is another bad idea, quite often misunderstood and much
maligned. A properly run system can have UAC running without any
interference whatsoever. The ironic part is that this protection mechanism
is no different than the one implemented by linux systems, a requirement to
self-elevate, only the implementation is different.
Vista has more overhead than XP, and when run on XP-era hardware will be
slower and that's part of the problem. Users wanted the new OS on their old
system and expected it to perform better, and this has been a problem with
every new iteration of Windows. Vista got a bad rap because it also included
the new protection mechanisms which were frequently blamed for the
performance loss, but in reality had little to do with it. At worst, UAC is
annoying when setting up a new system and installing software, as it takes
all of what, maybe 5 seconds to be acknowledged in order to prevent a user
from being infected by malware usurping user privilege? Terrible thing to
have to put a user through....maybe they should go back to letting users get
infected sight-unseen.

It's funny how people have such selective memory, talking about how great XP
is. I can still recall all the hollering about XP's mickey-mouse interface
(just google the XP groups from 2001 if you want to see for yourself) and
how it would never be accepted in the corporate world.....

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

Hi,

"xfile" <coucou@newsgroup> wrote in message
news:eu4uiqpQKHA.4004@newsgroup
You're right. It doesn't prevent malware nor is it an antivirus product. It
simply forces a user to be more aware of what's happening on their system.
Something that, at least in my opinion, is sorely needed in the malware
fight. I don't say that it's perfect, far from it I think it should be more
intuitive. But, this is the first iteration of it and like anything, it
should get better or be dropped.

Microsoft provides a simple way of turning it off in Vista (msconfig/tools),
they just added another in Win7.
I don't think I overexagerate it. I simply try to think in terms of the
intent behind its implementation. Anyone practicing safe hex would likely
not need it, but let's be honest: most users do not do this. Rather they
click willy-nilly on anything that pops up in front of them - including
warning notices from their own AV software telling them not to do that.
Like I said, I was there at the time and it was wipespread, rampant rants
all over the 'net. From IT pros to high end users to corporate clients and
even home users. They hated it, thought it was horrendous, the biggest
mistake since MS Bob. They all said it would never fly, and now it's looked
upon as one of the best releases ever. It's not my reasoning or knowledge,
it's just an observation on how people forget and views change with time.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org

On Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:01:31 -0700 (PDT), MikeB <mpbrede@newsgroup>
wrote:
It's in the Security Center..

On Oct 1, 5:59*pm, "Rick Rogers" <r...@newsgroup> wrote:Rick, Can you help me here please? I know I turned off UAC in Vista
and then did something else to turn off the red shield nagging me that
UAC was turned off. This just bit me in the rear end, as I had no
warning that I was running without a firewall after uninstalling WLOC.
And of course, now I can't recall what I did.

What is the recommended way to disable UAC without also having to
disable the warnings of the security center?

Might you be able to hazard a guess as to how I can reenable the
warning s from the security center as well?

Thanks