Windows Defender to protect against apps that show coercive messages

I like the idea. Putting a halt to scareware is always good news. As for people saying this is MS spying on you, I partly disagree (not about the part about MS spying on you), but on the part about 99% of these "software" gets installed without user consent either because, yes, most non-knowledgeable users are happy clickers (next, next, next) or the software gets installed inadvertently. And I am pretty sure most of the software isn't useful at all anyway (not even the paid versions) and most of the time is a backdoor to further issues.

Faith said:

Aren't those cookie ads? That's not really what this is about. This is about free software that's trying to lure you into a premium by telling you lies or misleading information about your computer. I doubt Microsoft will try to tell you that your computer is about to die if you don't buy Office 365.

You are quite correct - I was conflating two separate issues.

However deciding if something is coercive is a value judgement. Perhaps CCleaner would be a better example. No-one (I suppose) would say its locked "Pro" features are coercive but they do encourage you to upgrade for (I think but it doesn't matter if it is true) no benefit. Someone would have to say "CCleaner.exe is good, DodgyScanner.exe is bad" which is tricky as it could be just a matter of opinion.

It will be OK if you can override it but already I find smartscreen/defender deleting some downloads it doesn't like even if you say "Download anyway". You can only override this by suspending protection.

We will see how it works out anyway I guess.

This could affect the giveaway software that a lot of people look forward to checking out each day. As most know the giveway software is a time-limited offer and must be installed within 24 hrs. If MS detects something in those installed applications then it will be removed without the PC owner's knowledge or consent. Many times the features in the giveaway version is what the person wants, but because they offer better features in the Pro version they let you know. So we stand to lose applications that we use. This is becoming too controlling for MS. Sad

Always used MS Def as a second opinion-scanner , but if its removing things I want to keep , then I will remove/disable Windows Defender for sure..........!

Started trying to use Defender on some of the house hold systems, but if removes something I wanna keep, then yup will eventually be sticking with Avast Free, and Malwarebytes Free. Guess will see what happens prior to March 1st, or if I experience performance issue might end up with it disabled once again and back on Avast lol, time will tell

Thanks for posting the article, Shawn. :)

The statement “making unnecessary purchase decisions” is absolutely correct. Everything one needs to maintain the Windows system is already included. All automatic these days as well.

Josey Wales said:

The majority of freeware does this. I do not need a watchdog, MS seems to think that their user base is full of users that for lack of a better word- "Can't Read"

How about this instead? > MS knows that most of their user base is full of users that for lack of a better words - Not as tech savvy and get swindled. Do you have something against anyone protecting the ignorant and/or naïve? This leads to 3rd party crapps to take over part or most of their system and heaven only knows how much telemetry if that be the case.

Faith said:

Which is probably the truth. Though freewares doesn't need to lie or spread misinformation to gain monetary access in my opinion.

Well stated, Faith.

Josey Wales said:

No they do not but Microsoft has enough access to your PC, they do not need more.

What access is that? Do you mean impermissible access? If so, perhaps you can show us how they do.

lehnerus2000 said:

Agreed. :)

It's also "a bit rich" for a company that removes features from it cheaper OS versions to "encourage" you to upgrade to a more expensive version (e.g. W10 Pro to W10 Workstation)

Oh please. Really? #1 is that they don’t remove them, but rather don’t include them and never have in the past. Secondly, that would be like someone walking into an auto dealership wanting to purchase less-costly model demanding that they get all the features of the more-costly model. One gets what one pays for under capitalism, yes?

Josey Wales said:

There comes a time in everyone's life that they must take responsibilities for their own actions or lack thereof. I for one, want complete control over my PC and if I have to remove Defender, I will do so.

Doesn’t sound like you feel you have “complete control” if MS has “access to your PC”. So why is it you don’t you take your own advice of “take responsibilities for their own actions or lack thereof” and use a different OS? If not, sounds to me like you’ll at least have to look for a different AV then.

Hi,

lx07 said:

They should look to their own outlook.com and Skype apps then. Always bugging me to buy Office 365 subscription or spend money on some idiot sport betting site.

It is not a bad idea but one persons idea of "coercive" is another persons idea of "advertisement".

I find outlook.com adverts only mildly irritating but the ones on Skype are pretty coercive frankly. Especially if you have a gambling problem which they clearly think I have (it is all I see anyway for some reason).

If they are not designed to "put pressure on customers into making a purchase or performing other actions" then what are they for? Decoration?

My thoughts exactly. Some scripts that used to run on Oulook.com (the free version that is) were so cpu heavy that it actually made the program hang.
Not to mention the energy it is stealing from the users etc. It really was becoming ridiculous.
So yes, MS is guilty just the same as they promote the add free version alongside and of course that's a paid for version.
The entire web is getting ridiculous with all these adds and trackers if you'd ask me.

Cheers,