I get my antivirus from Bell for $60 a year ( 3 computers ) I am considering buying Norton antivirus for $29.95 at the big box electronic store ( 3 users ) My third alternative is to get a free antivirus off the internet. What are the differences from the 3 choices. How does free antivirus make money?
Free antivirus vs. paid antivirus - Is there a small, big or no difference.
- Thread starter Ceiling Cat
- Start date
The only one i use is 100% free and it's excellent
Microsoft Security Essentials
for Windows Vista and 7
About Microsoft Security Essentials
Microsoft Security Essentials provides real-time protection for your home PC that guards against viruses, spyware, and other malicious software.
Microsoft Security Essentials is a free* download from Microsoft that is simple to install, easy to use, and always kept up to date so you can be assured your PC is protected by the latest technology. It’s easy to tell if your PC is secure — when you’re green, you’re good. It’s that simple.
Microsoft Security Essentials runs quietly and efficiently in the background so that you are free to use your Windows-based PC the way you want—without interruptions or long computer wait times.
http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
Microsoft Security Essentials
for Windows Vista and 7
About Microsoft Security Essentials
Microsoft Security Essentials provides real-time protection for your home PC that guards against viruses, spyware, and other malicious software.
Microsoft Security Essentials is a free* download from Microsoft that is simple to install, easy to use, and always kept up to date so you can be assured your PC is protected by the latest technology. It’s easy to tell if your PC is secure — when you’re green, you’re good. It’s that simple.
Microsoft Security Essentials runs quietly and efficiently in the background so that you are free to use your Windows-based PC the way you want—without interruptions or long computer wait times.
http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/
I used to pay for anti virus software like McAfee. But reading posts here on terb alerted me to free software. Now I use AVG anti virus and it seems to work just as well. By that I mean I haven't had any virus problems. So from the point of view of this non tech savvy person, I would say no difference.
I might add that one time when I was using paid software, it came time for renewal. I can't remember exactly what the problem was, but the software company screwed up the renewal. I was without functional software for a few weeks and picked up a virus. So at least in that case, paid software was inferior.
I might add that one time when I was using paid software, it came time for renewal. I can't remember exactly what the problem was, but the software company screwed up the renewal. I was without functional software for a few weeks and picked up a virus. So at least in that case, paid software was inferior.
Just my 2 cents (being the geek I am)...
Norton is rated as the best antivirus and from experience its likely the best at removing those pesky bugs if/when you get them. That being said, its is also the biggest resource hog so you better have a somewhat newer machine if you are gonna run that.
Free AVG is a good detector, as is Free Avast. That being said, they are both in business to make money so there is no possible way the free version is identical to the paid version. My understanding is that the paid versions offer better (full) virus removal tools.
Not sure what Bell offers, but the free Rogers Antivirus is just 2 year old Norton and it sucks.
Lastly, Microsoft.... have yet to find anyone who was actually saved by this product. Sure, you haven't got a virus since you may have installed it.. but that doesn't mean the tool is working, does it! I'd be cautious about this product if you are that worried about viruses and such.
Norton is rated as the best antivirus and from experience its likely the best at removing those pesky bugs if/when you get them. That being said, its is also the biggest resource hog so you better have a somewhat newer machine if you are gonna run that.
Free AVG is a good detector, as is Free Avast. That being said, they are both in business to make money so there is no possible way the free version is identical to the paid version. My understanding is that the paid versions offer better (full) virus removal tools.
Not sure what Bell offers, but the free Rogers Antivirus is just 2 year old Norton and it sucks.
Lastly, Microsoft.... have yet to find anyone who was actually saved by this product. Sure, you haven't got a virus since you may have installed it.. but that doesn't mean the tool is working, does it! I'd be cautious about this product if you are that worried about viruses and such.
B
burt-oh-my!
I run Firefox on my desktop and do not use the Internet Explorer much, on my laptops I run Firefox on Ubuntu. Does this lessen my chances to catch a virus?
IMHO, AVG is the best. Norton and Mcafee has missed virus's that AVG has caught on my machine. I've used AVG for years.
Free AV is Fine
My first PC came with McAfee preloaded which was good for 3 yrs. Then McAfee wanted me to pay, so I went to Norton 2002 which I got off a p2p site for free and used Norton 2002 with no problems, till switching to Avast in 2006.
On my new PC with W7, free Microsoft Security Essentials is used.
Microsoft Security Essentials works great.
Free Avast is used on my laptop with Vista and on another desktop running XP.
Been using free Avast since 2006 with no problems.
I mainly use Linux Ubuntu now which requires no AV!
Been using Linux for over 4 years with no security/virus/malware issues whatsoever.
Better security is the main reason to me, for using Linux plus the fact Linux and all Linux software is FREE!...
I have never paid for AV yet!
My first PC came with McAfee preloaded which was good for 3 yrs. Then McAfee wanted me to pay, so I went to Norton 2002 which I got off a p2p site for free and used Norton 2002 with no problems, till switching to Avast in 2006.
On my new PC with W7, free Microsoft Security Essentials is used.
Microsoft Security Essentials works great.
Free Avast is used on my laptop with Vista and on another desktop running XP.
Been using free Avast since 2006 with no problems.
I mainly use Linux Ubuntu now which requires no AV!
Been using Linux for over 4 years with no security/virus/malware issues whatsoever.
Better security is the main reason to me, for using Linux plus the fact Linux and all Linux software is FREE!...
When I bought my Dells I had to fight with them not to pre-install McAffee - they couldn't understand why i didn't want a 3 month free trial - ever try unistall that or Norton? Yikes, took me 2 days to fully uninstall it and in the end had to do it file by file because it attaches itself to other dll files that you shouldn't delete. I also don't run MS products unless I have to.
I run free AVG. I also run Spybot [free] once every couple of weeks as well as Advanced System Care.
Warning: do not run multiple anti-virus programmes simultaneously. They don't play nicely together and your computer will grind to a crawl.
I run free AVG. I also run Spybot [free] once every couple of weeks as well as Advanced System Care.
Warning: do not run multiple anti-virus programmes simultaneously. They don't play nicely together and your computer will grind to a crawl.
I know someone who always buys Kaspersky, and I get to use one of his user codes each time. So far I have found it works great, so long as I remember to run checks once every week or so. The updates don't slow down my computer much at all either. The only problem with it is that when you install it you have to mark each program as 'safe' the first time you use it afterwards.
From my googling research apparently the best free anti-virus softwares right now are Avast and Avira. Many experts claim that the free AVG software has gone downhill significantly, but their paid subscription is still okay.
My new computer I installed Avast in July, but my old computers all used to have AVG.
My new computer I installed Avast in July, but my old computers all used to have AVG.
LOL!
Know what ya mean.....
My new Dell i7 with W7 came preloaded with a 60 day complimentary version of McAfee. 60 days, whoop dee doo! I figured WTF, use McAfee since it's already on and then planned to use free and highly rated Microsoft Security Essentials when the 60 day free trial is over. Well after 30 days farking McAfee is hitting me with pop-ups up the ying yang saying 'Time to Renew'! Your AV trail usage is expiring! Even though there were 30 days left! So I just clicked them off and ignored them. A week later the pop-ups get worse. Now McAfee says trial is over, time to renew NOW because they are not protecting my PC anymore, in spite of having 3 weeks left in the trial version! Fark McAfee! I uninstalled McAfee and put in Microsoft Security Essentials. Been using Microsoft Security Essentials since with no problems on the Windows side of this dual boot system which runs both W7 and Linux.
Installed Linux 8 hours after getting this new PC, since Linux is run 99% of the time now and requires no AV. I have total faith in Microsoft Security Essentials because when running Windows, only safe sites are surfed, the little W7 is used.
However with Linux I have been hitting ANY sites desired (suspect sites, risky sites, hacker sites) with total impunity and don't worry about a thing for the last 4 years! Linux IS that secure and worry free...
I used avg for years, then I had problems. So I uninstalled avg and installed avast (actually from what I read from WoodPeekers recomendations), and it found all kinds of stuff, and I upgraded and scanned everyday with avg. Avast INMO, is the way to go.
Avast Internet Security
Still too slow to take seriously
Our last experience with Avast! left us utterly annoyed, and for good reason. It was slow, resource-heavy, and seemed to suffer from an identity crisis, with a quirky user interface that looked more like a media player than an AV scanner.
That was the free version we looked at, and this year, we put Avast!’s full-blown security suite under the microscope. A close inspection reveals that some of our previous complaints remain, but there have also been a handful of welcome improvements.
For starters, Avast! sports brand-new digs, and it’s never looked better. Gone is the goofy media-player façade, replaced by a sleek UI that’s easy to navigate. All the controls are clearly labeled, so you won’t spend time fumbling around looking for things like the IM shield or firewall.
Initially, Avast! did the best job out of the bunch at blocking most forms of malware. If we clicked a link containing malicious code, not only did Avast! stop the script from executing, it also disabled the website to prevent us from doing any harm. But when we turned our attention to seedier sides of the web, Avast! allowed us to download a dirty archive brimming with infectious files and failed to detect any of the payloads inside. Where Avast! somewhat redeems itself, however, is with its sandbox mode. Accessible through the right-click context menu, you can run any file in a virtual environment, including your browser, and then kill the process if it turns out to be a virus. If you remember to use it, it’s like having a persistent undo button.
But for all of Avast!’s improvements, it’s still saddled with the slowest scan engine of the bunch, taking twice as long to scan our test bed as the next-slowest security suite.
Pros:Sleek, improved, easily-navigatable UI. Performed well against malware. Sandbox mode.
Cons: Slowest scan engine in our roundup. Allowed us to download infectious files.
RATING 5/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/avast_internet_security
Still too slow to take seriously
Our last experience with Avast! left us utterly annoyed, and for good reason. It was slow, resource-heavy, and seemed to suffer from an identity crisis, with a quirky user interface that looked more like a media player than an AV scanner.
That was the free version we looked at, and this year, we put Avast!’s full-blown security suite under the microscope. A close inspection reveals that some of our previous complaints remain, but there have also been a handful of welcome improvements.
For starters, Avast! sports brand-new digs, and it’s never looked better. Gone is the goofy media-player façade, replaced by a sleek UI that’s easy to navigate. All the controls are clearly labeled, so you won’t spend time fumbling around looking for things like the IM shield or firewall.
Initially, Avast! did the best job out of the bunch at blocking most forms of malware. If we clicked a link containing malicious code, not only did Avast! stop the script from executing, it also disabled the website to prevent us from doing any harm. But when we turned our attention to seedier sides of the web, Avast! allowed us to download a dirty archive brimming with infectious files and failed to detect any of the payloads inside. Where Avast! somewhat redeems itself, however, is with its sandbox mode. Accessible through the right-click context menu, you can run any file in a virtual environment, including your browser, and then kill the process if it turns out to be a virus. If you remember to use it, it’s like having a persistent undo button.
But for all of Avast!’s improvements, it’s still saddled with the slowest scan engine of the bunch, taking twice as long to scan our test bed as the next-slowest security suite.
Pros:Sleek, improved, easily-navigatable UI. Performed well against malware. Sandbox mode.
Cons: Slowest scan engine in our roundup. Allowed us to download infectious files.
RATING 5/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/avast_internet_security
Avira AntiVir Free Edition
A serviceable solution if you supply your own smart computing habits
Ask any penny-pinching power user what he thinks about non-free security suites, and he’ll tell you it’s a fool’s solution, plain and simple. After all, what’s the point of paying for AV software when programs like AntiVir offer the same protection sans a price tag?
A valid question, so we set out to answer it. We combed through the data available from two well-known independent testing labs—Virus Bulletin and AV-Comparatives—and in both cases, we found that AntiVir historically performs well, boasting high detection rates. So far, so good.
Even better, AntiVir added a bit of basic spyware protection to this year’s version, addressing one of our primary complaints about AntiVir in 2009. Repeating some of the same tests we used last year, this year’s AntiVir did a much better job protecting IE from rogue code and prevented a few other spyware shenanigans, such as altering our host file.
But it wasn’t all peaches and cream. Based on AntiVir’s track record, we didn’t expect to run into too much trouble with Trojans. We were wrong. When attempting to download the same dirty archive we used throughout this roundup, AntiVir failed to detect any of the several payloads inside. Moments later, our test bed was in pretty bad shape. The various viruses disabled UAC, knocked out access to the Task Manager, and even managed to block AntiVir from running a scan.
Based on our in-house testing, it’s tough to recommend AntiVir if you’re installing AV software for family for friends. But for power users who don’t plan on putting themselves into too many precarious situations, like romping around the web’s dark alleys and searching for software via P2P, AntiVir still deserves consideration. Its ultra-low footprint makes it a serviceable option for anyone who doesn’t want to sacrifice performance; just be sure to tread carefully.
Pros: Added spyware protection in this version. Protects IE from rogue code.
Cons: Failed to detect any of the several payloads inside our contaminated archive.
Rating 6/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/avira_antivir_free_edition
A serviceable solution if you supply your own smart computing habits
Ask any penny-pinching power user what he thinks about non-free security suites, and he’ll tell you it’s a fool’s solution, plain and simple. After all, what’s the point of paying for AV software when programs like AntiVir offer the same protection sans a price tag?
A valid question, so we set out to answer it. We combed through the data available from two well-known independent testing labs—Virus Bulletin and AV-Comparatives—and in both cases, we found that AntiVir historically performs well, boasting high detection rates. So far, so good.
Even better, AntiVir added a bit of basic spyware protection to this year’s version, addressing one of our primary complaints about AntiVir in 2009. Repeating some of the same tests we used last year, this year’s AntiVir did a much better job protecting IE from rogue code and prevented a few other spyware shenanigans, such as altering our host file.
But it wasn’t all peaches and cream. Based on AntiVir’s track record, we didn’t expect to run into too much trouble with Trojans. We were wrong. When attempting to download the same dirty archive we used throughout this roundup, AntiVir failed to detect any of the several payloads inside. Moments later, our test bed was in pretty bad shape. The various viruses disabled UAC, knocked out access to the Task Manager, and even managed to block AntiVir from running a scan.
Based on our in-house testing, it’s tough to recommend AntiVir if you’re installing AV software for family for friends. But for power users who don’t plan on putting themselves into too many precarious situations, like romping around the web’s dark alleys and searching for software via P2P, AntiVir still deserves consideration. Its ultra-low footprint makes it a serviceable option for anyone who doesn’t want to sacrifice performance; just be sure to tread carefully.
Pros: Added spyware protection in this version. Protects IE from rogue code.
Cons: Failed to detect any of the several payloads inside our contaminated archive.
Rating 6/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/avira_antivir_free_edition
Microsoft Security Essentials
Windows Live OneCare reincarnated for the masses
Someone over at Microsoft must watch a lot of hockey, because it’s the only way to explain the company’s recent hat trick. First there was Bing, the much-improved “decision” engine that replaced Live Search. Then Windows 7 launched, atoning for Vista. Now we have Microsoft Security Essentials, one of the latest entries into the field of AV, and another winning product from Microsoft.
Essentials scored points with us right off the bat with its supersonic 10-second install time. Even after downloading the latest update, we still hadn’t invested more than a minute or so of our time. And while Vista, Internet Explorer, and other Microsoft software made it easy at times to rag on Redmond for poor resource management, there would be none of that with Essentials, which disappeared quietly into the background.
When it came time to test Essentials, we checked our expectations at the door but were nevertheless pleasantly surprised. Essentials sailed through our synthetic spyware and virus testing without so much as flinching and fared equally well at thwarting our attempts to inflict damage with genuine payloads.
Microsoft did leave plenty of room for improvement, however; most notably in the swiftness of the scan engine, or lack thereof. Scanning just 60GB of data took nearly 17 minutes, and that time never improved with subsequent sweeps. That’s more than five times longer than it took AntiVir—the only other freebie AV app in this roundup—to sift through the same files.
We’d also like to see Microsoft offer power users more fine-grain control over the settings. The basics are there, like setting up scheduled scans, and you can choose whether or not to enable real-time protection. You can even tell Essentials to skip certain files and locations. But good luck trying to dig any deeper than that. For instance, you’re not able to configure the real-time module to act more aggressively if there’s a virus outbreak going around, like the Conficker scare, nor dial things down if it starts picking up too many false positives.
These are minor quibbles when you consider that Essentials won’t tax your wallet or your system, while still getting the job done. If you’re a gamer who’d rather spend $60 on a triple-A title than security software, does anything else really matter?
Pros: 10-second install. Breezed through our synthetic spyware and virus testing without infection.
Cons: Slow scan engine didn't get faster with future scans. No fine-grain control for power users.
Rating 8/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/microsoft_security_essentials
Windows Live OneCare reincarnated for the masses
Someone over at Microsoft must watch a lot of hockey, because it’s the only way to explain the company’s recent hat trick. First there was Bing, the much-improved “decision” engine that replaced Live Search. Then Windows 7 launched, atoning for Vista. Now we have Microsoft Security Essentials, one of the latest entries into the field of AV, and another winning product from Microsoft.
Essentials scored points with us right off the bat with its supersonic 10-second install time. Even after downloading the latest update, we still hadn’t invested more than a minute or so of our time. And while Vista, Internet Explorer, and other Microsoft software made it easy at times to rag on Redmond for poor resource management, there would be none of that with Essentials, which disappeared quietly into the background.
When it came time to test Essentials, we checked our expectations at the door but were nevertheless pleasantly surprised. Essentials sailed through our synthetic spyware and virus testing without so much as flinching and fared equally well at thwarting our attempts to inflict damage with genuine payloads.
Microsoft did leave plenty of room for improvement, however; most notably in the swiftness of the scan engine, or lack thereof. Scanning just 60GB of data took nearly 17 minutes, and that time never improved with subsequent sweeps. That’s more than five times longer than it took AntiVir—the only other freebie AV app in this roundup—to sift through the same files.
We’d also like to see Microsoft offer power users more fine-grain control over the settings. The basics are there, like setting up scheduled scans, and you can choose whether or not to enable real-time protection. You can even tell Essentials to skip certain files and locations. But good luck trying to dig any deeper than that. For instance, you’re not able to configure the real-time module to act more aggressively if there’s a virus outbreak going around, like the Conficker scare, nor dial things down if it starts picking up too many false positives.
These are minor quibbles when you consider that Essentials won’t tax your wallet or your system, while still getting the job done. If you’re a gamer who’d rather spend $60 on a triple-A title than security software, does anything else really matter?
Pros: 10-second install. Breezed through our synthetic spyware and virus testing without infection.
Cons: Slow scan engine didn't get faster with future scans. No fine-grain control for power users.
Rating 8/10
source: http://www.maximumpc.com/article/reviews/microsoft_security_essentials
