if i just need Anti Virus, then I use MS Security Essentials.
If I want more functionality (eg spam filtering) then I use Kaspersky.
Microsoft Security Essentials
BitDefender
Symantec Norton Internet Security
Bullguard Internet Security
AVG Paid version
AVG Free Version
Kaspersky
G Data
Trend Micro Titanium
Eset Smart Security
Avira Premium
Avira AntiVir Personal Free Antivirus
F-Secure Internet Security
Avast
Other
Dont Know
McAfee
Sophos
So do I buy another copy of My tried and tested Symantec Noton Security
or go for a free Microsoft Security Essentials
Sorry I miss out Mc Afee. Can a mod add it
Last edited by philsmove; 4th-January-2011 at 02:34 PM.
if i just need Anti Virus, then I use MS Security Essentials.
If I want more functionality (eg spam filtering) then I use Kaspersky.
Avast. Free (as long as you re-register each year), simple, non-intrusive.
I had a lot of hassles with Norton, so swapped to McAfee - better, but got a bit annoying telling me there were issues, but then when I checked there weren't.
So just the other day I changed to AVG - month's free trial. So far, so good (touch wood), although not sure if it's worth paying for the full version rather than just the free version. Will have to make up my mind in a few weeks.
I've been using the free AVG and ZoneAlarm firewall (also free) for 3 years now and have had no problems.
I think its crazy to pay for software like this there has always been good free versions. I currently use Avira and Zonealarm on windows and don't even bother on linux
Zone Alarm and AVG free here. I also see little point in paying for them for personal use. My company has the Enterprise version of AVG, which adds a lot of useful management features, but doesn't change the core scanning. I've also heard very good things about Avast. I also use SUPERAntiSpyware to pick up a few things virus scanners don't (the pay version of AVG does include these sort of malware detectors).
I've not heard many people who've had good experiences with Norton. I've used it a few years ago and found it pretty horrible. McAfee has a better reputation, but I don't see what it offers that AVG or Avast don't.
If you want the extra features, then it's probably worth paying for AVG.
If you must pay, the one that seems to get the most praise from the sort of techie and security people who know what they're talking about is NOD32.
This might be worth a quick read too.
Last edited by geoff332; 4th-January-2011 at 06:37 PM. Reason: Added a new link
I can get Kaspersky Internet Security free so I've used that for a couple of years now.
It seems pretty good from a usability point of view - I'd used McAfee and Norton before and both had annoying problems.
I've no idea how it compares in terms of stopping bad stuff though.
Love dance, will travel
I always used to use AVG free and apart from it needing user intervention for updates it seemed OK. It did let a virus through once though.
However, since becoming a ltd company many years ago, I decided to switch to McAfee which I much prefer now. I don't have to do anything to it once it's set up and clients/potential clients frown upon people bringing equipment into their premises which relies on freebies for security.
I've just wiped a windows netbook and put Ubuntu netbook Linux onto it and I have no intention of putting any security on that. (as an aside, it's made a huge difference in performance. It's gone from completely unusable to quite good)
I've always used AVG free too - and then my computer had to be wiped over Christmas due to a terminal Trojan!
I'm sure a lot of this was down to my management of the virus but free AVG alone is not enough.
Since then lots of friends have come out of the woodwork with"you should have had this" and "if only you'd asked me first" (typical!) but I've now paid for 2 years of the full AVG (£23-ish). Apparently free AVG twinned with something else would have been a better free option but hey - it's too late now.
All I've got to do now is work out how to (hopefully) get all my stuff back off my Seagate Replica which I thankfully purchased after geek-recommendation back in November
Cheers Geeks
I wouldn't touch Norton with a bargepole anymore. I've seen it fail to spot enough genuine threats in its lifetime that I just gave up on it.
It's been Kaspersky for me for the past few years although I expect it too with give up its crown to a better contender sooner or later.
As a general rule, dont use anything you can buy from PC world or Currys
I've been using Eset for several years on my PCs, but for light users recommend Avast or AVG, along with ZoneAlarm.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/ produce some interesting data, but the monthly tests show that the 'best' solution fluctuates. Try clicking through the months on this graph, for example: http://www.av-comparatives.org/image...ats/index.html
I have Norton installed on my 3 machines at home. I've used McAfee and Kaspersky in the past. The main reason for this is for the additional functionality associated with parental controls etc and not for AV alone - like others have said if all I wanted was AV and a firewall I'd use one of the freebies like AVG/Zonealarm or simply use Windows Essentials. Since I always buy a copy of the software in a sale (last time it was £35.99) I am not going to get too excited at saving the money which works out at only £12 per machine per year.
I do find Norton to be more of a performance hog than I like, but none of my machines at home do anything where this causes me problems. I've been compromised a couple of times over the last 4-5 years when using Kaspersky and McAfee, but then I know of people that have had similar bad experiences with all of the major endpoint security suites, sooner or later something will get past them regardless, as borne out from the link posted by RedFox.
Well I went for free Microsoft Security Essentials
Yesterday the computer slowed down big time
So run a full scan with Microsoft Security Essentials
and sure enough it found and fixed several serious threats
BUT how/ why did it let them in the first place??
Looks like its back to Norton
used to be a McAfee guy but Kaspersky is the bee's knees !!
I'd steer clear of Norton. its a royal pain IMHO !
I don't use any security software on my home PCs (though my router firewall is enabled as is Windows Firewall - I run XP home and 7 starter edition) This has been the case since I got my first proper PC at home 10 years ago and in all that time I have had just one problem, namely Blaster, which struck so widely so quickly that I am not sure I'd have been any less impacted if I was running a security suite. I do keep a regularly updated Ghost image of my system partition and store all my data on a separate partition so that I can simply rollback to an earlier setup if I did fall victim to a virus or similar.
I'm not claiming this setup is ideal for everyone, I have a reasonable level of technical knowledge and, more importantly, the knowledge to identify (and thus avoid) many of the common attack vectors so no opening email attachments of unknown provenance, no installing dodgy shareware, etc. Also, and I suppose, quite crucially I am the only person using the machines so I don't need to protect others from their own ignorance.
As I said, it's not a solution for everyone but don't believe that lack of such software automatically means your machine is doomed to malicious infestation because it's not.
Does anyone have any experience with webroot software?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks