Windows 7 anti-malware products compared

Now you're being silly. The only time I recommend it, is when a different AV has been demonstrated to cause a BSOD. Fact

Golden said:

Now you're being silly. The only time I recommend it, is when a different AV has been demonstrated to cause a BSOD. Fact

Objecting to recommending an inferior AV instead of finding why a certain AV is causing a BSOD or recommending another AV that won't cause BSODs without compromising security is silly?

And there we go with the eyeroll.

I'm with Jeannie. Microsoft never saw a good idea they wouldn't steal and then implement badly, take Bing for example. Whenever I sevice a machine "protected" by MSE, I remove it and install Avast. Compatibility is of no value if effectivness is absent.

mjf said:

I don't dare hit anyone with my purse; the darned thing weighs 5 lb.! I actually have the kitchen sink in there. I got teased so much about having everything except the kitchen sink in it, I found a doll house kitchen sink to keep in for when people claimed I didn't.

I see both sides of this. The BSOD point of view, and the ineffectiveness of MSE.

My argument is this, true you can have MSE and have system stability-until a virus comes along that MSE fails to detect and throws system instability out of the equation anyway.

OR

You could have a decent antivirus that actually catches the bad guys and does its main job. The best AV can only catch maybe 90% of malware. And thats on a good day. And that 10% is not 100's of threats, its millions. So you want to get something close that can actual sort of handle the job. So that is my reasoning.


True, avast is getting bloated, advertisements everywhere. Useless features that I am positive causes BSODS. And their most recently annoying introduction of grimefighter. (junk cleanware tool)

But avast is not the only option out there that's good. Their are paid and free suites that are fantastic. There is panda cloud antivirus which is free, light and offers no fancy bells or whistles. There is also bit defender free, which uses the same AV engine as their paid products.

On the other hand,

BSODS are bad, and can be a nuisance. Especially when a user is a novice and does not even know what a BSOD is. So that is bad too. And when you work in a BSOD forum, all your going to see is the negative side of the software, the software that is causing bsods. So its easy to quickly dismiss products as being bad and replacing them from something you have never seen cause a bsod-MSE. That thinking is Logical, but when it comes to PC security, its not a practical way to look at things.

I suggest that only geeks use MSE, as a normal user it would be very ineffective.

I have to say though, in all my time of fixing pcs and this and that, I have not seen a antivirus be the cause of the bsod. Normally it would point to it being the cause, but in reality it was factory bloatware or a old Remanent of mcafee (ICK) or notron (double ick) left on the system that did not fully uninstall, or was still installed.


Again though, every system is different, and there are more then a billion ways a computer can be configured. So one experience does not apply to everyone. Including BSOD issues

mjf said:

Lady Fitzgerald said:

I'm sorry, I still don't see the point of using something that doesn't do a good job of what it is supposed just because it consistently does no harm.

I'm supporting this point of view.

I couldn't agree more.


To sum up, as for the bickering of which AV is better: Only you and your system know. But it doesn't hurt to look at the results of labs-(or be your own lab and do tests on your own) and decide if what you have is really worth keeping and if its doing its job. Support the smaller av companies who are keeping their product clean and fast-focusing on protection, and not the big guys who focus more on features then protection.


My 2 cents.

I too have always used Avast with no issues. IF it caused me BSOD, I'd likely completely remove it, then reinstall it first before changing. IF it then caused me BSOD, I'd switch...to Avira

I would prefer better detection with some chance of BSOD, to poor protection because the chance supposedly doesn't exist. I also tend to think that people who have BSOD that point to Avast, have other issues as well. For our BSOD team, of course they have to point out the offending apps, but for an advanced user, they could likely find the other conflict and remove that if it was preferable.

I have no issue with people recommending MSE to the average user, as it is better they have some protection. It is the same as recommending the Windows firewall as opposed to a better firewall. Some firewall is better then none. And a firewall that is talkative and results in the user just allowing everything as a convenience isn't ideal.

A Guy