malwarebytes VS Mcafee

[pcmatty]

hey all

why does loads ppl say malwarebytes better than mcafee ?

always thought mcafee protects the pc more than malwarebytes.

anyone ?

matty

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

Comparing MBAM to McAfee is like comparing apples to kumquats. McAfee is an antivirus program. MBAM is an anti-malware program designed to be used with an antivirus program. Also, McAfee is a significantly less than stellar antivirus program whereas MBAM is an excellent one.

 

[Sir George]

hey all

why does loads ppl say malwarebytes better than mcafee ?

always thought mcafee protects the pc more than malwarebytes.

anyone ?

matty

The reply from Lady Fitzgerald is spot on. I suggest you replace McAfee with almost anything: The free ones most often suggested are; Avast, Avira and BitDefender, in no particular order.

 

[MilesAhead]

whereas MBAM is an excellent one.

Yeah. I would probably upgrade MBAM to the paid version if it automatically got rid of others like the Norton stuff that comes preloaded.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

whereas MBAM is an excellent one.

Yeah. I would probably upgrade MBAM to the paid version if it automatically got rid of others like the Norton stuff that comes preloaded.

It won't get rid of Norton but I would upgrade to the paid version while you still can get a lifetime license. The lifetime licenses are going away pretty soon so I would jump on it now rather take a chance on waiting for it to go on sale. It's only $30 here.

 

[ICIT2LOL]

I have got to agree with all and McAfee for what it is worth along with a few others is a load of rubbish.
In any case one of the best AV's operates the keyboard to your machine

 

[ThrashZone]

Good security combination,
http://www.sevenforums.com/system-security/206705-good-free-system-security-combination.html
http://www.sevenforums.com/system-security/297196-top-av-program-use-here-seven.html

 

[MrWhoopee]

Comparing MBAM to McAfee is like comparing apples to kumquats. McAfee is an antivirus program. MBAM is an anti-malware program designed to be used with an antivirus program. Also, McAfee is a significantly less than stellar antivirus program whereas MBAM is an excellent one.

Amen to that.

While cleaning up computers for clients (home users and very small businesses), I use MBAM regularly to great effect. Almost as regularly, I remove McAfee (assuming it has expired, which it usually has) and install Avast free. I fear the day Malwarebytes eliminates the free version, as it is still the most effective malware remover I have found.

 

[MilesAhead]

The lifetime licenses are going away pretty soon

I only use the scanner anyway. Running with a real time shield is like taking a shower with a raincoat on. Backup imaging is free so why pay for a prophylactic that interferes with the functioning of the machine? It's just how I like to roll. But to me the paranoia itself becomes paralyzing.

 

[MrWhoopee]

The lifetime licenses are going away pretty soon

I only use the scanner anyway. Running with a real time shield is like taking a shower with a raincoat on. Backup imaging is free so why pay for a prophylactic that interferes with the functioning of the machine? It's just how I like to roll. But to me the paranoia itself becomes paralyzing.

And another Amen!

From time to time, I find the user who doesn't ignore their security. Instead, they have multiple AV and anti-malware programs installed and running in the background. Then they assume that their machine is running like death itself because somehow an infection got past their security. Their answer? Another virus/malware remover!

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

The lifetime licenses are going away pretty soon

I only use the scanner anyway. Running with a real time shield is like taking a shower with a raincoat on. Backup imaging is free so why pay for a prophylactic that interferes with the functioning of the machine? It's just how I like to roll. But to me the paranoia itself becomes paralyzing.

I love the analogy of taking a shower with a raincoat on but, in this case. a better one would be belt a suspenders. MBAM's purpose is to be there should something slip past the AV. The problem with just using MBAM's scanner is, should something slip past your AV (and, face it, even the best AVs will occasionally let something through), it will stay on your computer, potentially, if not actually, doing harm until you update the free version of MBAM and run a scan on it. A virus that got past your AV could clean out your bank accounts, steal your identity, etc. before you manually run a scan.

The full version of MBAM both automagically updates itself and watches fulltime for anything that "snuck" past the AV. I've been using MBAM Pro for some time on two different computers and I can't tell it's running at all; it definitely does NOT interfere with the functioning of my machines, unlike some programs, like Norton.

If you get the free license before they become unavailable, it's a onetime cost. Once paid for, you never have to pay for it again. That's pretty cheap insurance.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

The lifetime licenses are going away pretty soon

I only use the scanner anyway. Running with a real time shield is like taking a shower with a raincoat on. Backup imaging is free so why pay for a prophylactic that interferes with the functioning of the machine? It's just how I like to roll. But to me the paranoia itself becomes paralyzing.

And another Amen!

From time to time, I find the user who doesn't ignore their security. Instead, they have multiple AV and anti-malware programs installed and running in the background. Then they assume that their machine is running like death itself because somehow an infection got past their security. Their answer? Another virus/malware remover!

That's not always true. Multiple AV/anti-malware programs can be chosen to "play well" with each other. The ability to do so is one of MBAM's strongest points. While running two or more AVs at the same time is a bad idea, MBAM is designed to be run with an AV. It will NOT interfere with anything except what it is supposed to interfere with. One can have multiple layers of protection and not have any slowdowns, etc. I run Avast free, MBAM Pro, SAS (SuperAntiSpyware) free, Spybot S&D free, ZoneAlarm Free Firewall, Secunia PSI, and WOT (Web of Trust). All except SAS and Spybot (those are scan only) have been running full time on both of my machines for quite some time and they do not slow them down one bit that I can tell. The only time I can tell they are running is when they detect and/or block a nasty or are otherwise doing their job. ZoneAlarm's firewall will throw up frequent alerts for the first week or two but, as it gets trained, it tapers off dramatically; I get alerts from ZoneAlarm far less frequently than I do from UAC (I run UAC at full strength).

As long as they are carefully matched, there is no reason not to run multiple AV/anti-malware programs. If carefully chosen, they will be more effective than most, if not all, security suites and will have a lighter footprint.

 

[mjf]

You will get many different opinions on anti malware software. I like many/most here don't favor McAfee but many here do use Norton. I personally use Norton 360 at the moment along with Malwarebytes (free version).

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

With the exception of Ghost, my experiences with Norton and Symantec (who makes Norton) products have been abysmal. I've heard they have improved in the last few years but, once burned...(in my case, multiple burns).

 

[mjf]

I gather Norton went through a slump but I've been using Norton NIS, 360 for ~6 years and keep renewing it based on personal experience. I wouldn't call myself knowledgeable in this area!
I do have MSE on one PC that is generally offline.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I gather Norton went through a slump but I've been using Norton NIS, 360 for ~6 years and keep renewing it based on personal experience. I wouldn't call myself knowledgeable in this area!
I do have MSE on one PC that is generally offline.

MSE is as bad, if not worse, than McAfee.

 

[MilesAhead]

Heh heh. I just got a

idea.

Get someone who has 1/2 dozen of those scanners from "test" sites, do a super scan with their own software, then do the "test" on the web site. When it says "you have 8000 malwares on your system" we verify their software showed the machine clean like a microsecond before the test. Like a crapware outing party.

 

[MrWhoopee]

Heh heh. I just got a

idea.

Get someone who has 1/2 dozen of those scanners from "test" sites, do a super scan with their own software, then do the "test" on the web site. When it says "you have 8000 malwares on your system" we verify their software showed the machine clean like a microsecond before the test. Like a crapware outing party.

I've had similar thoughts, only with a freshly imaged virtual machine.

 

[King Arthur]

I gather Norton went through a slump but I've been using Norton NIS, 360 for ~6 years and keep renewing it based on personal experience. I wouldn't call myself knowledgeable in this area!
I do have MSE on one PC that is generally offline.

MSE is as bad, if not worse, than McAfee.

MSE is still leaps and bounds better than McAfee at its job of virus hunting.

Special mention should also go to MSE's uncomparable level of smooth integration with Windows. Both Windows and MSE being developed by Microsoft, nothing compares to MSE's ability to co-exist with Windows without causing any problems.

Now as for my personal 2 cents: I use MSE for all my Windows 7 machines and Avast for my one Windows XP machine. Regarding MBAM, I run a scan every now and then, but I don't have a pro license as I don't particularly value another real-time scanner.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

I gather Norton went through a slump but I've been using Norton NIS, 360 for ~6 years and keep renewing it based on personal experience. I wouldn't call myself knowledgeable in this area!
I do have MSE on one PC that is generally offline.

MSE is as bad, if not worse, than McAfee.

MSE is still leaps and bounds better than McAfee at its job of virus hunting.

Special mention should also go to MSE's uncomparable level of smooth integration with Windows. Both Windows and MSE being developed by Microsoft, nothing compares to MSE's ability to co-exist with Windows without causing any problems.

Now as for my personal 2 cents: I use MSE for all my Windows 7 machines and Avast for my one Windows XP machine. Regarding MBAM, I run a scan every now and then, but I don't have a pro license as I don't particularly value another real-time scanner.

So the fact that MSE stays near or at the bottom of AV reviews doesn't bother you? During the few months I had it, MBAM got frequent hits. Since I replaced MSE with Avast free, MBAM rarely gets any hits. I also had problems getting MSE to automatically update. I had to do it manually. That is not acceptable for one's first line of defense.