Free vs. Fee: Free and Paid Antivirus Programs Compared

What level of protection you "need", in my opinion, comes down to what level of risk you put yourself at. Even though i do online banking and pay my credit card bills online using my computer..I don't visit adult sites, warez sites, torrent sites, keygen/cracks sites, P2P sites, etc....so my risk of infection is much lower. For any risky web surfing, I would either 1) use my Linux workstation 2). Use a virtual machine 3). Use sandboxie.

I have a router providing basic NAT firewalling, I leave the Windows firewall enabled, I leave UAC on, and I scan regularly with MalwareBytes and I use Spyware Blaster.

So, while I believe that a paid for app could provide better protection and certainly could be worth the price...i have no need whatsoever for it. So, the freebie stuff provides me with a suitable level of protection for the things I do on my computer.

Sandboxie confused me so I deleted it immediately

EchoX860 said:

Sandboxie confused me so I deleted it immediately

When you load sandboxie...you end up with an icon on your desktop called Sandboxed Browser. You run this browser instead of your normal browser and it runs in a sectioned off part of your hard drive. It's "logically" secluded from the rest of your system. Whatever you do in this environment, is within that environment only and not on your actual PC. So, if you launch the sandboxed browser and change your home page and bookmark 10 new pages....it only happens in the sandboxed browser. If you simply launch your regular browser, your home page will not be different, nor will the 10 new bookmarks appear.

That's all there really is to it. Just a safer environment to prevent malware and such from actually installing "onto" your actual system. Hopefully that helps clear up some of the confusion.

malexous said:

Maxxwire said:

My current freeware computer security program is doing a flawless job of protecting my computer's Hosts file

How many times has it actually had to protect the hosts file that you are aware of?

My computer security always protects the Hosts file although it does not alert me to as to how many unsuccessful attempts are made to infect the Hosts file, but the computer does let me know when the Hosts file has been successfully infected and that has only happened twice both times while I was using Norton Internet Security which I paid $50 for. After I switched to a top testing totally free computer security software nearly 2 years ago there has not been one single instance of a Hosts file infection or any other Malware infection on any of my computers.

I do not mean any malice towards NIS as I learned a lot during the time that it took me to completely restore my computer to its former state after it unexpectedly crashed while using NIS, but this was the only experience I have ever ever had with paid computer security software and so it is the only story that I can relate on the subject of Paid vs. Free computer security.

~Maxx~
.

pparks1 said:

That's all there really is to it. Just a safer environment to prevent malware and such from actually installing "onto" your actual system.

Great explanation! I haven't had so much as the detection of a single tracking cookie since I started running my browser in the virtual space of Sandboxie.

~Maxx~

I think buying a personal copy then the one that was given free has alot more advantages for the simple fact you are not prompted after a scan to buy the product to remove the infections also

I have a guarantee by the service provided wasn't met I would get some kind of compensation as the old anology goes you get what you pay for.

Even though some may say it works fine but they probally do the basic and really don't venture out on the web that much

Just my opinion

Well. maybe my logic is little bit weird, but my opinion is that the first step, layer, should be imaging. After that, there are plenty of free AV's around to begin with. There is absolutely no need for paying for AV's. In every thread that starts "my PC is infected" there are recommendations, scan with this or this...which is fine of course, but, how you can be 100% sure that after the scanning/cleaning the PC is clean? Well, you can't. If there is something that can be called safest, that would be having an image. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not saying one should do whatever he wants to just because he has image somewhere on external drive, PBKC are too common actually. Now, for online banking or working with some sensitive financial (or other) data, what would be the best approach, I really don't know.

P.S And how AV's are working actually? I mean, how fast they should update virus definitions to keep us safe? I'm sorry if I sound stupid, but how they know that there is a new malware, virus or whatever? Someone needs to be infected first. The question is, how big the lag is between the new viruses and new definitions? And yes, I know about heuristic detections and all that Antivirus software - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
At the end, its always starts and ends with the user, and how much he/she is tech savvy

cheers

Imaging is just fine....however if you get your box infected and then your identity is stolen or compromised....it doesn't do a lick of good if you can restore your previous image onto your computer.