Switching Security Solutions

[C-11]

Newegg.com - Shell Shocker Deal. VIPRE Antivirus 1-User $9.99 for a little longer

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Agree JMH I prefer paid as for I think it's about $0.16 a day it's just not worth the hassle of running hither and thither - you probably spend more money in power searching for something eh?

Plus I am thinking of changing over to paid Comodo for one of my machines when the KIS runs low.

 

[codyw]

I have heard different feedback about AVG's free and paid products. A mix of good and bad. However, I have customers myself so I strive to make sure I recommend a paid product that works and doesn't leave them hanging. I've seen some reviews on ESET's newest version "Smart Security 5" and it didn't do very well and let A LOT of junk invade the system. I may into avast!'s new security and look at some reviews on it. But when you have customers, you also need to protect their contact information, opened/closed cases etc. which is why I always keep my database software encrypted but also good system protection helps it stay safe. I believe avast! is pretty popular...

wow nice spread. I did a lot of research many years ago
(5=many to me) and had found that AVG was far better than most other common apps/suites. And that the difference between the free and paid is slight at best. You do not get "ID secure" and theres a ad banner, to name most of them. So I have advised it to clients for ~5 years and installed it for them. There IS a very noticeable pull on system resources, but for great security, I looked past it (myself I have never used antivirus/antimalware scanners or protection on an average of 5-6 personal computers around the house, I did use Norton in win 3.11 for a year, then trashed it - I would be lying if I said I had ever had a known infection on one of my computers - I just practice active awareness, thats for another thread - back on topic. A client had a full breach by AVG by a nasty rootkit, AVG recognized every viral/malicious component and logged it as they passed by for him. I can say thanks to SF and 2 weeks worth of man power the infection is believed to be clear. So I read up and spoke to those with more knowledge than myself on the various softwares available, and learned that AVG ranked LAST in several reputable studies. I now am transferring everyone to Avira (or Avast if the prefer) and so far so good, highly improved web performance. Many people love ESET - I have enjoyed the (financial) fruits of this software's occasional quirkiness, on a good deal of vista and win 7 systems, where they seem to suddenly experience changes in settings, even intermittent firewall protection, but just on some systems it seems. Finally any MS app is an opinionated type decision for people to make, more political based IMO than value-based. Regardless of what software you use, I will assure you to assume it is there, protecting you, is the biggest mistake people make, don't use it as a crutch..practice active avoidance, look for red flags, trust is quite a realistic looking mirage online. The actual software is not nearly as important as that advice can be. Take from my rant what you like! or not.

Best of luck!
Mike

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Well this is always a good guide.

Results and comments - www.matousec.com

 

[JMH]

Well this is always a good guide.

Results and comments - www.matousec.com

Guide yes.....

Test Results should be used as a guide not as indisputable evidence.

IMHO tis far better to do your own research re the "facts /statistics/ evidence tested" & presented
> view any AV Software that might appeal
> read the Company blurb about the product
> then make up your own mind about what is considered appropriate.... or otherwise.

 

[rubyrubyroo]

I don't know which if any company is going to send out a sublist of v-sigs but in my expedience, the same size files are updated on the free and paid vers, I think that a a/v mfg "picking" through a list to produce some kind of employed incentive to pay for their full product, would be recognized, exposed as extremely unethical behavior for a security co. and I'd be surprised to see a common mfg doing this. Any specific tangible examples out there? I'm actually interested to see this. But I'd need more than an article on the matter, I'd just like to see a real sample. Now excluding features, is something completely different.

@JMH - excellent point - test results can often be vague on their techniques and even (sorry to say..dishonest sometimes) without a good understanding by the reader (or disclosure by the writer) on test sample sizes, as in how many reps the test was preformed and on how many systems the results can be truly meaningless/useless for anything aside from online reader hits or magazine sales! This is just one of many examples of why I can't stand many of the "tests" presented to unaware consumer. (for instance enough details should truly be presented as to make the test reproducible, otherwise your taking someone 100% at blind faith, as they can't be proven wrong!)

@ICit2lol - YES! i forgot about KIS they are one of the better/best ones out there IMHO

 

[marsmimar]

FWIW, here's my 2 cents.

A lot of people I know switch anti-malware products almost monthly looking for "the best" product. When I ask them what was wrong with the product they were using they usually say something like, "It never caught any malware so it must not be working."

If your current software never caught anything, don't automatically assume it's not working. Maybe your safe browsing habits haven't put you in harm's way. Before giving up on your anti-malware du jour, try using some of the free on-demand scanners to double check if something was missed. If Malwarebytes, Hitman Pro, HouseCall, ESET Online Scanner, Norton Power Eraser, and others all come back with a clean bill of health, chances are your computer has been protected quite nicely. And this applies to paid products as well as freebies.

Remember, there's no such thing as an anti-malware product that will be 100% effective 100% of the time. If there was such a product we'd all be using it and everyone else would be out of business.

 

[rubyrubyroo]

True, And the US Government would be using it, reguardless of price-tag, yet they get infections. I mean the media has reported China cracked US's best security millions of times over like 5-10 years. So install then, read-up, and be aware of threats to avoid.

Mike-o

 

[codyw]

Good information. I have a free trial now of avast! IS 2012 on my PC and it seems OK.

 

[rubyrubyroo]

it will work very well and that's not just me talking, did the research and got what I consider the highest advice(s) on SF

Best of luck!
Mike

 

[ICIT2LOL]

I don't know which if any company is going to send out a sublist of v-sigs but in my expedience, the same size files are updated on the free and paid vers, I think that a a/v mfg "picking" through a list to produce some kind of employed incentive to pay for their full product, would be recognized, exposed as extremely unethical behavior for a security co. and I'd be surprised to see a common mfg doing this. Any specific tangible examples out there? I'm actually interested to see this. But I'd need more than an article on the matter, I'd just like to see a real sample. Now excluding features, is something completely different.

@JMH - excellent point - test results can often be vague on their techniques and even (sorry to say..dishonest sometimes) without a good understanding by the reader (or disclosure by the writer) on test sample sizes, as in how many reps the test was preformed and on how many systems the results can be truly meaningless/useless for anything aside from online reader hits or magazine sales! This is just one of many examples of why I can't stand many of the "tests" presented to unaware consumer. (for instance enough details should truly be presented as to make the test reproducible, otherwise your taking someone 100% at blind faith, as they can't be proven wrong!)

@ICit2lol - YES! i forgot about KIS they are one of the better/best ones out there IMHO

Well FWIW I wouldn't change to anything else the only one I would even consider if Kaspersky ever went belly up would be Comodo. Am running the free Premium on my old XP and may even try the paid version. Te only thing I don't like is that geek buddy that pops up all the tie -unless you unistall it.

 

[Darryl Licht]

This is a touchy subject with many, and likely to get many different answers/viewpoints.

As for free AV, I'd look no further than MS Security Essentials! All MS does is put out this free AV to consumers, no paid for version, and they update it on a regular basis!

As for all the free others... I'd stay away from them. Ask yourself one question; if a company puts out both a free and a paid version of AV (as most do) where are they going to put all their efforts?

As for "paid for" AV, Norton has consistently performed at the top of paid for AV solutions for the last 3-4 years. Look at what Maximum PC, CPU magazine, and others have said lately. ALL GOOD THINGS WITH NORTON! Another great AV solution, #2 on my list, is ESET NOD32.

3 user copy of Norton Internet Security 2012 = $49.99, thats $16.66 per PC/year, $1.38 per month/PC, what's not to like???

Personally, I want nothing to do with Kaspersky. Where is it made... Russia! Where do most virii and malware come from... former soviet countires. I'm sticking with Norton for the foreseeable future!

 

[rubyrubyroo]

@DarrylLicht some good thoughts there, and your right about opinionation, but I'll toss my opinion in(kinda a weird tongue twister there): but anyway, in no particular order, the Russian idea sounds solid at first glance, then one begins to think if all the serial killers were born in one country area, that area would need to be making really good .....cops or profilers etc. just like with viri, is theres a lot coming out over there and it has a localized effect, their software would likely be superior since they'd need to have great a/v technology just to go online at all and not get infected.

second concept - free software and paid software made by same co therefore why not be smart and focus energy on paid version. A good point, but I think other factors outweigh that (IMO). For instance how can any new software become marketable and profitable, selling to many people. but how when theres SOOO much competition. Look at how most of the a/v SW got their foot in the door (example AVG 100%, used to be really good software too. so they make 2 versions 1 free - with the sole purpose of NAME RECOGNITION and ADVERTISING. eventually If it doesn't "suck" the people think if this is so good the paid version must be even better (and of course there are a handful of IMHO minor features added to the paid version) but they want to focus on making the free version great, because if you get a bug w/ it installed, you'll never pay for the other version. But when it works good, everyone does like I have read 5-6 times a day-by-day breakdown, and make it seem like "why wouldn't you just pay 10cents a day" suddenly your convincing yourself to pay even if you had no gripes or issues with the free SW! and your recommending the same to everyone else! Finally, it takes twice the resources to make two programs, so they make 1 app and simply disable say 4-5 things, no ID guardian....no pop-up blocker- etc. they tag a heaping load of ads onto the free one and waalaajust annoying and intriguing enough to make a company's product skyrocket (if they're lucky)

that's all, not picking on you just showing the less apparent side for compare and contrast

good times!
Mike


EDIT: just a funny/weird thing i ran across with a clients Norton install - if you read the WHOLE entire EULA - you will come across a section that reads like this (paraphrasing - and section no's are fake):

Section J : subsection 7.12 : 7.) This software shall not be used in any device capable of launching from the earth and reaching a velocity high enough to exit earths gravitational influence, or projectiles intended to be used as weapons of mass destruction.

I forget the rest but it's a good read! Who installs Norton anti virus in a nuclear warhead or satellite rocket?!??! I'm guessing thats not a high lawsuit prone area for them!

Mike

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Well I did post this in the free apps but might as well put it here as it's relevant and useful for those who want to see the choices.

Search Results - Software reviews, downloads, news, free trials, freeware and full commercial software - Downloadcrew

 

[marsmimar]

Well I did post this in the free apps but might as well put it here as it's relevant and useful for those who want to see the choices.

Search Results - Software reviews, downloads, news, free trials, freeware and full commercial software - Downloadcrew

Nice link. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Darryl Licht]

Well I did post this in the free apps but might as well put it here as it's relevant and useful for those who want to see the choices.

Search Results - Software reviews, downloads, news, free trials, freeware and full commercial software - Downloadcrew

I have a comment, or two, regarding this link... WHO IS "THE DOWNLOAD CREW" & WHY SHOULD ANY OF US BELIEVE THEIR RANKINGS? Even though they did rank Norton as one of the best, them giving McAffee 4 of 5 stars has me doubting their entire site. McAffee is pure rubbish, as most here will agree! Furthermore, they mix antivirus, antimalware, firewalls, and backup apps together... WHO DOES THAT?

Just because someone posts on the Internet doesnt make it true, and they didnt do any head to head testing, if they did where are the results? Look for a more credible source with an actual head-to-head test, like PC Mag, CPU mag, PC World, or Maximum PC.

 

[rubyrubyroo]

@ ICit2lol - I appreciated the link.

@ Darryl - The link was posted as a recommended site by someone you may or not know, likely as a helpful attempt. Just like anywhere on the INTERNET, any post could easily be a link to a site riddled w/drive-bys or infected files or as you believe to be the case, terrible file ratings, etc. So going to the link, is basically at your own risk. (if it was malicious site, I'd say get admin/mod to remove link or click report) As I trust the source of the link (ICit2lol), I have the luxury of having MORE faith in the site being benign, and while I agree completely that testing methods are difficult to trust unless you know how they are compiled (user ratings? site tests? etc) and if you have confidence that their not getting a payday for a bump-up or equally shady practices! And I quite honestly don't even trust most of the mags even the ones you mentioned which are leading line mostly. I'm not going to dive into why, for the sake of post length, but would be happy to explain. Again, you were simply offering your opinion. That's fine and I encourage it, but in the same vein, this is my opinion of your post.

I'll also go ahead and recommend File Hippo , as a source of security as well as most any freeware/OS/shareware! I have grown to trust their scanned files, compared to many sites, very up-to-date s/w (w/archives of all past versions), and after ~3yrs of use and ~2000? downloads I have never had a problem attributed to the s/w nor have my clients, that I am aware of.

Mike

EDIT: rating a/v and other securty software is prettymuch not helpful (with the exception of showing the "CRAP" s/w) becaue it depends on way too many factors, avira may be best for guy1 and guy 2 uses torrents and would be wise to fortify with a more firewall intensive suite or mix maybe include peerblock to keep others from finding him/her - although i dont condone this activity!

 

[ICIT2LOL]

Well I did post this in the free apps but might as well put it here as it's relevant and useful for those who want to see the choices.

Search Results - Software reviews, downloads, news, free trials, freeware and full commercial software - Downloadcrew

I have a comment, or two, regarding this link... WHO IS "THE DOWNLOAD CREW" & WHY SHOULD ANY OF US BELIEVE THEIR RANKINGS? Even though they did rank Norton as one of the best, them giving McAffee 4 of 5 stars has me doubting their entire site. McAffee is pure rubbish, as most here will agree! Furthermore, they mix antivirus, antimalware, firewalls, and backup apps together... WHO DOES THAT?

Just because someone posts on the Internet doesnt make it true, and they didnt do any head to head testing, if they did where are the results? Look for a more credible source with an actual head-to-head test, like PC Mag, CPU mag, PC World, or Maximum PC.

Point taken Darryl I know where you are coming from and yes I agree that some of the stuff in that particular part of their site is dubious and their ratings perhaps a tad "warm and fuzzy" but as I have just posted in another thread the only and final responsibility is YOURS to pick the wheat from the chaff.
Moreover I don't agree with your views on what is put into magazines my friend because the little that they do is overwhelmed by adverts and highly biased by them IMHO. If you want to see accredited testing then I suggest that one should look at sites such as AV Comparatives or matousec for examples.

I picked out that particular section because I am interested in security and there are many more apps of different genre's to look through. As for your comments on Norton and McAfee myself would not be caught within a universe of them as I consider them both to be overrated and superbloated garbage as I do CA, Trend, and AVG. That there were AV and ISS's mixed in was to me at least just quoting what was on offer and not intended to make anyone mix and match as I think you allude to and in any case if one doesn't like t one doesn't have to look - it's not rocket science.

I just thought it was another likely source of useful apps because if you look through you will find CCleaner, Defraggler, EaseUS to do, Adobe Reader, Teamviewer, Comodo EasyVPN etc etc Plus if you are not sure then again any responsible user would download it in a sandbox or a safe run that some of the security suites use.

There are other download sites that I am not particularly fond of and would not use unless absolutely necessary. As I said in my comments in the other thread http://www.sevenforums.com/system-security/72070-whats-best-anti-virus-17.html#post1679246 the responsibility is up to the INDIVIDUAL - I mean folks in general - would you cross the road without first looking?
It would be a foolish person indeed to use anything such as net security without researching it first and there are plenty of very clever members in this forum alone to draw experience and advice from before making what any adult should make and that is an informed decision - don't you agree??

I do not want you to take my comments personally and I never meant it to be taken as the be all and end all o download sites - sorry!

 

[Corrine]

I'll also go ahead and recommend [Edited Out], as a source of security as well as most any freeware/OS/shareware! I have grown to trust their scanned files, compared to many sites, very up-to-date s/w (w/archives of all past versions), and after ~3yrs of use and ~2000? downloads I have never had a problem attributed to the s/w nor have my clients, that I am aware of.

Mike

Not that I have a real problem with the site Mike linked to as a source for security software. Rather, my preference for any software is the vendor site. Certainly use multiple sources for reviews but go to the vendor to get the installer.

 

[Darryl Licht]

Not that I have a real problem with the site Mike linked to as a source for security software. Rather, my preference for any software is the vendor site. Certainly use multiple sources for reviews but go to the vendor to get the installer.

I agree... unless you can save money on the security software by using an established, reliable, well-known online retailer such as newegg or similar!