Best Free/Paid antivirus for me?

[vsdagama]

Hey

I'm looking for a good antivirus solution for me

I have no idea which one to choose, so maybe you guys could help me

I like it to be:

1. Very good at keeping all the nasty stuff from my computer
2. Not really interrupting my computer experience (no lag, ...)
3. Pretty easy to handle (With AVG I had some experiences where it just blocked and deleted files I needed from my computer and I had to put the antivirus off in order to use it)

I doesn't matter if I have to pay, as long as it is a good quality product

Please help me choose

Grtz

 

[aford10]

Personally, I use Norton360. I've had it for the last 3 years and it's everything you've looked for.

Another good option is NOD32.

 

[vsdagama]

I heard norton internet security 2009 was good, but I really have no idea
Are Norton360 and NOD32 paid versions you mean?

 

[aford10]

NOD32 has a 30 free version, but then you have to pay to keep it. Norton360 is full featured and has the internet security built into it. It is a bit pricey though.

 

[vsdagama]

I don't care about money, so you think I should take Norton 360?

 

[aford10]

I'm happy with it. It fits everything you said you'd like an AV to be.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

norton 360 is a resource hog.....kaspersky is the best!

 

[aford10]

Kaspersky is a good AV as well.

Though you're mistaken on norton. It uses very little resources.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

If it is the brand new norton you are right,but kaspersky gets better results!

 

[maxakuru]

norton gamers edition

 

[btk1w1]

Norton / Symantec has come a long way since the "old days"... Symantec have streamlined it and many reviews rate Norton 360 v3 as one of the best AV products for 2009.

http/www.pcauthority.com.au/Review/146185,norton-360-version-30-impressively-fast-and-comprehensive.aspx

There is a free 30 day trial if you want to trial it.

If you do trial it and are unsatisfied, remember after you uninstall, to use the symantec norton removal tool to finish the job:

http/service1.symantec.com/Support/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039

My vote though would go to Avast AntiVirus.

1. Very good at keeping all the nasty stuff from my computer

I like the inclusion of a boot-scan that Avast has. It scans before the operating system is fully functional to prevent malicious files from running and preventing their removal. This can be accessed any-time from the GUI and has a run-once option on install.

Screensaver option, I also use this to scan my pc's when they're idle. It will resume the scan from where it left off if interrupted the next time the screensaver kicks in.

Auto-update feature is really non-intrusive. I have never noticed a lag in my pc while the update is running in the background. I only notice the update when the little blue box pops up in the bottom right hand corner telling me it is complete. No need to schedule or manually perform updates.

Resident protection is also very good. When browsing the net if a malicious web page is detected you are given the option of aborting connection or ignoring. With malicious file download, again you are given the choice whether to delete, quarantine or ignore.

2. Not really interrupting my computer experience (no lag, ...)

As stated above, "Auto-update feature is really non-intrusive. I have never noticed a lag...".

I must let you know that some people that have done the switch from AVG to Avast have noticed a slow down in boot-time. But once the OS is up and running no further slowdown. I don't know whether this will affect your system, I guess the only way to be sure would be to test the AV program.

3. Pretty easy to handle (With AVG I had some experiences where it just blocked and deleted files I needed from my computer and I had to put the antivirus off in order to use it)

As stated above, Resident protection is also very good. When browsing...

I have never had a problem with Avast deciding what should be done with any infected files. I almost always opt for the delete option, and can say I have never been hit by any serious malware.

I have two other malware scanners that are on call, don't run resident. I update them and run full system scans periodically. Having on call scanners mean that system resources are free until I decide to run them. They usually only ever find the odd tracking cookie, but I run them regardless for exrta security. I use Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware and SUPERAntiSpyware.

As for cost, Avast is free, so you can try it for size and see if you are happy with it.

There are many that say you get what you pay for, but in my experience I haven't paid for security applications since I have owned PC's and been very happy with the security apps I have installed.

 

[aford10]

Another good free AV is Avira.

 

[Hyno]

Avira is good, you'll find it here www.free-av.com

 

[Mister_M@sk]

Hi all,

My advise is that Antivir is a good antivirus but it's not the most important.

Antivirus are not the first wall against malware, it's even the last!
Computer's security especially assure by User.

The 3 keys of security are :
■ A good behavior of user, no p0rn, no illegal download (cracks, keygen)
■ Keep your programs up-to-day ! Very important : Acrobat Reader, Flash Player & Java !
■ An Antivirus like Antivir up-to-date.

Note : Antivirus is the last key of security !

It's not a surprise, infection cause by user, and not by other things (exept Exploit).
The research of the "best antivirus" is like the Graal quest

@+

 

[4Ryan6]

Hey

I'm looking for a good antivirus solution for me

I have no idea which one to choose, so maybe you guys could help me

I like it to be:

1. Very good at keeping all the nasty stuff from my computer
2. Not really interrupting my computer experience (no lag, ...)
3. Pretty easy to handle (With AVG I had some experiences where it just blocked and deleted files I needed from my computer and I had to put the antivirus off in order to use it)

I doesn't matter if I have to pay, as long as it is a good quality product

Please help me choose

Grtz

For Paid For Suggestion:

IMO Norton Internet Security 2009, is the best product line released yet, I was so impressed with its performance I purchased a second 3 machine package and presently have 6 computers running it, it doesn't bog down even the slowest of the machines.

For Free Suggestions:

According to PCWorlds October 2009 magazine tests, the tested free AV programs fell in this order:

#1 Avira Antivir Personal (Rated 92) Superior
#2 Alwil Avast Antivirus Home Edition (Rated 91) Superior
#3 AVG 8.5 Free (Rated 86) Very Good
#4 Microsoft Security Essentials (Rated 86) Very Good
#5 PC Tools Antivirus Free Edition (Rated 69) Fair
#6 Comodo Internet Security (Rated 68) Fair

The entire article is available at PCWorld

 

[Mister_M@sk]

IMO Norton Internet Security 2009, is the best product line released yet, I was so impressed with its performance

You talk about the speed of the product or the performance with scans and Malware Detection ?
If it's the second proposal, can you give the protocol, the test and the result ?

PcWorld is a very good magazine but not a good tester, especially in antivirus.
Why ?

Because tests are predominantly done with a "stock" of xxx Malware that we scan ...
The protocol ? Where is it ?

I have only found this : Antivir Test (if the protocol existed, my apologize)

Why are this type of test not sure ?
Because Malware changes all seconds ... A test with xx Malware is not the same 5 minutes after !
It's not the only reason ... That is interesting in an antivirus test is the intrusion of Malware, the drop and his installation. With this type of test, there are no intrusion, no drop, no installation.
Another reason : Exploit ! Javascript exploit in pdf file, or swf exploit, How do antivirus behave ? He beeps ? The performance with exploit are not very good ... With an Antivirus that we find on market or Free Antivirus.

As last argument, I give this : "Successful cleanup of malware (removal of all active components)" on PcWorld Site.
Details ? Please communique your protocol. How have you infected the machine ? What infection ? We know nothing.

PCworld is not an isolate case, all magazine do that, this tests are for the person who ask himself the bad questions (look my precedent post).

NB : I espere that you will have understood me ... My post is long, so I have made lot of faults. If you haven't understood a piece, please ask me.

@+

 

[4Ryan6]

@Mister_M@sk

You talk about the speed of the product or the performance with scans and Malware Detection ?
If it's the second proposal, can you give the protocol, the test and the result ?

When I'm talking Performance of NIS 2009, I'm talking fast updating, excellent protection, and not bogging down your computer, its almost like it isn't even installed, its lightyears ahead of the past releases from Symantec.

PcWorld is a very good magazine but not a good tester, especially in antivirus.

Totally disagree; PCWorld sucks as a magazine and the descent articles are few and far between, thats why when my present subscription runs out it will not be renewed, however once in a while they do a thorough testing article as this one was.

Because tests are predominantly done with a "stock" of xxx Malware that we scan ...

Thats true but a testbed is only fair if each program is attacked by the same value of infections and see which one does the best job, of handling whats thrown at it.

So yes each program is tested with a fixed attack to see how each one detects and handles the same attack value, and thats how other magazines test too, so whats your point in this arguement anyway.

 

[Mister_M@sk]

@4ryan6

I don't critic an Antivirus in particularly, I have said in a precedent post, that it's not the first barrier ...
I critic PcWorld's Test cause, all magazine (except specialist magazine in informatics security), don't specify their protocol and their test !
When a mathematician makes a counting, there is a demonstration, no ?

Give some results who don't come of nowhere, it's not serious.
I can say, "Nod 32 is "superior" he detects 900 000 000 viruses" but if the Malware dates of 1992, no interet.

Do you understand what I want to say ?

Often, Magazine or organism "drop" some result, I'm disagree with that.

@+

 

[4Ryan6]

@Mister_M@sk

If we try to completely guard against every single possible threat on the planet, we may as well just disconnect from the internet and only install outside software completely and thoroughly disinfected by some miracle before installation.

Most of us would hope for an all in one program that could handle, malware, spyware, and virus infections, that would still allow your computer to still be able to run and complete tasks besides protecting the computer.

The 3 keys of security are :

* A good behavior of user, no p0rn, no illegal download (cracks, keygen)
* Keep your programs up-to-day ! Very important : Acrobat Reader, Flash Player & Java !
* An Antivirus like Antivir up-to-date.


Note : Antivirus is the last key of security !

Thats true but we live in the real world, and maybe curiosity kills the cat, but the cat still prowls, its in our nature to do so.

According to your logic, there is no possible way to claim one security protection application over the other because the internet is constantly flooded with new virus, malware, spyware, so the best we can hope for is getting the fastest update to the newest danger out there, in time not to destroy our machines.

What works for me may not be sufficient for you because I also add online gaming to the mix, but Norton Internet Security 2009 so far has protected my computer, and thats good enough for me.

I don't write the security protections out there, and I'm not really concerned with which one covers what, I am concerned when we have so much security and protections running on our machines, that you have to disable something to be able to use your computer for something like online gaming, if you don't online game at all, you will never understand my statement.

 

[btk1w1]

My take on the subject is that some protection is better than none.

If the AV scanners were subjected to only a limited amount of malware (oh hell it might have only been the eicar test), the test results on the detection and maybe removal rate is still indicative of their efficiency.

These days with the prolific variations of what is deemed malware i.e. viruses, trojans, worms, downloaders, dialers, rogues... rootkits also, it is almost best interest to have on call scanners at hand also. I don't believe any one antivirus program or security suite will ever cover everything. This is why I also use on call scanners, I have winpatrol also. Even these won't cover everything, because something new is always lurking around the corner.

Depending on surfing style, I believe that the final line of defence is the ability to re-image your HDDs. This is an almost fail-safe method of reinstating an uncompromised operating system.