Do you use : No Antivirus , FREE Antivirus , or PAID Antivirus and why?

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Avast free here. Light on the system, and usually seems to block this well. And has a silent/gaming mode. Plus it packs a lot of features for the price.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

Avast is the most popular FREE choice out there.

 

[Skylyne]

Avast is the most popular FREE choice out there.

While that may be true, that doesn't make it any better haha. The scanner is good, but the live protection is sub-par at best.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

I would disagree with your point. Turn on it's PUPs scanning and set sensitivity to high and it sends to do a fine job.

 

[Dark Lord of Tech]

But for general browsing , more than adequate.

 

[Skylyne]

I would disagree with your point. Turn on it's PUPs scanning and set sensitivity to high and it sends to do a fine job.

The problem with that is the higher likelihood of false alarms, and false positives. This makes things very unbearable for many uneducated users, and ends up being a disaster for some.

But for general browsing , more than adequate.

Yes, and no. My dad uses Avast, and it hasn't been much of a help, in the grand scheme of things. He has a few problems (either malware, viruses, a combination, or something...) that I've not been able to pinpoint, and bog his computer down more than if I had installed Vista onto it. I understand that he is running very old hardware, but it used to run much faster, before he ended up using it full time. For people who are atrocious with their browsing habits, and want that "full internet experience" (which I call BS on), it's a pretty bad AV. He thinks he knows more than he really does... and that's relatively common with people who Google search everything, and take the first two results as the only truth available.

Avast is a decent, and I really do mean decent AV for those who know what they are doing. For the beginners, and those who think they know what they are doing, they should find something that has a better rating with AV Test, and AVC. The number of computers I've fixed, with Avast installed, outnumber every other computer I've fixed (either with no AV/security suites/etc. and those with practically any other well known AV program). Yes, I've had more people with Avast need their computer fixed than those without any protection on their computers. What's worse is that the people running Avast were even more difficult to diagnose, and repair.

Avast is decent, and I have to emphasise that word very heavily. I've used it a number of times (with both my computers, and other people's), and it's no where near as good as many of the low budget, name brand, AV wares you can find.

Bottom line, according to me: If you're not very educated on computers, viruses, and so on, do not get Avast, or even anything rated below it from places like AVC, or AV Test. If you are fairly educated on your computer's security, and do thorough research before enabling/disabling something that your AV flags/etc., then Avast is an okay choice. It may be annoying at times, but it's a software that does its job the way it was intended. Personally, I'd recommend either paid AV solutions, or Bitdefender's free AV.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

We may set it up differently. When i set it up, I set it up with pups as I said, and i turn on it's silent/gaming mode. Once i do that, i never hear from it unless it needs an update. Another thing i do also is use Google Chrome as my browser, and use adblock plus which seems to cut down exposure write quite a bit to begin with.

 

[Skylyne]

We may set it up differently. When i set it up, I set it up with pups as I said, and i turn on it's silent/gaming mode. Once i do that, i never hear from it unless it needs an update. Another thing i do also is use Google Chrome as my browser, and use adblock plus which seems to cut down exposure write quite a bit to begin with.

You do realise that silent/gaming mode is basically silencing every notification that it would normally give you, and pretty much puts the actions to deal with viruses/etc. on hold, right? Unless you are checking things out daily (or more ideally a few times per day), that's problematic; and I know that many people do this, hence why I mentioned it. Not saying you are, but I know that is more common than many will admit.

Also, Chrome has a lot of vulnerabilities, due to being a browser built by an advertisement company. While Firefox is relatively better, it's still pretty crappy; and it handles everything in a single process (which is more prone to crashing). Use a browser that is based on Chrome's opensource code, if you want to use Chrome, and have decent protection. Aviator is the most secure version, and I would say Iron is probably second best. Also, as I've mentioned before, AB+ is somewhat problematic, and doesn't seem to block everything properly... so just keep an eye on things. While it cuts down on exposure to script vulnerabilities, one with a better way of handling the ads will cut down exposure even more.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Yep, i also use the do not track me add on, and have duckduckgo set as my default search engine in Chrome which is not supposed to track your searches. Plus i generally try to be careful what sites I'm on.

 

[Skylyne]

Yep, i also use the do not track me add on

That doesn't do too much... "At this time, most web services, including Google's, do not alter their behavior or change their services upon receiving Do Not Track requests.".

and have duckduckgo set as my default search engine in Chrome which is not supposed to track your searches.

They don't. There are a few ways they try to improve their search results, but the results aren't tailored to each user in the same ways most "intelligent" search engines deliver their results.

Plus i generally try to be careful what sites I'm on.

All I have to say: things happen. Lol

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Maybe but I'm also a tech, so i usually notice if my system hiccups wrong lol.

 

[Skylyne]

I've missed some things, over the years (mostly from being careless). Things happen lol.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Yep true. I actually need to reinstall my copy of malwarebytes professional. Same thing as their premium version except it's the older one with the lifetime license that is actively in the background.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

Thanks for the heads up btw. Just got home and decided to try installing aviator since you mentioned it. I like it pretty well now. I also set it up how I have chrome set up. So I have duckduckgo as my home page, and as default search engine. I added adblock plus and selected for it to disable tracking, social media buttons and any sites it does not like, I left the other 2 add ons that came with aviator alone. So far seems to behave like chrome, so going to keep test driving it and see what it does.

 

[Skylyne]

Thanks for the heads up btw. Just got home and decided to try installing aviator since you mentioned it. I like it pretty well now. I also set it up how I have chrome set up. So I have duckduckgo as my home page, and as default search engine. I added adblock plus and selected for it to disable tracking, social media buttons and any sites it does not like, I left the other 2 add ons that came with aviator alone. So far seems to behave like chrome, so going to keep test driving it and see what it does.

I've found Aviator to be the best Chrome-variant, for both performance and security. There could be another one that I'm not yet aware of; but this one is definitely my favourite, for the time being. For ad blocking, I'd always recommend AdGuard (I've found it performs better than AB+), but AB+ is decent enough for the more seasoned users.

The best part of Aviator, that I've found, is the option to spoof your browser. I haven't tried this on many things that matter (like spoofing IE for a work related thing, so to speak), but I have a feeling it would work pretty well for that job. It hasn't failed me yet. The only reason I'll use Iron more is because I like some websites to keep me logged in. I use Aviator for the more shady, or potentially risky, websites, though. No problems to report.

 

[zthomas]

For me Norton is good enough.. been using Norton for 4 years.. rarely do it turn my machine off.. just shut down the monitor off at bedtime.. as I get older my adventurous surfing is way down.. Norton rates sites on search engines.. didn't like it at first.. but do take there warning seriously.. having suffered so many times.. in dealing with Trojans.. once had 30 Trojans was a (record) at the puter shop.. I had to take the machine in and paid 60 bucks an hour to rid myself of the little digital creatures. If lose a whole hard drive from some virus.. you learn pretty quick not to trust free antivirus.

 

[ohiou_grad_2006]

30 trojans was a record? I've personally worked on machines with 2000+ things on them before.

 

[Alan Caldwell]

I had an old computer.
Specs,
Intel Pentium III 533 MHz,
256 MB SDRAM,
20 GB HDD,
Some old PSU,
Some old mobo,
It came with Windows 98.

My parents bought it when I was born(2000)! It never had an anti-virus as it was already very slow. Once when I scanned it just for fun with Comodo Dragon Anti-virus+Firewall it had about 6000+ viruses total when it was about 5hrs into scanning with only about 25% completed! I think it is really a world record! It had Windows XP SP2 at last.

Sold it for about Rs.800 in exchange for another in 2009.(About $12)

 

[zthomas]

30 trojans was a record? I've personally worked on machines with 2000+ things on them before.

That was the puter shop that had told me about the record.. was like 5 years ago.. none since.. Two thousand.. wondering what was in his image files.. hehe

 

[Skylyne]

For me Norton is good enough

This phrase, substituting Norton with any AV software, is usually followed by my question... "Based on what?" Most AV software won't tell you that it isn't finding things, because it can't. Since most users don't get a second opinion, and aren't educated enough, or don't put in the effort to find out whether their AV software is truly working for them, they never know if their software sucks or not. Norton users often come to me for help (as well as Avast users). Symantec just isn't a company to trust with security, as they have a history littered with security flaws. if you actually have your computer double checked, and it always comes up clean, I'd genuinely be surprised.

you learn pretty quick not to trust free antivirus.

Paid software rarely works much better than free software... if you care to do a little research.

30 trojans was a record? I've personally worked on machines with 2000+ things on them before.

30 is a low-ball average for the comps I've worked on.

I had an old computer.
Specs,
Intel Pentium III 533 MHz,
256 MB SDRAM,
20 GB HDD,
Some old PSU,
Some old mobo,
It came with Windows 98.

My parents bought it when I was born(2000)! It never had an anti-virus as it was already very slow. Once when I scanned it just for fun with Comodo Dragon Anti-virus+Firewall it had about 6000+ viruses total when it was about 5hrs into scanning with only about 25% completed! I think it is really a world record! It had Windows XP SP2 at last.

Sold it for about Rs.800 in exchange for another in 2009.(About $12)

Comodo has a reputation for a high number of false flags and false alarms. After researching, I found the vast majority of "infections" it found on my system, over a couple years, were not infections at all.