Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Moving up to ESET NOD32 v5

<< < (3/8) > >>

oblivion:
For what little it's worth... I use NOD32 AV on my desktop machine and I went through a crisis of confidence back at renewal time myself. At the time, I was using MSE on my netbook and it seemed okay, and I spent a while wondering why I was paying money for the desktop and getting acceptable protection on the netbook for free.

I never really got to a definitive answer. However, the "MS is the obvious target for malware" argument has a fair amount of clout so I stuck with NOD32 on the desktop (it's still very quick and seems reliable). The netbook ... well, I picked up a lifetime VIPRE Premium license for a very reasonable sum (like, if I decide I hate it I won't feel I've lost out) and so far I'm happy with it.

But I don't use IE and I keep my machine in a bucket of bleach overnight.  :)

cyberdiva:
This post at dottech.org might be useful:
"Microsoft Security Essentials vs Avira vs avast! vs AVG: A comprehensive comparison to help you decide which (free) anti-malware security software you should use"
http://dottech.org/freeware-reviews/14151/avira-vs-avast-vs-avg-a-comprehensive-comparison-to-help-you-decide-which-free-anti-malware-security-software-you-should-use/
-mouser (November 16, 2011, 10:27 PM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks, Mouser.  I found this useful, though the testing (done last year) used version 1 of MSE, and the current version is 2.  What difference that would make is unclear, except that I'm pretty sure version 2 does much faster scans than version 1.  Also, I was surprised that the testing used paid versions of AVG and Avira but the free version of Avast.  Not sure why they did that.  Still, a very interesting read.

superboyac:
For what little it's worth... I use NOD32 AV on my desktop machine and I went through a crisis of confidence back at renewal time myself. At the time, I was using MSE on my netbook and it seemed okay, and I spent a while wondering why I was paying money for the desktop and getting acceptable protection on the netbook for free.

I never really got to a definitive answer. However, the "MS is the obvious target for malware" argument has a fair amount of clout so I stuck with NOD32 on the desktop (it's still very quick and seems reliable). The netbook ... well, I picked up a lifetime VIPRE Premium license for a very reasonable sum (like, if I decide I hate it I won't feel I've lost out) and so far I'm happy with it.

But I don't use IE and I keep my machine in a bucket of bleach overnight.  :)
-oblivion (November 17, 2011, 02:11 AM)
--- End quote ---
I went through a similar dilemma a while back with kaspersky.  I had used Kaspersky for years.  I love the feature set, it has tons of options.  But it became bulkier and bulkier with each version.  I started getting pissed off when clicking on buttons stopped doing anything.  Often times, you'd click the button to update the database, and nothing would happen.  Then the update would happen several minutes later.  Things like trying to stop a scan that is going on would be similarly unresponsive.  It slowed down my computer more and more.  Whenever I tried to get customer support, they would make me first send them information about EVERYTHING in my computer, and before answering any questions, they would first make sure you are not using any pirated anything.  They act like the pirate police.  So I asked myself why I was paying for this??

So I tried MSE, and I've been using it since.  It's easy, it works fine, I don't worry about subscription payments.  It seems faster than Kaspersky, but it has far fewer options.  Still, I don't care anymore.  I want programs that work now, and I want them to be as lightweight, quick, and responsive as possible.  Those are my criteria.  I don't want a zillion options anymore.  I combine it with a firewall, and stuff like WinPatrol, which I will gladly pay for because BillP knows how to program stuff.  His program is effective, it's small and light, and it works beautifully.  Why the big AV companies, or Adobe, or MS, or anyone big can't do that is something I often wonder about.  It has to do with money in the end.  That's where all the answers seem to be.  In the end, BillP is not going to be rich, and Adobe is going to be very rich.  Why that means BillP makes great software, and Adobe makes crap...I don't know, but that sure seems to be the trend.  Why these two things (money and quality) in software seem to have an inverse relationship doesn't make sense.  But then again, why does a cable ISP not require a contract, but DSL does?  Or as Kramer says, "Why does Radio Shack ask you for your zip code when you buy batteries?"

Stoic Joker:
I want programs that work now, and I want them to be as lightweight, quick, and responsive as possible.  Those are my criteria.-superboyac (November 17, 2011, 10:14 AM)
--- End quote ---

+1  :Thmbsup:

MSE & UAC get my vote. You can waste processor cycles by the ton hoping that whatever babysitter you pick is vigilant (read CPU intensive) enough to catch some sparkling new zero day exploit. Or... You can go the reduced permissions route (std User acct + UAC), which never uses any processor time and actually be relatively safe.

I just don't see it as much of a contest.

Carol Haynes:
+1  :-*

MSE + Windows Firewall on Windows 7

AVG - cumbersome and annoying interface that they keep changing for no good reason & too many adverts
Avira - over agressive
Avast Free - very good, ads increasing though. Been my free option of choice until recently.

Note: MSE can be used by small businesses too - unlike all the other free offerings.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page