freeware is the best.

Lol, me either

 

I am always glad to get freeware, and I think that the average user who does not visit "dangerous" sites is as well off with Avast as NOD32. I won't argue the point except that I know many who use AVG and have never been infected. I personally use Bit Defender as that is what I started with on this machine. I intended to use Avast on my new laptop until I learned that I can use the one license on the two machines.
Yes, I think BD is better, but I would not feel bad if all I had was Avast.

The one area that I will buy is anti-trojan program. I like real time protection and as far as I know no free version gives that. I am using Ewido paid.

I have LnS on this computer, but am happy with Kerio 2.1.5 on my laptop.

I am using the trial of Spysweeper on both machines, but have been using Counterspy on this one. I am persuaded that MSAS is as good as the rest, and when my license expires that is the AS I will use. I also use the "bundle" of free AS tools that are common here.

I will always use freebies when I believe they will do the job I need. If one is not comfortable with that, then get what you believe is good for your needs.

Jerry

 

OK, I like freeware, open source etc if you can get something for free, why pay for it ?

But, the flip side of the coin is support. Companies need software support, if something goes wrong, cannot simply wait, time is money. This is why where I work we pay a premuim for software for fast response support, written in contract. Freeware we are at liberty of the developer who has NO incentive to rush a new build though the same day for example.

 

Yes, free is nice. However, the idealist in me realises that everyone has to earn a living to support themselves and have a reasonable standard of living. So whilst I use some freeware, for serious and important software I pay and perhaps use freeware as a backup.

 

donations are heavily appreciated, some developers dont even want donations they just make software as a hobby, and give out their program to whoever wants it. (except people trying to make money of their hardwork.) that's why freeware rocks.

 

On-Demand scanning at Trend Micro's Housecall, BitDefender and McAfee are good to use if you are running freebie AVs. Can't hurt and no , they don't throw up false positives to get you to buy the program. They're very good.

http://housecall.trendmicro.com/

http://us.mcafee.com/root/mfs/default.asp

http://www.bitdefender.com/scan8/ie.html

 

freeware = yum

 

That can or can not be a bad thing. Sometimes commercial-supported software might equal "need to churn out new versions fast because those were business choices", and can be a very bad thing (do I even need to explain why?).

 

also it's hard to trust the company is genuine, they could be just out for money...

 

Yes I agree, but atleast you have leverage to force the company to fix things. Funnily I suffered an issue with some software last week where a patch broke more things than it fixed, got another one by the end of the week that fixed those issues though. The company in question wrote us some real ropey software, that is only just passable, they are trying their best, but we paid good money for the product that really we should'nt of.

 

In my mind, the deal is this:

1/ freeware is a good way to attract potential new clients and get a product some publicity, with hope that commercial companies would then say "hey, that's a great soft, let's go for the pro version to protect our company".

2/ individual users benefit from (hopefully) good products, but must (as a rule) content with basic home-based capabilities, which is fine as far as I'm concerned.

If one is not content with a freeware rendering, one can #complain that the world is suuuuuuuuuuuuch an unjust place to live in and insult everyone who disagrees; #participate on forums to try and improve the product through public feedback to the software developers; #go payware; #get back to school and pay the price so as to be able and write own software

Cheers