Security Suite Versus Separate Components

I am sure this question has been asked many times before, but I would like to know what the experts in this forum have to say about it!

My question is, are you better off getting a full SECURITY SUITE of a particular top software company, or cherry picking the best of breed components for antivirus, spyware, and firewall protection? What are the pro's and con's.

Please be fair and give me your unbiased answer. (Just don't reply get ESET SMART SECURITY because this is their forum, etc. etc.)

Thank you!

 

You may want to take a look at this Poll first...

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=122466

 

The advantage of Security suites, is that you know everything included is compatible. Separate programs have the advantage of being able to pick each individual program, best suited for the users needs.

I personally have a preference for security suites

 

agree with you plus it is more expensive if you have to pay for each application at this moment i am using a security package from my internet provider for me is free and it's antivirus engine is kav antivirus

 

Got fed-up to keep fixing conflicts and incompatibilities at every update of my "best of each" (best AV, best firewall, best AS, etc...).

So now running happily with just a suite (since years) and it works!
Faster PC, never been infected and less BSOD

Of course... choose a good suite

Fax

 

If you pay for something...go and get the best thing you can buy with your money. Suites often have a strong component and the rest is weaker. For sure suites cost cheaper and you have no incompatibilities issues, but if you want the best for every sector of your security you have to buy different products.

 

I like to "cherry pick" from various programs.
One way of looking at this way of securing your pc is that you can overlap or layer some programs within reason.
I wouldn't want to rely on one developer to cover all of the bases. There is bound to be at least one weak spot.

 

I like separate components, because I am looking for specific features in components that a suite doesn't satisfy. Support to mobile use is a main concern, but not a major concern of most suites. The latest issue of Consumer Reports, of all places, rates Eset as #1 in the suites, but I still don't use it-the other majors are very close, though, and firewalls are not rated. There is a table of how the detailed features stack up that might be useful to some. Take that, PC Magazine! The CU preferred free suite, BTW, is Avira, Windows Defender, and Spamfighter (which is the highest rated of all the components). YMMV.

 

.
I use Norton Internet Security 2009 because it has the lowest impact on system resources of any suite I've used, installs (and uninstalls) very quickly, and is very affordable - comes with a three PC license and is often on sale. I feel NIS 2009 gives me good general coverage. I added Zemana AntiLogger for dedicated keylogger protection. Perhaps it would be even better to use a sandbox in conjunction with NIS, but at the moment I don't want the extra complexity.

My point is you can use a suite and still add a best of breed app for additional protection. As long as you choose carefully you won't create too much system overhead, and you can keep license costs down.