Which Antivirus is best??

To be very blunt there is no best antivirus product. If you take two identical factory set up computers and let two different users have one each to use for a while you will find that very soon after the users install a few of their favorite apps that a given antivirus product will not run the same on the two identical computers. The memory and CPU usage will be different and the speed at which it runs on each computer will also be different. It is always interesting to read individual users reviews of their security apps. But you must remember when reading these that the information they are giving will not reflect what it will do on your computer but what it does on their computer. These reviews are given with good intentions but can only be taken in the broadest context. I have found that the old tried and true antivirus programs that have been around a long time, such as Symantec ,McAfee and trendMicro will install a different version of their product from a CD or a download on an XP Pro and An XP Pro media center computer These are the only one that do differentiate between these different Os's that I know of So It would be very hard for someone to tell you how well an av will run on your comp unless you have actually run it on your computer. The bottom line is that as good intentioned as these personal reviews are they don't really do you much good in letting you know how it will react on your computer. The only way you will ever know how well any given application will run on your computer is to install the trial version ofthe product that has the options you would like to have and actually see how well it does on your machine. That way you will know with any doubt. It does take a little time trialing several different security apps but it is the only way to find the one that performs the best with your software environment, your internet connection and possibly your home network. All of these thing effect the way these apps work and no two computers are the same. So go for it and try a few so you can find one you can live with comfortably knowing that it is working the way you want it to on your computer.

bigc

 

Hello bigc73542!

Well said. I totally agree. I hope they will make this a sticky. I do have to say that i was once one of those who asked Which one is better and so on. That was one the reasons why i joined Wilders initially. I think it is for a newbie one way to start learning about security and security software. I have learned alot here in wilders and i am bit wiser now. I still keep learning everyday.

Kristian

 

The *best AV* is (in my opinion) the one which affords the best protection. It's analogous to buying a padlock for a storage room that protects things that you highly value. If the best lock doesn't fit the hasp on that room, for goodness sakes REPLACE THE HASP -- don't accept a weaker lock.

Advocating less than the best AV is like saying "If you can't raise the bridge, lower the water."

 

Within your analogy, with the storage room representing the compuer, and the padlock representing the AV, you are basically saying that the end-user should replace a component of the computer if it is preventing the 'best' AV from running right. Think about that for a sec, it is at best impractical. The vast majority of people are not going to replace a component of their computer environment, be it any of the three factors bigc mentioned ('software environment, your internet connection and your home network'), to allow an AV to run properly on their system. Granted there are some with interest and know-how in computer securirty who might have developed an affiliation or loyalty to a particular AV and might have the know-how and inclination to alter their computer environment to ensure that their beloved AV runs right, but most everyone else is unwilling and/or incapable of doing this to a large extent. On a different note, continuing with your analogy, the 'best' padlock (AV) would be the one most effective at preventing an intruder from breaking in and stealing your things in the storage room (computer), right? The problem with this criteria for 'best' is that it ignores other important factors. For instance, what if the padlock was so complicated the end-user couldn't figure it out or spent more time trying to open it then he did using his storage room, or what if the price for it was cost-prohibitive for the end-user, or what if it there were problems with it and when the end-user tried contacting customer support about it they were at best unhelpful? The analogous nature of the aforementioned factors should be obvious, and should highlight why such a narrow criteria for determining and choosing the 'best' AV is illadvised.

 

What has "the vast majority" got to do with a discussion of "the best?" In fact, the vast majority of people don't even run much security at all -- or, if they do, it likely hasn't been updated in weeks & weeks.

Moreover, the "vast majority" -- if they come to Wilders at all -- will come here in order to learn. Why teach them to use less than the best protection? Why teach them to select security based upon anecdotal information, to the near-100% exclusion of basing their decisions primarily upon objective data such as that available at AV-Comp?

Security recommendations should not be dumbed-down to fit the lowest common denominator. Neither should a user's security set-up be compromised in order to *play nicely* with that user's predilection for using questionable software. One reason why so many computers are rendered to zombie status is that all too many users select security software because it has a pretty GUI or because it doesn't object to all the garbage programs they have on their computer.

First priority should be given to selecting security programs that afford demonstrably superb protection, & then (only then) to finding apps that do not conflict with that security. In other words, one should dump the apps that are incompatible with strong security programs, NOT vice versa.

 

Well said.

 

Who said I was disregarding or espousing the dismissal of objective data (detection capabilities) as a factor to consider when choosing an AV or as a factor in determining the 'best' AV, even though the latter is an act in futility. Furthermore, that anecdotal information you are talking about--how it runs on one's system, the quality of customer support, the usability of the program, etc--is of utmost importance and should not be disregarded. My point is that both subjective factors AND objective measures of effectiveness should be taken into account. Ignoring one or the other is illadvised.

Come on now, your making it seem like the only conflicts AVs have with someone's computer environment is with 'garbage programs'. That is patently false and blatantly misleading. There are so many variables that could be the cause of conflict that reducing and simplifying them in the manner you did is ridiculous, not to mention amusing.

My point was that your advise isn't applicable or useful to the vast majority of computer users because that is simply not how they approach it in general. They think of and use the computer for its functionality, not in order to keep it secure. The latter is of secondary importance to them, so they are not going to prioritize it over conveniance or functionality.

 

Why offer advice to people (the so-called "vast majority") who aren't here & who won't come here? It's like a preacher who berates his congregation about people who don't attend church. The faithful few get the scolding. The non-attendees never hear the exhortation because they are happily at home watching a football game on TV.

And why base one's teaching upon a reductio ad absurdem such as the 1-to-the-minus-10 probability that a good & valid accounting program won't be compatible with a good & valid security program? I am a software try-out junkie. In all the years I have tried out all kinds of stuff, I have yet to experience any incompatibility with my security programs except between other security programs.

And yes, I DO think that a NON-security program that conflicts with a good & valid security program IS a questionable program to have on one's computer. That is, I am fully persuaded that such conflicts will almost certainly be caused by the fact that the *conflicting* NON-security program is doing something that is a real or potential danger to the integrity of one's computer.

I am always happy to be amusing, and do hope we can continue to engage in friendly disagreement & banter. Believe me, TOB, I deeply respect your right to be wrong.

P.S. -- I shall be absent from this topic for a while. aloha... bellgamin

 

You are getting hung up on my use of the word advise, perhaps I should have approached my point differently. My point is that your perpsective on computers--in regards to their primary purpose and how the end user in turn prioritizes software on them--isn't in line with the vast majority of people, both the computer illiterate masses and some that frequent this forum (see Peter's previous post and the following quotes as some examples), and thus isn't applicable or useful for them.

On a different note...

At least we can agree on a couple things, as I always seek to keep things civil and I similarly adhere to the implied principle of the following quote: "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

 

What I make from these statements is that regardless if a security app runs well on someones computer they should just dump the programs the security has issues with. as long as someone somewhere has said that the particular security app is a good one . That reasoning is what the security vendors would come up with. As long as the security has at least a standard rating at AV-comparatives you will be protected. In reality in the real world you would never in several lifetimes come in contact with all most all of the samples they test with. It would be like digging a moat to keep the elephants out of your front yard. How often do you come into contact with elephants. Although people somewhere have been stepped on by an elephant I don't think I have to protect my property from them. Like i stated in the first post of this thread, the only way to find a security app that will run well and protect your computer is to try it for yourself. I am not going to protect my computer with a security app just because some self professed expert tells me it is the best. Get real. I am going to try it for my self and find out if it runs well on my machine. If not I will try another, there are plenty of them available.

 

Errrr.. well, there are people who install programs just because of magazine reviews or online blogs that they come across. In my case, I first used Zone Alarm only because of a very small article in the local newspaper (I only read computer magazines off and on). I also installed antispyware and AV programs based on reviews and information/comments from other users. I don't think there are that many computer users that actually dig down deep into seeing how effective the security software works (unless you are a hacker or PC expert or someone who has a lot of time to read computer dumps).

But I do agree with the thinking that you DO NOT set up your system just to have the best security software that forces you to dump the programs that your computer was originally intended for. Back in the 1980's, three of the most basic functions used by computers were word processing, spreadsheet applications, and database programs. If another utility program forced you to not use your other programs, then basically the PC was useless and would be a good doorstop.

 

Any that products you from the rain.

 

I now what you mean

 

Looks like your umbrealla is full of holes.