No One Has Replaced Yet Have They?

To date would SuperAntiSpyware still be one of the top if not top contenders for freeware spy/malware apps?

I haven't been paying attention lately if anyone else has been moving up the ranks...

The only one I can think of at the moment that brings some attention is Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware...

THANKS

 

absolutely Still the top along with malwarebytes.

 

which one is better at blocking malware in real time or and detention?

 

If I am not mistaken,some folks had mentioned malwarebytes had some problems with the real time. I am not sure what in regards to.IMO I Would take SAS real time and malwarebytes on demand.

 

Personally I have never used any spy/mal app as realtime, to much sucking up resources, I always use them on demand...

 

Same here.
I don't find the reason to do so.

 

SAS still at the top. Not using MBAM, too much false positives for me.

 

I´ve been using MBAM for a few months now. Today I got the first FP. According to MBAM forums, it will be fixed in the next update.
MBAM is a top notch program, development is fast and it has a great detection and removal rate.
I use it as a reinforcement to SAS, they play along very well.
If I would pay (and if I wanted real-time protection), I would have SAS real-time and MBAM on demand.
Now I scan often with MBAM and sometimes with SAS.

BTW: MBAM quick scan is FAST, under 3 minutes in an 80G hard drive.

Back on topic: SAS is still one of the best AS out there, but in the last months MBAM has come very close (if not the same or better). Use both on demand if you want to.

 

Personally for me MBAM hasn't been around long enough for me to be bothered with it.

When compared to other names floating around, this app is to new to know what it's doing if any good at all... It can't compare to SAS for now at least anyway...

 

You shouldn't judge an app by the amount of time it has been out, but by its effectiveness at doing what it claims to do. And, in the respect, MBAM and SAS are neck and neck IMHO. I've grown to prefer MBAM myself.

 

Why would one need to "replace", unless desperately short of disk space?
Nothing wrong with having two (or more) demand tools on board.
Personally, I have no idea which one is better, so both are installed, along with the AVZ antiviral toolkit, and a few other goodies, in case of bad times.
(None needed, yet, touch wood.)

 

Below is one user who is quite happy with SAS.

SAS user review

 

Quoted from that same website:

He had bad luck not to find a Wilders post about it. Wilders usually appears on the first results page
But it's a simillar story to how I first found out about SAS. I found little forum a few weeks before I knew anything about Wilders. Back then SAS saved the day. It still does when I clean infected machines. (With a little help from it's friend MBAM )

 

Same here.
MBAM seems to have tons of FPs for me.

 

What about a-squared? seems a good contender as well, haven't tried it yet though. Thanks.

 

I don't seem to have that problem.
A typical scan with MBAM.

 

Many members here like a2. However when I tried it, it was full of FP's. Never bothered to try again. Maybe it was just me.

 

That results are similar to what I get, except the scanning time. Under 3 mins over here

 

I had like more than 100 threats scanned with Malwarebytes,
while SAS, AVAST!, Dr.Web Cureit found nothing.
Odd.

 

Just cookies?

 

Hello , everybody ,
# LoneWolf - a TYPICAL scan with MBAM : Quick Scan ; Objects scanned : 41646 ; Time elapsed : 2 minutes , 59 seconds ; Files infected : 0 .
Thanks , PROROOTECT

 

MBAM Quick scan : 2 min. 55 sec. Thanks , PROROOTECT

 

Originally posted by HURST

Originally posted by Ohmy

It's been a long time since I had actual for-real tricky malware on my computer.
Since well before MBAM was developed, and before I'd heard of SAS. In fact, back when the tools of choice for the average noob were Spybot and AdAware.
A2 was making a bit of a name for itself, and Ewido was considered pretty much top of the heap.
(Just a bit of context, there.)
What I particularly appreciated about A2 then, was that even after I'd taken the PC in to get fixed (a combination of malware plus naive cleaning techniques forced a re-install) A2 was the only one that actually finished the job, and cleaned the PC. The others I was using deleted stuff, but it always came back.
I now know that the tech who "cleaned" the computer failed to do a very thorough job on the malware, but at least he got the PC working.

I don't mind FP's at all. Provided the program detecting them has the removal muscle/smarts needed should real malware install. As I say, it's been a while, but I believe A2 might well fall into that category. (So I keep it. Update it weekly. If I'm dumb or unlucky, it'll be part of the arsenal.)
Ohmy, it would be interesting to know what some of these FP's (or rather, MBAM detections) are...file names/paths/threat type etc. I wonder if the program is mis-identifying some Korean software, or, as VLK suggested: Cookies.

 

I also don't mind some FP's every now and then. I am worried about detection and removal. But when you find FP on almost EVERY scan you do, that app is not usefull: time consuming and another thing to worry about. SAS and MBAM do a great job without the FP's: with SAS I never had a FP, with MBAM, just once and it was fixed on the next update. As I said, A2 didn't work for me, but maybe that was just me...

 

Is there a way I can send you the results?
Thanks!