Why Pay for AV When It’s Free? (Article)

Now, it is time to support Emsisoft....

 

I agree. I bought 1 year licence although I don't use it ATM. Maybe I will in the future.
Go Bears!

 

Hehehehe.....thanks, hq!

 

Avast free can scan Web traffic. the new 2015 line can scan https too.

 

I would, if

a) It didn't make my $7500 PC feel noticeably slower (i7 4960X, Asus Rampage IV, 32GB DDR3 2800, 2x 840 EVO 1TB SSD, quad SLI 780Ti's 6GB each)

b) If I could find it at a respectable sale price. I drop loads of money on hardware and am a total cheapass with software, I know...but there was a time when I refused to pay for anything software-wise.

Aside from that I really like Emsisoft. I like the company and the people. It's just a little high $$$ and it puts noticeable drag on anything I install it on.

 

I bought a licence when they had a sale and paid 10€ for one year. Even if I don't use their real time AV, I use their on demand Emergency Kit and because of it I like to support them.

 

A little to $$$.

 

Well at least I'm not the only one. I have the money, I'm just a cheap ass on certain things.

I don't know how much 10€ is in US$, but I would definitely pay that for Emsisoft. Maybe I have just never caught the right sale.

 

Ahem...



Glad to live in a developing country~

 

YEs it is.
46.78 CAD =42.7090 USD

 

Well yes, since Canada has a better state economy health. I was just saying that the price tags range differently from one country to another. In my place, EAM is cheaper than other AVs, probably the cheapest worldwide-consumer AV available (JFYI Avira Pro is US$26.99 when I visited their website). So in my case it is not too expensive.

 

Hello,

It has been my experience that while some businesses renew their anti-malware software year-in and year-out, other businesses shop around for anti-malware software, looking for things like better threat detection or performance, or simply trying to save some money.

The author of the article seems to have fallen into the trap of thinking "because anti-malware software isn't 100% effective, you shouldn't bother with it." While I'm used to seeing such abstract and dogmatic thinking in the computer industry, because people who work around computers tend to see things in terms of absolutes, it doesn't really work that way in the real world, where you have to deal with all sorts of issues. As an example, the bulletproof vests worn by many policemen are not 100% resistant to all bullets. Does this mean that they should be taken away from the policemen, because they give give a false sense of security and encourage risky behavior? I don't think so. Seat belts in cars would be another example.

The world is full of imperfect technologies that don't work perfectly 100% of the time. And, frankly, the time to do the whole "antivirus is dead" discussion is not during summer, but right before RSA (the conference, that is) starts, in order to maximize press coverage.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

 

29.95 USD

 

I'll drink to that!

 

Really ?? Lol. Java exploits, Adobe exploits. Drive-by downloads are the most common way by which people are being infected. Look at the Microsoft Intelligent Report.

 

Heh, I still didn't encounter such case. In my experience, to get infected people are usually running email attachments, install "Flash updates", install rogue AVs and don't upt-out of PUPs during program installs. But that's just my experience.

 

For 25% off, you can apply "SOFTCLUB25" coupon code....
I got 3yrs for 36$.

 

To clarify, when I said it was expensive, I wasn't necessarily comparing it to other companies prices. Day-to-day price I would say it is average price.

However, I'm a cheap ass and am used to getting 3 PC for a year for $4.99-9.99. I could swing $14.99-19.99 for Emsisoft for 3PC for a year, but that's about my limit. I am cheap yes, but also you have to consider that it is hard to justify spending twice as much for Emsisoft than for another solution (example: $9.99 vs $19.99)

 

In the past free meant less protection with basic features. Today Avast, AVG an Panda even let their free versions be tested. Ad sponsored is normal in world of smartphone aps, no one complains, so why complain for the few ads prompted by the companies who provide their products for free.

 

I pay just to support developers for their work despite I have free licenses of almost any AV. So should you

 

You can also contribute in other ways.

 

Makes sense to me, good post.

 

Good point, Windows Security.

 

Don't know about other paid AV vendors, but no force can get me to pay a sorry bunch of layabouts who are magnitudes better at table football than at programming in any capacity.

Maybe your point went over my head, but I thought he just meant it's pointless to pay for so small a difference in effectiveness rather than that their flaws make them completely useless.