Free vs their paid upgrades

All of the "free" guys try to get you to upgrade to their paid versions and thats how they stay in business. In general do you guys think that these upgrades are worth the money.

The way I see it is that either the free products are protecting the user adequately, in which case their paid versions are a scam

OR

the free versions dont, and they are merely a bait an switch.

Which one is it.

If someone who has 1st hand experience between Avira Free vs Avira Premium and those like it, in terms of real-world cases where one blocked the threat and the other didn't, please let me know.


This is not a Vendora A vs Vendor B thread. Its a Vendor A vs Vendora A thread

 

Avira's webguard blocks stuff the guard doesn't.

Avira's free version is more stripped of features than, say, Avast's free vs paid versions.

 

It is neither. I only have experience with Avira and avast!. In both cases, I don't think a "bait and switch" or "a scam" are being perpetrated on the end user.

If you compare the feature set between paid and free on each companies website, it is quite obvious what you are giving up in terms of overall protection.

IMO, the paid versions are well worth the money. Nothing in life is free and the developers need to make a living just like everyone else. Because I can afford a license, I buy one. If I fall on hard times and can't afford one, I'll go with the free version. If part of my licensing fees indirectly help to support others using the free version, then so be it. If the vendor wants to donate part of the license fee to a charity, then that's ok with me too.

 

In most cases, the paid versions offer a few extra features that I usually don't find necessary, so I go with the free most of the time. I have used Avira free and paid, but found the web guard slowed browsing down enough to be annoying to me, so I went back to the free version. I can live without the web guard. However, some folks might disagree. It's usually a personal thing, up to each user, as to what's necessary and what's not.

 

I can only speak for Avira and there is no scam with the premium version. It is a business model which has many advantages: the free has the same detection capability as the premium as far as the main guard and scanner are concerned, it promotes Avira with a large number of users, it also filters the web for malware (some people report infections). The premium is paradoxically more useful to the average user as it offers an all around security (web, mail, behaviour blocker) which can be completely automated.

I have both free and paid, but I only pay to support them (most of the time I use both versions on demand).

 

We should be glad that they already give us the free version. Since all of the company doesn't have any obligation to give us anything at all

Back to op question :

Many advanced use here are satisfied with free version, they doesn't bother to buy anything at all. Just look around, and u see that free is not equal to bad product.

free can be a bait (it works on me!)*,but it also help many people who doesn't have enough money to buy security product

*I buy SBoxie, EAM and OA because of that

 

Thankfully it is possible to get long trials with AVIRA.

 

Thats my point. If the free keeps me as protected as the premium, then why buy the premium. Either it does or it doesn't. I note, I didn't say free has the "same features" as the premium, because I know it doesn't. Rather, I am asking "does it protect be as well" as the premium.

Someone mentioned Webguard. If Webguard is really providing added protection, then users of the free version need to know that they are running around the internet with the zippers down. The need to know that, so they can buy the paid version and protect themselves. If they truly is a difference, then AVIRA and others are truly putting millions of users at risk by providing a free version. I think its criminal.

Just look at the number of infections on the Cleanup Forms that are running Avast Free.

 

Them claiming to use Avast sadly does not mean anything. When people install Avast, MSE, NOD32 and Spybot with Teatimer on their system at the same time (recent example) and get infected, you cannot really blame anyone but the user.

 

MSE pretty good for protecting but there are still pest that can sneak into the system. None of these products can give you multi-layer protection. All doing the same thing trying to detect pest before it spreads and does damage.

 

So you are saying those who used a paid product, that has no HTTP scanning, are stealing money.

Free ones tthat only update once a day over paid update frequently, are not putting users at risk?

Those who market products with pathetic detection rates knowingly are doing so in criminal intent?

And for the record, Aviras free will keep you safer then most paid. Of course the paid is going for a great price right now to.
The responsinility is on the user to educate themselves of each product, safe web habits and the all out truth of there isnt a Holy Grail.

 

very nice approach

 

The paid version are good, the free will just lack some special products that they have.

However, I usually go with the paid version. It is fair exchange for security, they guys work there ~ Snipped as per TOS ~, writing definition updates. They deserve some exchange as well, the free scheme is only to help the people without much income.

So please support the Companies, if you can, this go out to everyone in this website as well. Oh, they also increase employment rate