Malwarebytes Anti-Malware 2.0.X releases

A once go to program has now IMO become more concerned about selling their paid program and has made using the free one not worth the hassle. Scan time is way to long and a quick option is only available on a short trial version or the paid version.

Always,
Wildman

 

On my machine the "hyper" is not much quicker than the regular scan, FWIW.

 

We barely use MBAM anymore, free or otherwise. If I do feel like using it on a malware removal I use Chicalogic instead, it's faster, and doesn't annoy with pushing stuff. Also I have 12 registration codes for MBAM lifetime, paid for through legit resellers but most of the keys are being killed in the newer versions of MBAM, but work fine on Chicalogic.

So these days either I don't bother with it, or use Chica in the rare cases I do bother with it. The glory days of MBAM seem to be behind us.

 

It has nothing to do with this. MBAM 2.0 was IMO extreme uncomfortable and buggy from the beginning on. Pro users are annoyed more than free users. Too much of the good things are gone: No advanced CLI options exist (were there in 1.x Pro), annoying popups and so on. But the real nuisance for me is that fixing and come back of those features was promised since Beta-time, but nothing happened until now.

 

On my system Hyper Scan takes 3 minutes and Threat Scan 11 minutes. I do have "reduce priority of scans to improve multitasking" enabled which might cause the scans to take longer, but I haven't tested it both enabled and disabled.

 

Yes, I'm sorry that there haven't been new builds for while now that address the outstanding issues. Hopefully development is continuing though. MBAM Pro is still the best solution for people who can't avoid PUPs IMHO. None of the AVs are aggressive enough in that regard.

 

Yes and no. I don't like that kind of aggressive PUPs policy that MBAM and f.e. ESET use. It brings a lot of confusion to average joes. In many pc forums users get strange because MBAM finds PUPs. Many helpers then give crazy tips: scan with this, with that, format c and so on. And if we look: Often only the installers are flagged (and many delete them) but that does not mean that PUPs are installed or that the users isn't aware enough when installing. So I like an approach like Emsisoft better: warn, if PUPs are going to be installed.

btw.: I'm wondering why the aggressive PUPs policy of MBAM is so inconsequent. Why do they flag some software that f.e. contains Google Chrome or other toolbar PUPs but do not flag for example AVAST, which contains the same PUPs If aggressive, please consequent!

 

I have checked out the free version, and normally I'm not into on demand scanners, but I kinda like MBAM, it's not bloated.

 

Yep, my lifetime license is collecting dust, and my machine is currently MBAM free.............. Nothing lasts forever.

 

Same thing here.

 

One of the problems for security software is how to protect users from their own ignorance. There is no single correct answer; all solutions are compromises which work better for some then others. In my work though I see many people complaining about the fact that their antivirus did not protect the system from being crippled by PUPs. On the other hand it's extremely rare that anyone complains their security software removed a PUP that they actually wanted on the system. The overwhelming majority of people don't understand software bundling and the opt-out process when they install software, so they wind up with a vast array of rubbishware that they don't want and don't know how to remove. My customers are a lot happier running MBAM Pro along side their AV; they have a tool that works when their AV does nothing. As for people accepting bad advice from others in forums that simply can't be helped.

 

Okay Malwarebytes is off my machine and SuperAntiSpyware is on Spyware Blaster is activated as well.

Always,
Wildman

 

I'm actually thinking of going back to SAS as a failover for Norton.

 

Dropping MBAM for SAS? Tests results at MRG Effitas have always been dismal for SAS...

 

From what I have seen in some malware testing videos, SAS is starting to lose quality ever since Version 6. It has basically starting to go the same route Spybot did, unfortunately.

 

FWIW https://threatcenter.crdf.fr/?Stats

 

Interesting site. Thanks.

 

Indeed. However it provides an unintrusive background layer I don't have to worry about. Lately I've been using SAS to tell me what cookies Untangle is missing at the router level, so it's been fun for that. But I agree - for raw protection/detection, SAS is pretty useless. I would guess Kerish Doctor has similar detections, Kerish isn't even trying to be an anti-malware, it's just there as a 'bonus'..

I doubt I would pay more than $30 to cover the entire home with SAS, and since they don't offer good family packs, that probably won't happen. Someone needs to tell SAS that a 2 PC license isn't a 'family'.

 

LOL...

you guys can send me your MBAM product codes any day ill take them!

 

Really so the only good malware FREE product is Malwarebytes? Gee why do I find that hard to believe?

 

I have two MBAM licenses although it's not even installed in my computers. I use it on demand every three months along other scanners to check if anything has gone under the radar of my resident security. Its reputation is excellent with many different types of users, it is often the application chosen by many malware testers to check whether other applications tested for malware, managed to detect and clean everything during the test...

Its new version has drawn a lot of criticism, but I believe it is still an outstanding tool to have as an on demand scanner. If you wish to try something else, I would suggest HitmanPro which is designed as a second opinion scanner, very fast and effective as it uses several AV engines, always free unless you want it to clean.

 

The age old story, if it ain't broke don't fix it! Nope Malwarebytes went and fixed it and now IMO it is broke. Hitman Pro? Another one who wants the coins to get rid of baddies.

Always,
Wildman

 

You could be right....as they say, "greed is good".

 

IW BS.......

 

I see no need to change right now. Everything running fine here.