Malwarebytes Anti-Malware Updates (Formerly Malwarebytes 3.0 Beta)

Discussion in 'other anti-malware software' started by puff-m-d, Nov 14, 2016.

  1. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    3,507
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Is that really a problem? It's not like they can automatically charge your credit card once the trial period is over.

    One thing I really like about Malwarebytes is it plays well with other security solutions. That is, I have never seen it bog down the performance of my systems, or interfere with other security programs.
     
  2. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,902
    if trial time restarts from scratch also, why bother? ^^
     
  3. BoerenkoolMetWorst

    BoerenkoolMetWorst Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2009
    Posts:
    4,227
    Location:
    Outer space
    No, but it is annoying :D.
    I intentionally want to use MBAM only on-demand, I still have a premium lifetime license. I'm okay with them automatically enabling a trial when you install MBAM, but after every time after an upgrade is a bit too invasive imho.

    Haven't checked the trial time.
     
  4. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    You're kidding, right? Oh, that's right, you use WD, so that probably slows it down anyway.
     
  5. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    3,507
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    LOL Yeah right.

    It's funny how people who don't use it think that. But sad how they try to make others believe it. While it is true WD is not the fastest scanner, it does not interfere with real-time operations like many anti-MSers want everyone to believe.

    As for Malwarebytes - same thing. When in real-time mode, no performance hit. In manual on-demand scanning, not the fastest but who cares when manually scanning? Manual scanning is a rare event anyway.
     
  6. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    I have used WD recently Bill, but once I installed Norton I noticed a marked difference. Unless you've tried alternatives recently on your machine/s you have nothing to compare it too. I don't mean on someone else's machine/s.
    Try disabling it starting with Windows, restart your machine and open a few program and use your browser a bit. I will be very surprised if you don't notice a difference
     
  7. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    3,507
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Norton!?!? LOL And yes, I have tried it and many others on my own systems.

    No thanks.

    You like yours and that's fine. But please stop trying to convince others that your solution is the best for everyone.
     
  8. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am stating facts about how WD v Norton (+ others I've tried) run on my machine. Again, unless you've tried an alternative LATELY you have nothing to compare WD to.

    Edit: But this isn't about Norton or WD. Try disabling MB like I suggested and see if you don't notice a difference.
     
  9. Bill_Bright

    Bill_Bright Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Posts:
    3,507
    Location:
    Nebraska, USA
    Right. So you assume your sample-size-of-one experience is representative for the entire universe and renders the whole point moot for everyone else? :rolleyes:

    Anecdotal evidence is not evidence.

    The forums are awash with posters who complained Program ABC bogged their system down so they switched to Program XYZ and all is good now.

    :rolleyes: I have 6 systems here and dozens more client systems I am directly responsible for. Some have MB Free for on-demand scanning, some have MB Premium with its real-time component. Only when doing manual on-demand scans is any performance hit noticed, and that's to be expected.

    If you are so insistent MB drags systems down, why do you use it? Why not go with Zemana or another? And if you don't use MB, why are your participating in this thread? To force your anecdotal based opinion on everyone else? :(

    As I said above,
    Now let's move on.
     
  10. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    It's like talking to a brick wall.
    I've done as I suggested you try, disabled MB starting with Windows and only open it when I want to run a scan.
    Yeah, it is a waste of time talking to a brick wall.
     
  11. Brummelchen

    Brummelchen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Posts:
    2,902
    on my 10pro (not tuned) WD is slowing down, measurable, but i would say its the bloated pro crap at all. on my 10ltsc only less or none impact.
     
  12. guest

    guest Guest

    Coming from you, it is hilarious. :argh::rolleyes:
     
  13. guest

    guest Guest

    The problem with WD is it's set "on-access" without the possibility to turn it into "on-execution" , such simple thing all AVs do but MS can't (don't want) implement lol.

    Simple test :
    Download lot of installers/files (bigger they are better it is) in a single folder then try to open the said folder.
    With WD: the time to display the icons takes ages, because of the said on-access scanning.
    Without WD: instantaneous display.

    Known behavior observed by many and myself on several different low to high-end machines since Win8.

    If it wasn't for that, WD would be greater.
     
  14. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    To be fair, what improved Firefox's speed far more than disabling MB was uninstalling the MB extension (beta). Huge difference. I'm not necessarily putting all the blame on their extension as I have other extensions that may have been conflicting, but without it Firefox runs much quicker.
     
  15. Roberteyewhy

    Roberteyewhy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    US
    Need input. Anyone running Windows v1903 with MBAM AND Windows Defender Antivirus both running without problems as they did in v1809?

    When I installed v1903 as an update, Defender would show MBAM as the Antivirus of choice or vice versa. I could not run both at the same time. Have not clean installed yet so I do not know if they both run concurrently.

    Thanks,
    Robert
     
  16. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Did you check the setting in MB so that it doesn't show in Windows Action Center?
     
  17. Azure Phoenix

    Azure Phoenix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Posts:
    917
    Can you look at MBAM's setting? There should be a section to not register it to the action center. See if that helps.
    https://support.malwarebytes.com/docs/DOC-1149
     
  18. Bertazzone

    Bertazzone Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2018
    Posts:
    138
    Location:
    USSR
    The extension is well-known to affect browsing speed, thus not necessarily the best choice. It depends on what the user is looking for, and other factors.
     
  19. Roberteyewhy

    Roberteyewhy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    US
    Damn, didn't think about that.

    Same as above.

    Are you both saying that by doing this that you have MBAM and WD running together with no conflicts in 1903?

    Thanks Krusty and Azure Phoenix for the quick response,
    Robert
     
  20. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    I'm still on 1809... very long story.
     
  21. Azure Phoenix

    Azure Phoenix Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Posts:
    917
    @Roberteyewhy

    I'm not currently using MBAM or WD. However I assume it can help in your situation. Since as you said your OS is showing MBAM as your antivirus and that setting should help to deal with that.
     
  22. Roberteyewhy

    Roberteyewhy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    US
    Me too....long story. But, Krusty we figure it out.;)

    Robert
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2019
  23. Roberteyewhy

    Roberteyewhy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    US
    Thanks. Will remember when I clean install 1903.

    Topic already on MBAM's forums and they are working on it.

    Robert
     
  24. Roberteyewhy

    Roberteyewhy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2007
    Posts:
    549
    Location:
    US
    Ok clean installed 1903. You were both correct, Krusty and Azure Phoenix. All it takes to run both WD and MBAM together is to disable the Action Center.

    On a side note Krusty, got everything to work just like with 1809. Took all day though.:eek:

    Thanks again for you help,
    Robert
     
  25. Krusty

    Krusty Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Posts:
    6,934
    Location:
    Among the gum trees
    Good to hear. I'm glad you've got 1903 + MB + WD all up and running. Thanks for letting us know. :thumb:
     
Loading...
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.