malwarebytes, i read lot bout it whys it so good

iv always heard about mbam but why is it so good? im under the impression you run it with your regular antivirus program and firewall.

 

cuz it focuzez on malware dat antivirus don't catch n stuff, so its good compliment for dem.

 

Malwarebytes receives a lot of contributions from malware hunters and forum members.
Dedicated malware hunters submit hundreds of samples as is seen on their forum.
Every windows user should have the free version installed at least and i see no viable reason not to do so.

 

I would only stick to the free version. I have some experience with the Pro version and it causes more trouble than benefit, in my opinion.

Free version is very good when it comes to infected machine and it must be cleaned (not reformatter/reinstalled/reinmaged). It finds leftovers and it sensitive to such things.

For daily usage, the Pro version might feel heavy on some computers (lots of memory and CPU usages at times).
Additionally, it can cause some undesired false positive on certain files (which scares some users). The scanner is sensitive. I know many examples and even this one: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=345442
Its IP blocker blocks lots of traffic from P2P software such as torrents or Skype [just start uTorrent and Skype and watch the show of pop-ups] , or from some legitimate sites (this might be true blocks but it does not really protect the machines, and is also not desirable because it scares users and makes them ask too much).
Finally, the PRO version has troubles to really automatically update program versions - this might not be an issue for some people (IT pros who use the program on home machines) but is a real issues for non-savvy users and real problem I have reported more than an year ago - still not fixed - this is not a bug but design. MBAM often update the program and the Pro version can only notify you about this, then download the program files but NOT install them. You must manually start the update process to finish the update (this never happens from end-users site) , to restart the program and to continue with the new version. Typical end user would never do that. And by this it can remain with the old version for a whole year. But this waiting for new version [downloaded, but not installed and waiting] can also cause performance issue (it has caused to my clients) with high CPU usage (until update gets installed).

These many issues make me think it is better at free version and the Pro version is good only for savvy users and IT Pros who know what they are doing (but if they know what they are doing they don't need the Pro version either )

 

I'm not getting high CPU. Not heavy on my machines. I've never had a FP. No SKYPE issues.

 

{ I have some experience with the Pro version and it causes more trouble than benefit, in my opinion.}

I have used the pro version since it was introduced. I have had zero problems with it, and have used it in real time with KIS, NIS, Avast, F-Secure, and Avira.
Obviously we have had different experiences and different opinions. It is one application I would not be without, and if my AV won't run with it I would ditch the AV and go to one that would. However, so far I have not found an AV that conflicts with MBAM Pro.

It is so good because it works. I have used on a friends machine when his AV, which was one of the top and up to date, failed to stop or identify a rogue. MBAM found and removed with one Quick Scan.
Jerry

 

Never had any problems running the realtime/pro version on any machine I've used or set up for others, other than when I briefly used Avast at a time when Avast had a bug that interacted badly with MBAM.

I don't get FPs with MBAM. I do turn off the notifications for the IP blocker if I use utorrent.

 

Sure, if you are using quad core desktop then you are not going to see much CPU usage. But if you are using 1.4Ghz single core then MBAM Pro might really slow down your CPU.

 

RE, researchers and community keep mbam on top of the current malware nets.

 

Same here, I have 2 Pro licenses with no problems, although I haven't yet used it on my Win 8 machine.

 

Hey The Hammer,

Just to clarify myself - Microsoft bought Skype and started to change its P2P structure. Currently, it is hybrid model and at least 80% of the Skype structure is not P2P:
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/microsoft...frastructure-changes-has-microsoft-made/12612
http://www.zdnet.com/microsofts-skype-for-windows-8-to-launch-october-26-7000006145/

So, this might have changed but in the past it was a case. I can't test it now because I use Skype for Windows 8 and not MBAM.

 

There's no need for that.

MBAM along with HMP are probably the sanest on-demand scanners with excellent detection rate you can get today. They could help as a second opinion if you're hesitate your PC is clean or not and/or to scan downloads.

No.

 

I don't know.

It just is.

That is all.


.

 

1. Great detection and removal of stuff AVs miss, especially rogue AVs.
2. Most important stuff is free.
3. Great support.

 

How about a AMD Dual core C50 (1.0GHz) 2GB DDR3 memory netbook which I have it installed on also?

 

Going from dual core to single core is a huge downgrade. Also, speed is a personal perception.... Something that's fast for you might be slow to me. If you are happy with your speed then who am I to tell you what is wrong or what is right? For me MBAM Pro slowed things down enough to look elsewhere for protection.
Cheers

 

this is an old thread but think its moves back to the top. anyways i was wondering if mbam would it be a good idea to have that on real time protection even though im already running emsisoft anti-malware?
paid