Microsoft Security Essentials

Does anybody know if you can run MSE and Norton Internet Security 2010 simultaneously?

Many thanks,

 

Anyone have any comments on this issue? Or is it not an issue?

 

This would be a bad idea, you never want to have 2 realtime scanners going on 1 machine at the same time.

 

I _highly_ doubt it, you would be lucky to run any security software alongside a suite.

 

I agree, they would not be so loud about this if they didn't think it would affect their bottom line. Someone else here made the point about Norton's main end user revenue being from preinstalls on so many retail machines. So many consumers just go ahead and buy a subscription to norton because they don't know any better and renew when it is time to renew. Perhaps Norton is worried about MSE affecting their little sweet money maker they got going on with these pc manufacturers. All this noise coming from them is really disgusting. It makes their reputation that much worse.

 

I don't think it is a good idea.There are someone testing this situation.And the result is bad.Two more AVs are installed,their ability will be powerless.When scanning the computer,they will influence another one and just can detect a few viruses.

 

Running two very similar programs together is asking for conflicts.
Definitely not a good idea. An adventure maybe.

 

well for some reason, the people over at the Avast forums seem to think runing 2 AV's is no problem at all if thers no "VISIBLE" issues and i thought people who visited a technical forum like that knew better...

 

I see that. A junior member suggests running the beta with MSE as one of two options for a disgruntled beta tester.
ROFL!

 

I can pretty safely say you can not run the two together without even trying it. You can only run one resident shield, and one on access shield at the same time. You can only use more than one antivirus if the other antivirus gives you the option of only installing the on-demand scanner module. You can get away with installing two antivirus for a while sometimes if you disable both of the above shields, but you will eventely have problems with system stability. Running two software firewalls at the same time will make your system less secure; not more secure. Don't do it. Firewalls work off of policy based rules, and if you have two different sets of rules trying to accomplish the same thing at the same time then you will run into problems. I don't want to explain the technical details out of pure laziness right now lol

 

several of the more senior forum members say the exact same and it really just lowers my confidence of the technical knowledge over at that supposed "AV" forum...

 

Maybe I will try to unhook my external hard drive and see if MSE creates a new temp folder.

 

It is quite worrying if the 'seasoned pros' are recommending running 2 real-time AVs simultaneously.Any possible benefits (a few extra signatures) are far outweighed by the potential major issues and it's irresponsible for them to say different.

 

thats exactly what i posted ther, but apparently im wrong...

 

According to this: http://blog.avast.com/2009/08/28/greetings-from-redmond/
should work fine.

 

No automatic updates?

 

Read more of the thread.

 

From that post:

"During that time, we tested avast with over 15 other low-level applications and fixed a few compatibility issues. For example, we made sure avast! works flawlessly with the upcoming Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) – a program that has severe issues with the current avast beta build 5.0.89, by the way "

That's all terrific but are they going to guarantee there will never be any such 'severe issues' in future? and for what exact benefit is there in running both together?

 

Looks to me like that article is about compatibility on Windows 7.
If you don't have enough faith in your choice of av, dump it. In the case of Avast's beta, it's more suitable for test systems at this stage.

 

I have plenty of memory and cpu, but look how much memory it is using on my pc. As long as I don't notice any sluggishness then it is ok. Does it use more resources if you have them available?

 

This is the only explanation I can think of at the moment.

 

I didn't read this entire thread, but I've read the MSE isn't good at prevention against new threats, that is, malware for which no signature exists yet.
No good heuristics either.

Source: non-English website.

It may have been mentioned somewhere in this thread, but I'll just state it here, just in case.

Antimalware based on signatures only is rather limited.

 

In my "personal" experience, it's the complete opposite.

 

It does employ some special features per this article:

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...s_beta_offers_free_protection_against_malware

"Security Essentials uses a new feature called the Dynamic Signature Service, which employs a variety of techniques to check for malware even before that malware's specific signature has been identified. Microsoft says Security Essentials emulates the behavior of programs before they run, and uses the signature created during the process to look for any suspicious behavior or patterns of suspicious behavior, such as starting an unexpected network connection or trying to modify certain protected sections of Windows. The Dynamic Signature Service then determines what action to take against the potential malware."