MSE v Trend Micro v Kaspersky

ok so for about 4 yrs i have been using trend on my pcs and when i started using this i really had no idea about internet security/antivirus but it was the only thing available to me other than zone alarm and norton which i both hate.

so after being on NBR (and other PC/tech sites/forums) for a while now ive heard alot about kaspersky and it is only recently being stocked by all the stores around here(previously only one or two had it).

and know the new MSE is out and getting some good reveiws too + its free!!!

ok so i really like trend and all its features (and layout) but it cost $110 a year for 3 lisences where as Kaspersky is $80 - $90 for a 2 year 3 lisence subscribtion which works out alot cheaper and obviously MSE is much better being free...

but putting cost asside which is the better package?

i dont really want any other free suites as i have had several bad experiences with these (and yes im talking about real ones not the fake ones) and im not getting norton. Norton and trend and kaspersky is about all thats available (retail) to me so dont bother mentioning them...

so which is the better option (assuming they were all the same price)

and for those of you that vote for trend or kaspersky please tell me why i would be better of getting that instead of the cheaper/free alternative...

many thanks

mtarm1

 

Avira AntiVir Personal 9 Free + IObit 360 Security + Spyware Blaster + Windows Firewall is enough for me..

Why? It's free and basically providing almost a perfect free security suite..

 

yer but i dont wanna have several apps to do something one app can do (except WSE as windows does the rest...)

 

Just because you get an all-in-one security suite doesn't mean it can do it all with only one process running. You will still have separate processes running for antivirus, active antispyware, firewall, etc. You might as well build you own "custom" suite by selecting the best one from each of those categories instead of compromising by getting all your protection from one vendor. I run Firefox, Avira Free, Malwarebytes, Superantispyware, Spywareblaster, and I leave Vista's firewall turned on. Using that combination of programs I haven't had a single infection in over two years, and I wouldn't trade my free custom security suite for any of the choices you list in your poll.

 

ok as i said i dont care... i just want to know which one of my options is the best... out of those three... excluding the prices which one would you choose to use if they were the only three options in the world?

thanks

 

i would pick trend micro. its quite good actually (though it does have a slight but noticeable impact on system performance). kaspersky atm is going through bad days, and its detection and scanning rates are low (av comparatives). MSE only has a basic AV and antispyware, without heuristics (!!).

 

thanks for your comments melthd i will still keep my options open until a) my current subscription runs out(dec 27) b) i get soem more responses...

also could you please put that into a vote for the pole so i can see this latter on...

thanks
mtarm1

 

Norton is better than TM os KIS if you want a paid suite. MSE is good for free.

 

+1 (filler)

 

I prefer 3rd Party Security Software(Kaspersky, Norton, ESET and so on except AVG and those weaker than AVG's).
MSE + Build-In Windows Security is a great combination. However, I think it can't beat Kaspersky.
Basic Theory,
Most CHEAP stuffs never be GOOD.
Most GOOD stuffs never be CHEAP.

Hell yeah! Norton>Kaspersky

 

Norton
Kaspersky
ESET


For paid apps. Just get whichever one is on sale.

 

i refuse to use norton... i had it on my laptop but it was a hog and was way harder to find all the options than trend...

thanks for the input guys keep it commin

cheers
mtarm1

 

Norton 2009 and later products are much better.

 

Kaspersky internet security actually runs in just two processes - one "sytem" the other "user".

I personally like and recommend Kaspersky, but as others have pointed out - it has dropped in the antivirus comparatives test

 

Kaspersky is better than MSE & Trend Micro, but Norton is the best

 

ok well iv decided to run some of their trials ive got kaspersky going atm... very different from trend but thats to be expected...

i installed MSE for a freinds computer the other day and i must say i like it a lot...

il will try norton a bit later.

so two new questions guys

based on these prices;

Norton 1yr, 3pcs, $79 (whats the difference between norton Internet security adn 360? 360 is $115)
Trend Micro 1yr, 3pcs, $98 (upgrade which applies to me $79)

Kaspersky 2yr, 3pcs, $105

MSE + built in windows security features unlimited yrs, unlimited pcs, $0

Q1) whats the best value for money?(excluding MSE)

a. Norton

b. Trend Micro

c. Kaspersky

and

Q2) whats the best value for money?(including MSE)

a. Norton

b. Trend Micro

c. Kaspersky

d. MSE + built in windows security features

also does CA rate at all?

 

Norton, Kaspersky and Trend Micro are much more better than MSE + Windows Firewall + UAC.
I tested MSE, it is quite heavy. 60-70MB RAM usage.
I don't know about Norton and Kaspersky, but, it seems they're around 30-50MB RAM usage. In addition, Norton and Kaspersky are much superior in detection rate and features.
Avira Antivir Personal 9 is better than MSE and it is free. It can work flawlessly with Windows Firewall + UAC as well. Moreover, Avira Antivir Personal 9 have only 15-20MB RAM usage and superb detection rate as well as better features than MSE.

However, MSE is better than AVG Free Edition. AVG is very heavy and lousy in detection rate and always give false positive. While MSE have low false positive and higher detection rate(lower than Avast and Avira). MSE is lighter than AVG too.

 

Honestly, what does RAM usage matter?
Any decent computer (including netbooks) nowadays have +1GB RAM - only old computers have less.
and whether you use 15MB or 100MB - it doesn't make a difference.
Your computer's speed won't be affected - and as most computer haved 4GB nowadays anyway its even less of a concern.

On an old computer with 512MB RAM that would be important, but not on a new machine.

 

I didn't say I am concerned for every single RAM.
My theory and my logic is "Protection Power against Resources".
For example:
AVG used plenty of RAM and gives lousy protection.
While Avira used freaking low RAM and gives great protection.
So, which 1 is better and more worthy?

Kaspersky is not very light resources but also considered light resources already.
Norton have slightly lower resources than Kaspersky.
Both of them equally good, it is actually user preferences.
About Trend Micro, I have no idea.

 

You focused on RAM usage - which for modern computers we don't need to care about.

CPU usage yes, but not RAM.

Ideally, the AV comparatives tests help when it comes to a decision.

 

DO. NOT. GET. 360!


Only buy/try NIS 2009 or 2010 if you decide on Norton.

And fwiw, discount coupon codes can usually be found online for Kaspersky.

 

Be the recent AV comparatives test shown Kaspersky sucks. LOL.
Hopefully, the next AV comparison Kaspersky will raise again.

Sorry for the RAM usage, the CPU usage is the main 1 of course.
Indeed, Resources is against Protection. If low resources + great protection, it is awesome. If high resources + lousy protection(AVG), it is awful. If high resources + high resources or low resources + low protection, it is still acceptable.

 

so what is 360 though? whats the difference???

@ Deletcvm and darksilver can you at least answer Q1)?

 

What question did you mean? Can you show it again?
Well, the difference between Norton 360 and normal Norton is Norton 360 sucks and normal Norton good. Norton 360 offers overall protection but your System will become very slow if not mistaken. I very rarely see Norton 360. Normal Norton 2009/2010 is very good! Low resources with great detection rate.

I do see Norton 360 on a Movie called The Incredible Hulk(2008).
That movie was like advertising a lot of Computer stuffs, like Sandisk USB Flash Drive and DELL Desktop as well as Norton 360.

 

The last antivirus comparatives test showed that Kaspersky's detection rate was lower.
This doesn't mean its bad per se.
It means that something chaged - and we don't know what. And it also only dropped from the top rating to the second one, so not that much of a change.
I still use it.

On your Question 1 - I've used Kaserpsky since version 7 now and like it.
I belong to the "No Norton" bandwaggon - but have to agree that it get's good results in the comparatives in the current version and that fellow NBR members speak positively of it.

Trend Micro - never heard of it before - I don't remember seeing it in the comparatives test either - but I may be wrong - and thus can't say anything about it.

 

yer but value wise for the prices i put up???

 

I don't think you can make a simple "value for money" calculation on antivirus software.

Not as 100g Müsli fpr 10$ or 150g for 13$ (ridicolous prices, I know - just to point out the idea).

 

well i have made up my mind,


Laspersky!!!

only because i got 2 free 2 year licenses...

thanks for all your help.

i might try norton out when these expire but i'd have to say this could be the best free (for me anyway) antivirus for me...

 

LOL! Is that the economy version of Kaspersky?

 

It is obviously a typographic error.
Well, well. Where did you(mtarm1) manage to get that? >.< I want to have Norton/Kaspersky IS for FREE as well.

 

if you saw the system drag in comparison to nis2010 you would not think so much lol.. the reason i dont use it anymore

 

kaspersky and common sense.

 

^^ what way should i read that dizzler?

yer it might be a bit more taxing on my system but i save myself $200

i would rather not disclose how i got it but it is legal and the info is somewhere in the windows OS and software forum...

 

One thing about Kaspersky - if you instal it, let it do a full scan once.

That speeds it up a fair bit