free vs. fee-based antiviral/security software for notebook PCs

I apologize that this post may be redundant, I wanted to make sure I am not overlooking any critical aspects when comparing free antiviral/security software to their fee-based competition. My McAfee security software subscription provided at nominal cost with my notebook PC expired 2 days ago and the renewal fee is quite hefty, even with a purported 36% discount.

I read 6-8 pages in this thread and I am very intrigued by the posts suggesting that some of the free security options, such as Microsoft Security Essentials (MSE) and Avira, are as good or perhaps even better than the fee-based ones, such as Norton, Panda, Kaspersky, Bit Defender, and McAfee. Since I have Windows Vista, MSE seems to be the ideal security software with the right price. Are there any users who disagree and believe one of the fee-based security software is sufficiently superior to MSE, Avira, and other free security software to justify paying for it?

I also have the free version of Ad-Aware and SpyBot, both of which I update and run regularly. Do I need any other software to guard my virtual castle, such as anti-rootkit and/or malware software?

Thanks much for reading and any responses.

 

Remove Ad-Aware and SpyBot..

I suggest

Realtime:
-Avast! 5 Antivirus Free(File+Behavior Shields On)
-Prevx SafeOnline 3.0 Free( Prevx - PC and Internet Security for Home & Families, Businesses, Enterprises, Banks, Financial, eCommerce, and their customers.)

On-Demand Scanner
-MalwareBytes' AntiMalware 1.46 Free

 

I tend to find that you get what you pay for, and even then it can be hard. But free versions are often good for a version or two, and then, when you think your safe and you've stopped looking at their ratings, you get zapped.

MSE, at least has a large firm for whom it has an active best interest in keeping you safe, to lower the tarnish to its reputation. However the rest of the freeware universe has a moment in the limelight, then fade from existence, often while still purporting to keep millions of users safe.

Norton AV (nothing more than the pure AV software is needed)
Spyware Doctor (PC tools)
Registry Mechanic (it's pretty cheap when bought alongside Spyware Doctor, so I usually get them together)

This mix has been good for a many years running. I'm a fan of free, so I'm ok if you want to pursue that angle. But I've seen too many machines compromised with the owners of the machines saying "but I had this free AV software that seemed fine for the past year or two, what went wrong?" for me to trust any product that does not have a paid interest in keeping you safe from harm.

 

(clipped)

MSE, Avira, or Avast (choose only one) should be all you need for antivirus and real-time protection. I would replace Ad-aware and Spybot with Malwarebytes and Superantispyware as your on-demand scanners and add Spywareblaster for passive protection.

 

Seconded.

I use MSE for real-time protection and Malwarebytes as an on-demand scanner.
I don't experience issues of any kind, system runs fast and MSE performs efficiently (it's on par with latest Norton for the most part which is a paid program).

McAffee is quite the bloat of a program.
They did some minor revisions recently but nothing worthy of note to be frank.

Don't waste your money and stick with free anti-virus solutions that are good at what they do.

 

I greatly appreciate your responses and suggestions, I'll consider them carefully. Based on the recommendations, I'll likely replace the Ad-Aware and SpyBot with Malwarebytes. I'm admittedly still undecided about whether MSE is sufficient for AV protection vs. a reputable fee-based program--FXi makes a very valid case for the latter while MSE seems to be very highly regarded by many on the AV/security thread. I'll likely choose MSE for my AV (and Norton if I choose the fee-based route) and, as FXi suggested, remain diligent about checking ratings of it and other AV's at least annually to ensure MSE (or whichever AV I choose) is still one of the top AV programs. Even the fee-based AV software seem to vary annually in the protection quality ratings in PC periodicals--one year Panda seems to be on top, another it's Bit Defender, etc.

Thanks much!

 

MSE is quite good againts new malware detection according to AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests of Anti-Virus Software - Welcome to AV-Comparatives.org

 

A thing to keep in mind is that you should only have 1 antivirus installed/running real-time in the background.
Having 2 or more may not cause conflicts per see (in fact I've seen computers running several at the same time), but it will probably affect the OS performance in that case and even render the detection engines useless (or at least much less effective).

The AV comparatives is a pretty good indication of checking out how an antivirus/anti-malware software fares on a regular basis (but you really don't have to change it even if it's detection rates dip a bit ... because that happens with all paid programs as well - only change it if the detection rates drop significantly - but also keep in mind the programs efficiency and lightness on the system).
Personally, I installed MSE over half a year ago and haven't removed it since.
I also used it in other people's computers and removed threats their paid security suites had issues with.
Over 90% of systems I did this on showed marked improvements in speed and haven't had complaints of people getting infected (unless of course they are the type that clicks around on EVERYTHING - but I do my best to warn them about it and install adblock into their browsers to minimize the impact of possible threats).

 

I installed MSE on Aug 31, 2010 and it has already detected and removed (or at least indicated as such) 4 trojan and rogue viruses. My previous AV, McAfee, detected/removed 1 virus in the past month. Since I haven't changed my PC use and internet browsing patterns and am using the same internet browser since installing MSE, I suspect that the McAfee AV software has allowed some viruses to slip through undetected. Of course, this is a very unscientific assessment and it's totally possible that the viruses recently detected by MSE would have also been detected by MSE.

 

Actually, it's more than likely that McAfee allowed those viruses to get through.
I detected similar issues on systems that had inadequate av software installed.
After I replaced them with updated MSE it immediately detected several threats.

I also suggest you install/update/quickscan the system with Malwarebytes.

I recommend you re-scan the computer in Safe-Mode with both MBAM and MSE (quick scans should suffice, but running a full scan just this once in safe mode wouldn't hurt).

That way, it will probably be able to detect other lower level threats that got onto your system before MSE was installed (and it also makes sure you cleaned up your system thoroughly).

 

Thanks for your suggestions. Since posting my follow-up note, MSE detected and deleted 3 more trojan viruses in real time. I performed a full scan of my PC with up-to-date MSE and Malwarebytes yesterday and they did not detect any other threats. However, my PC was in normal mode and not in safe mode when I ran the MSE and Malwarebytes scans, could I have missed some threats?

I find ironic that a free AV program like MSE seems to easily outperform paid, brand-name AV software. You also commented earlier on this thread that McAfee is a bloated program; after using it for a few days, MSE does seem much "lighter" and much less of a drag on PC resources than McAfee.

Thanks again to Deks and the others who responded to this thread.

 

Just keep in mind the fact that paid software does NOT equal 'effective' or 'light'.
Same goes for freeware, which is why one must test these and compare.

I go with free because it's comparable to most quality paid programs and light on the system (not to mention I don't have to pay anything).
Some people seem to have an issue envisioning the concept that they can get something for free that does a job well.

 

The issue isn't detection rate - they're all on par within about 10% or so. The big difference is speed of response and safety against a zero-day threat. It used to be fee-based was light years faster than free, but the margin is much tighter now. It's really a matter of hours difference rather than days.

 

After I wrote my last post, I realized I erroneously indicated I had run a full scan with MSE--I thought I had done so, but actually I had run it but interrupted the scan long before it completed. I did run the Malwarebytes in full and it turned up nothing. Today I ran a full scan with MSE and was surprised and chastened that 18 additional viruses, including 3 Trojans, were detected and removed. In comparison, my former McAfee AV, which I ran weekly, usually did not detect any viruses and I estimate it found and removed a total of about 10-12 viral threats a year, if not less, for the two years I used it. Of course, some or even most of the viral threats detected by MSE could have been false positives--still, I am surprised by the discrepancy in the viral detection rate between the two AVs. I'm dismayed at the possibility that many viruses were undetected by my McAfee AV for the past two years I used it.

 

MSE has a very low false positive rate (3% maybe) in contrast to most other programs that have at least 6% to 10%.

As for zero-day threats ... I'd say MS is doing their best to keep on track with those (since they are more or less obsessed with Windows security patches and all).

In regards to detection rates ... they are quite a bit important, and if a program has a lower detection rate than what I personally find satisfactory, the it will not be installed (and there's of course it's lightness on the system)

 

It may well be that McAfee skipped one or more viruses, but there's no such thing as a perfect antivirus, actually all of them are far from it.
When exposed to completely new samples of malware detection rates are around 40-50 per cent. So MSE can fail at some too .

In conclusion try to choose a good av by looking to some professional reviews, and don't access dubious resources on the internet.


Source:
Anti-virus protection gets worse ? Channel Register

 

Agree completely. Year in and year out, Norton, Spyware Doctor and Registry Mechanic are the best in the business. CCleaner is also very useful. Three daughters in high school and college with their own laptops will tend to keep you in touch with the prevailing malware, and what it takes to clean 'em up.