Free virus protection, any that are good?

backflip

Not all AV programmes use heuristics analysis, Kaspersky being one that doesn't. And even in the comparison AVG's results were something like 13000+
compared to the most successful at 41000+. And I do want my AV to update almost constantly to keep my system relatively safe, why wouldn't anyone want the same? Or want a free application that gets equivalent results to arguably that which the best bought programme attains, and in fact uses the same engine as the bought version?
I'm not knocking AVG or any other application, it is for the individual to opt for, as I previously said.

mike_paterson

happyhero wrote:

Hi thanks for the answers guys, and I have now read loads of the sticy about it but one question, what about updates on AVG? It says you will NOT get high speed updates, well what do you get with regard to updates then?

And is there any other weaknesses because its free, ie is it a full blown version or will it have loads of things in it you cant click on because you have to buy a full version for them to work?

Not sure what High speed updates are, but I get regular updates whenever there are new threats. It is a superb product and checks emails downloads and zip files if you choose.

garcia

mostly wrote:

I've just ditched the full version of kaspersky for the above, its excellent theres no aol gubbins installed at all.

Err ... why would anyone ditch the full version of kaspersky for a lite cut down version???

backflip

I used Avast for a few years and was perfectly happy with that, I never encountered any problems. However, I opted for Active Virus Shield BECAUSE of the results it gets in many tests, and because basically it is kaspersky, albeit in a 'lite' mode. I simply unticked the box which wanted to install a toolbar in IE (much as I did when installing Firefox and the toolbar it wanted to install). It may be 'lite'....it is the free version.... but it still massively outshines any other free AV, heuristics or not. It was successful in 99.62% of virus recognition compared to only 82.82% accorded to AVG and its heuristics capability. That is what matters to me, the 99.62% success, nothing else, that is exactly what i want my AV to do. If something else comes along which I think is better and tests show it to be, then I'll ditch Active Virus Shield like a shot, and go with that.
Each to his own though.

skim

If you go by any Antivirus comparison it is only valid at the time the comparison was ran & it depends on the test as some tests may favour some Av's over others.

Also I have noticed that many people that run these comparisons don't fully understand each product & therefore do not configure it it the correct way.

The only real way to test anything is via real time results & 6 years of AVG, I've had about 6 viruses that it has caught & never had anything that has caused my system any problem. Thats not to say other AV's are rubbish - you need to monitor them & check regularly that they have done their job correctly.

backflip

skim wrote:

If you go by any Antivirus comparison it is only valid at the time the comparison was ran & it depends on the test as some tests may favour some Av's over others.

Also I have noticed that many people that run these comparisons don't fully understand each product & therefore do not configure it it the correct way.

The only real way to test anything is via real time results & 6 years of AVG, I've had about 6 viruses that it has caught & never had anything that has caused my system any problem. Thats not to say other AV's are rubbish - you need to monitor them & check regularly that they have done their job correctly.

Exactly...that is why you should compare, compare compare, and if you do, almost without argument you'll find that Kaspersky and Nod32 come out tops, time after time after time. It 'being only vailid at the time the comparison was run' is true for ALL AV programmes, AVG as well as Nod32 or Active Virus Shield or any other, so tests have to be compared against tests to get some idea, and as I said, this normally produces top marks for kaspersky (Active Virus Shield being the lite version) and Nod32.
But let the individual decide what is appropriate for him.

garcia

I've just completed a full system scan with AVS. Took 1 hr 50. System is clean.

I'm very happy with this product so far.

P.S. I agree that not all antivirus software is created equal. In particular Kaspersky *always* seems to top the tables. The only problem has been that its been pay-only until now.

backflip

"I've just completed a full system scan with AVS. Took 1 hr 50. System is clean.

I'm very happy with this product so far.

P.S. I agree that not all antivirus software is created equal. In particular Kaspersky *always* seems to top the tables. The only problem has been that its been pay-only until now."


The cost of kapersky was the sole reason that I didn't use it before, but like you, I'm very happy with the lite version, particulary as it's free and it achieves the same performance as the bought version.

Mizz_Pink

skim wrote:

Had to laugh at the remark "as good as Symantecs Norton"

Norton is a nightmare to say the least - I wouldn't let it anywhere near my system.

Any Antivirus is only as good as it's last update.
As well as Antivirus you need to have good layered protection e.g. Firewall & anti Spyware progs & make sure you don't go inviting virus/spyware onto your system.

I've used AVG for about 6 years now & never had a problem & I regularly check via online scanners & hijackthis to see if anything has got past my defences.

In regard to Norton, I support over 1000 companies across the UK for software support & 99% of all people that come to me with virus problems tend to have Norton installed.

Good and Norton shouldnt be in the same sentance together, we run a pc shop and Norton is the worst, its slows your pc by 1/3 and doesnt detect half the virus's AVG does!! :rotfl:

alanrowell

garcia wrote:

Be warned though by clicking you authorise them to send spam to your email address. So probably best to use a temp address.

Also it prompts you to install a "security" toolbar. I declined. Anyone say yes and live to regret it???

Finally the download speed for updates was only 11kb/s, which shows that this really is a freebie!

You'll need to reboot after installing, then reboot after initial update which was a tad annoying.

But other than that it looks great! (I've uninstalled avast).

What are you talking about?