We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Anti virus for windows
Comments
-
Do yourself a favour and bin off that horrible naggy bloaty avast.
Install bitdefender free and go on with your life
I understand your point that bit-defender might be better in detecting the virus.
You got the paid version for very reasonable price good for you. For myself as I tagged it previously, I have not convinced yet that their business Model is the same with AVAST which is already historically proven free and keep updating their free anti virus software in line with the paid version.
Also people might supplement AVAST with other malware detection such as Malware bite or Spyware Terminator which is also historically proven to be free all the time.0 -
Of course, it's your machine and your choice. However, the reason you have for not trying it is misguided.I understand your point that bit-defender might be better in detecting the virus.
You got the paid version for very reasonable price. For myself as I tagged it previously, I have not convinced yet that their business Model is the same with AVAST which is already historically proven free and keep updating their free anti virus software in line with the paid version.
Also people might supplement AVAST with other malware detection such as Malware bite or Spyware which is also historically proven to be free al the time.
Bitdefender uses the same database of signatures and engines as the paid version.
There would be no point in them not doing so. The differences in the paid and free versions have nothing to do with the database.
I'm not sure how you class Avast as historically proven and yet you do not consider Bitdefender to be.
Nothing wrong with Avast except being a bit bloaty, which is the main reason I would choose Bitdefender.Drinking Rum before 10am makes you
A PIRATE
Not an Alcoholic...!0 -
According to Wiki, Bitdefender has been around since 2001. (Avast has been around since 1988, and became a private company in 2015).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitdefender
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avast_Software0 -
I'm trying out Bitdefender on a couple of my machines, and leaving Panda on the other three for now.
It's quite a large download, 250MB as opposed to Panda's 85MB.
It does block the website grumpycrab posted in post 14, whereas Panda didn't.
Also on one machine it flagged up a file as malware that Panda hadn't, so I let it quarantine it, even though I think it's a false positive.
(it's an old exe file from an XP program that won't even run on Windows 10, and has been sitting in an archive folder doing nothing for the last 8 years or so)
But it seems fine so far (no pop ups).
Only thing is the bright red icon. Sticks out like a sore thumb.
0 -
Onlythebest wrote: »Already has Defender. You can add extra layers of protection, such as a modified HOSTS file and add-ons that stop scripts from running etc.
Avoid AVG and definitely don't rely on Defender !!
I would say either Avast or Bitdefender0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.3K Spending & Discounts
- 247.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards
