Recommend Me Some Non-Sucky Antivirus Protection

[Alerik the Fortunate]

Once I let McAfee lapse some years back, the corpse of it's program turned into a resource sucking zombie that begged for attention like a deranged labrador and interfered with other programs until I downloaded removal software from their website to purge it. Panda, though it helped clear out some viruses, simply doesn't behave according to the way the website and help menus say it should, and it is impossible for me to activate the product to keep virus definitions up to date since the program is unresponsive. A waste of 150 euros. What are your recommendations, oh techwise?

[Guardsman Bass]

A combination of the Windows Firewall and one of the free Anti-Virus programs (AVG, Avast, Avira) seems to do pretty well, and doesn't require a paid subscription. I've been using that on my computer for more than a year now with no issues (I also downloaded Malwarebytes as a second scanner that doesn't constantly run in the background).

Shep will probably tell you to get Windows Security Essentials, which is a full security package for free as well.

[Terralthra]

Microsoft Security Essentials is the best around.

[Stofsk]

Microsoft Security Essentials is the best around.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I'm not Shep, but

Microsoft Security Essentials is the best around.

Yup.

[Purple]

But if you don't trust them alone I also recommend Malwarebytes and Spybot Search and Destroy. The two have newer failed me so far.

[phongn]

Microsoft Security Essentials is the best around.

It's not the best, but it's fast and good enough for casual use.

[The Vortex Empire]

Microsoft Security Essentials, Malwarebytes, Spybot Search and Destroy. All are very effective and completely compatible with each other. I've never had a virus with thissetup.

[Zixinus]

I had good experiences with Avast.

[Faqa]

Microsoft Security Essentials is the best around.

It's not the best, but it's fast and good enough for casual use.

And now, I'm curious - what's better? On what criteria - detection, convenience, what?

[phongn]

And now, I'm curious - what's better? On what criteria - detection, convenience, what?

NOD32 tends to have better detection rates and fewer false-positives. But it costs money.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I also recommend Firefox or Chrome with adblock or noscript. That walls off most of the nasty right there.

[SilverWingedSeraph]

The number of viruses my computer has been exposed to has dropped remarkably since installing Adblock Plus on Firefox, so I'm inclined to agree. I use AVG for my anti-virus, but I'm considering switching to Microsoft Security Essentials considering the large amount of possitive feedback I've heard about it.

[Civil War Man]

If you don't want to spend money on antivirus, your best bet is Security Essentials. AVG has been getting increasingly bloated with the newer versions.

[Zixinus]

I also recommend Firefox or Chrome with adblock or noscript. That walls off most of the nasty right there.

I double this. Since installing that thing, I've only gotten viruses due to my own stupidity.

[Ace Pace]

I also recommend Firefox or Chrome with adblock or noscript. That walls off most of the nasty right there.

I double this. Since installing that thing, I've only gotten viruses due to my own stupidity.

Actually, this bears talking about.

Recent studies (specifically by MS) have shown that a large majority (98%+) of malware infections succeed because the user was running unpatched software or because he clicked on a UI control (and not a link) without reading. If you're running a fully patched system (browser of choice, flash, adobe, office, whatever), you have very little to worry about and I'd be more worried about system stability running some of the older AVs than from any malware attack.

[LadyTevar]

Moved to Appropriate Forum

[someone_else]

I personally think Windows firewall isn't a good firewall since it tends to be resource-intensive (adds minutes to boot times and its presence is noticeable when running), and I use the modem-router's own firewall which ranks better on sites that do the appropriate tests (100% safe vs 80-90%). Maybe It's my own computer that sucks a bit too much though.

For antivirus I use Bit defender antivirus 2010 (bought license when downloaded for 50 or so euros for three machines, and with license renewed for this year for 3 machines at something like 25 euros). I would recommend it, but of course you will have to pay. They offer a 30 day trial with a complete product so you can see if you like it before purchase. Also if you do, they email you a 25% discount on the price at around half the trial period.
Given that the difference in price between the license for one and the license for 3 PCs is 10 euros (of a total of 30 or so if you take the offer mentioned above), you can team up with some friends and share the costs. if you look around, bitdefender seems to be top dog, or close second in the field, at a very competitive price.

Before I had Norton antivirus (200-something), which was a fiendish piece of shit, enough said.

And yes, the add-ons called "no script" and "adblock plus" are generally another must-have for a serious user.

I do wander the shadiest corners of the net with this setup and I have yet to catch a virus/malware/rootkit.

[KhorneFlakes]

If you want to spend money, as someone in the thread mentioned earlier, ESET NOD32.

[phongn]

I personally think Windows firewall isn't a good firewall since it tends to be resource-intensive (adds minutes to boot times and its presence is noticeable when running), and I use the modem-router's own firewall which ranks better on sites that do the appropriate tests (100% safe vs 80-90%). Maybe It's my own computer that sucks a bit too much though.

Something is very wrong with your computer if the built-in firewall slows down your computer. Also, a perimeter firewall (that on your modem) is not entirely a substitute for a client one.

[Guardsman Bass]

I don't get that, either (especially the "slowed down by minutes" bit). Windows Firewall never slowed down any of my computers, not even my clunky six-year-old laptop running Windows XP. In fact, I found Windows Firewall + Free Antivirus to be much faster than what I had had before (Norton Antivirus 2009).

[Terralthra]

I personally think Windows firewall isn't a good firewall since it tends to be resource-intensive (adds minutes to boot times and its presence is noticeable when running), and I use the modem-router's own firewall which ranks better on sites that do the appropriate tests (100% safe vs 80-90%). Maybe It's my own computer that sucks a bit too much though.

Something is very wrong with your computer if the built-in firewall slows down your computer. Also, a perimeter firewall (that on your modem) is not entirely a substitute for a client one.

Agreed. My computer doesn't take a minute to boot, total, so...