i recommend Kaspersky and Avira.
Woudn't bother with half of the stuff listed here, most AV has it's own AV database and all differ. None is 100% effective, would never ever pay for AV complete waste of money but I recomend free.
5 Years I tried every type of AV out there including all the above listed, all a waste especially those that cost money, Norton + just hog memory and waste space. I fixed my PC myself countless times and have formated over 12 (just to remove the 1 virus that no AV could catch), have had a virus that persisted through a format that I had to fix manulay. Finally, last 2 years I stuck with a few free AV and have not had 1 virus since.
AVG Free
Spybot
Malwarebytes
CC Cleaner/ATF Cleaner
Hijackthis (People who know what there doing)
Chance is if this setup won't catch your virus/spyware ask on tech forums (there are many out there) or learn to remove it yourself.
If you learn your hijackthis list of by heart you can spot any new infiltration that appears, if not there are more hardcore spyware removal systems out there that require safe mode and wipe sections of your pc.
But you should always have AV installed, free stuff listed is the best.
With a non free AV you wouldn't suffer from a virus that survives a format. And I'm not worrying at all about malware that break my system. I worry about malware that actually work seamlessly with my OS, and free AV doesn't do anywhere near as good on protecting from that stuff as a commercial product does.
When did you try norton last time? It has used less resources than AVG the last 3 years...
Interesting. I've run commercial AV-suites the last 7 or so years, and have formatted 3 times, not a single one was because of a virus. I wonder what that could mean...
AVG is a false positive machine. It consistently alerts on things that's not viruses. It also slows down the machine way more than other available free software. Of all free AV-software AVG is the one I recommend the least. Avira or Avast is the way to go if you can't afford a real suite (Personally, I recommend Norton IS 2009, it's for AV-suites what Windows 7 is to Vista... Yes, REALLY).
You assume that all malware will cause a noticable degradation of your system, which is not true. With your software setup, and naive attitude, your computer could be part of a botnet without you knowing it.
LOLN00B Linux malware
This statement is even more fun than another one of yours "Starcraft is not a strategy game"
Personally I use both Avast! and McAfee. Theyre both very good with frequent definition updates. The only complaint I have is McAfee adding almost 40 extra seconds to boot time. Whatever. I can deal.
Did you serously type LOLN00B, and then bring up a Wikipedia page in which the list of Linux Malware is only about twice the size of the list of Linux anti-virus software?
New Rule: If (List of viruses on Wikipedia/List of anti-virus software on Wikipedia)<10 for Operating System "X", then "X" may be safely said to not have a virus issue - {G}.
Although this does bring up an aternative anti-virus scheme - make an Ubuntu (Or some Linux Variant - DSLinux maybe?) partition, load clam-av, and have *it* scan your windows partition on a regular basis. Although for me the Ubuntu partition is my main partition, it doesn't *have* to be, you can load a small linux partion in next to nothing < 1 gig certainly. Since that prevents any root-kit effectively gaining control of windows, it's probably better that any given anti-virus running under windows itself.
Jonnan
I think it's obvious from b0rsuk's post that he's a clueless fanboi who didn't know that malware for Linux exists at all. So yeah.
No virus issue, maybe. Then again, the only virus i had on my home comp in 17 years was OneHalf which i brought from university on a floppy drive. So i may as well say i have no "virus issue" on Windows as well. Besides, you'll have issues running most games under a different operating system so that undermines all gains you can possibly get by reducing your virus issues. After all, the most efficient anti-virus solution is to throw your PC in the window, it's much easier to do and you'll be able to run about as many of your games as under Linux operating system anyway. Isn't it a nice solution? So i wish all Linux proponents on gaming forums to do exactly that. As a bonus, i'll not see any other of their stupid suggestions.
This kind of topic will always degenerate into a pissing contest because everyone basically believes that the best AV is the one they are currently using. My opinion is, If the AV you are using is doing the job you want then great. It's always good to have other opinions and options, But the old adage counts here. If it aint broke, don't fix it.
I use AVG professional, Adaware Pro, Spybot search & destroy, Malwarebytes antimalware and Zonealarm Pro.
I have used this combination for many years and never have i been hit with a virus or had my machine compromised by malware. The most effective form of protection is common sense and computer maintenance.
Just for fun, I downloaded Adaware, spybot and malwarebytes antimalware.
Currently my computer is protected by Norton IS 2009 and maintained by Advanced System Care pro (mentioned only because it has some malwareprotection integrated too).
Nothing bad was found on my computer. I take that as a indication that my software is at least equal in keeping my computer safe as all the above software. Any performance hit I get by my software is negligible, can't say that about AVG, Adaware, Spybot and Zonealarm (specially if they're all running on-demand scanning).
I ran a scan with AVG about a year ago on my system, and it found 3 "viruses" on my system. I'm 100% certain that none of them were a real threat, so I didn't bother with trying AVG again now.
McAfee and Norton, although they are high profile, are in the middle of the pack in terms of effectiveness (Norton is a resource hog though).
AVG is ahead of them, it's very good, and the best thing you can get for free.
If you want the real best, It's either NOD32 or Kaspersky. There is this tema which does a thorough analysis of antivirus program, I can't seem to find the link now, sorry. It' a way better methodology than that used in magazine reviews. Kaspersky and NOD usually swap the first place, but the difference is very minimal. Last time I checked NOD32 was ahead.
Ok, let me see here....
ccSvcHost is the resident symantec software. CPU usage: 0-2%, it peaks at 4% on rare occasions. Memory use: ~1200kB-~3500kB - On rare occasions it goes up to ~5000kB.
That's resource use for both firewalling and malware protection on demand. I don't see how you define a resource hog, but I'm quite certain you can't mean this...
Kaspersky Internet Security
For system resources purposes, NOD32 and Norton 2009 are very good. I strongly recommend either one (I use NOD32, but thats just cause I haven't gotten around to buying the new norton for some of my systems yet)
(Note: previous versions of norton were super resource hogs, but 2009 was rewritten from the ground up and rocks)
None. If there was the "best of the best" it would out-rule all others (kinda like Microsoft pretty much owns the OS market for home users).
Its all about prefrence really ...
You might have a good PC. Note: You aren't everyone that uses norton.
When i used it .. it did use alot more resources than i cared for a virus protection to use. But thats just me ... im a speed freak (i dropped $400 on a 80GB SSD hard-drive so i could have like instant load times) .