The Best Antivirus
Home > IT Answers > Security > The Best Antivirus
Schmidtw
10995 pts.
0
Q:
The Best Antivirus
Antivirus software
I have been thinking about this for a while. A lot of my friends, family, and collegues ask me what is best as an antivirus. I would like to get some feedback from the community on what everyone thinks is the best antivirus they have used for personal and or business use and the reaons why. A lot of people come to this site for answers to questions like this, so I think it's only fair we pool our resources to make the best answer possible. With that in mind...

What is the best antivirus software you have ever implemented for personal or business use?
ASKED: Jul 28 2008  2:07 PM GMT
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
RELATED QUESTIONS
0
Labnuke99
26695 pts.
0
A:
 RATE THIS ANSWER
+2
Click to Vote:
  •   2
  •  0
  • AddThis Social Bookmark Button
I don't think there really is a single answer to this question. It's like buying the best auto. It depends on your budget, your requirements and your ability to manage the solution. I would recommend sticking with industry leaders like: Symantec, McAfee, NOD32, Microsoft Forefront and similar products. My organization uses McAfee Enterprise Anti-virus and it has served us well over the past years... however, we are considering a move to Microsoft Forefront when our McAfee agreement expires. Forefront can run several AV engines and has some good features for Microsoft shops who use tools like Systems Center.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think you cant go wrong with Symantec for Personal or business use. I use it for both.

------------------

I'm a huge fan of the Trend Micro Antivirus for both home and corporate use. It's not very expensive, you can usually find a coupon for Fry's or other stores to get it for next to nothing for home use. It's a very thin client so it doesn't take that much RAM or CPU power.

The corporate version has a nice web interface for easy management from anywhere in the world with an Internet connection (and the correct password). About the only thing I don't like about the admin piece, is there is a single password. It would be better if is was based on Windows user names so that you could assign rights to the users and track who did what.

=======================
Labnuke99:
That's why we went with the McAfee product for >2500 devices. It integrates into Microsoft Active Directory and has decent reporting and is a java based console. We have not really had a large number of client memory or performance issues. It does occasionally take some time to determine if there is a piece of bad behaving software that needs McAfee tuned a bit for exclusions, etc.
Last Answered: Jul 28 2008  8:53 PM GMT by Labnuke99   26695 pts.
Latest Contributors: Mrdenny   47440 pts., JimmyIT   1260 pts.
  •   
0
0
RSS - Discussions Help
Discuss This Answer:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _



_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Jul 28 2008  2:10PM GMT

On of the best Antivirus programs I have ever used is Kaspersky Antivirus 7. The customizability is great. It has a hostile environment feature unlike others I have tested (tho it can, at times, become annoying). The software is lightweight, does not each much memory, the scans complete efficietly, and I have found that it neutralizes pretty much everything. The look and feel is also nice and it includes several scanners and a system shield. Also, there is free online support, which is always a perk if necessary.

 

Gilly400   23625 pts.  |   Jul 28 2008  2:30PM GMT

Hi,

I use AVAST antivirus at home and have never had any problems with it - and it’s free!

I’ve used sophos, norton/symantec, mcafee and kaspersky for business use in the past and found that they’re all reasonably good, but none of them seem to catch everything. I’ve often had to download virus removal tools to get rid of viruses that they only warn about bu don’t let you remove.

Regards,

Martin Gilbert.

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Jul 28 2008  3:13PM GMT

I had McAfee…the suite and its functions were impressive but it was a CPU and memory HOG…so I got rid of it.

 

Robert Stewart   1810 pts.  |   Jul 29 2008  7:14PM GMT

Among the top AV programs (Norton, Trend Micro, McAffee) look for an AV program that is not a process hog, this is the main difference on the top tier AV programs. Look for an AV that does not fill your client registry with uneeded entries, as this will slow processing down. As far as which one does the best job of removing the virus, that changes every day. Of course the one who solves the problem virus first will be considered the best and one day it might be Norton that comes out with a fix first, then the next day another virus is released and Trend Micro might be the first to fix the virus. There is no one Virus company that can say it quarantines and repairs damage from viruses faster than another virus company.

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Jul 29 2008  8:46PM GMT

I had Trend Micro.
And then I got a virus…but trend micro didn’t let me know.
I was concerned with performance, so I got Kaspersky.
I ran Kaspersky, and it told me I had over 40 threats on my system…
40 to 0 is a pretty huge margin, especailly when talking about malware and viruses.

 

Spywarebiz   90 pts.  |   Jul 29 2008  11:44PM GMT

Ive used Avast on my XP machines for years with no problems.
Im using BitDender right now on my new lappie with Vista.
So far so good.

 

Jaideepkhanduja   6705 pts.  |   Jul 30 2008  7:22AM GMT

AVG Antivirus (free version) for my home PC working very well for last 4 years

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Jul 31 2008  3:15AM GMT

How do you all rate Ad-Aware or Spybot Search and Destroy?

 

Pressler2904   2165 pts.  |   Jul 31 2008  6:51PM GMT

As far as an anti-virus program, I do indeed think you’ll find as many people who swear BY <insert favorite A/V program here> as swear AT it… I know that that’s the case with Symantec, Trend, McAfee and Sophos at least…

I use Symantec Corporate (SAV) (at work and at home) and am satisfied with it’s functionality. Schedule updates DAILY. Panda A/V is also good, but the update process has been a bit intrusive.

As far as AdAware and SpyBot, I have them installed as well (in addition to SAV) and rely upon them to catch what SAV doesn’t. personally I like them. My some disagrees. Violently. But what does he know anyway…

 

Robert Stewart   1810 pts.  |   Jul 31 2008  7:31PM GMT

I use both Spy-bot and Adware, I consider both really good tools for spyware. Of course I always run AV and spyware scans in Safe Mode no networking. Recently read a review in PCWorld or some other trade magazine and neither of these got good ratings. With that being said 9 times out of 10 they do the trick.

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Jul 31 2008  8:14PM GMT

Unfortunately some programs don’t want other running. I had AVG prior to getting Kaspersky…and on install kaspersky said uninstall it or else. That choice was OK with me considering i had a previous threat and AVG didn’t catch it where as Spybot S&D did as well as Ad-Aware.

 

Labnuke99   26695 pts.  |   Aug 1 2008  6:24PM GMT

This is one of the reasons we are considering Microsoft Forefront. It has multiple scan engines that run in serial & parallel to detect & neutralize threats. They have tuned the application so the engines all work together well. This is like the different layers of security at an airport, your photo ID, your boarding pass, XRay scanners, metal detectors, etc. They all serve a purpose but do it in different ways.

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Aug 18 2008  1:19PM GMT

Do any of you think that the newest trend in AV software of reducing footprint and memory usage is a sacrifice for protection or security?

 

Pressler2904   2165 pts.  |   Aug 18 2008  6:20PM GMT

Schmidtw -

In a nutshell, definitely maybe, but than again maybe not…

IF functionality can be preserved while reducing footprint, that’s a good thing. What you have is a game similar to what you see in modern warfare: If you are protecting a city, you do indeed need massive well armored installation to effectively neutralize certain threats. On the other hand, you cannot effectively defend against a commando raid by using a main battle tank: you need something swift and mobile which can morph its’ behavior to address current threat(s).

Are the two mutually exclusive? Perhaps, but that’s why it’s called “defense in depth” and we use A/V, IDS and host based firewalls in the first place….

What I object to, and what has happened in the software and hardware industry, is the battle for performance we so many times see. If a hardware manufacturer comes out with something which performs 50% faster than previous versions, and a software or OS publisher say (effectively) “Great! Lets take advantage of this new speed and add X, Y and Z functionality to our product.”, the net result so many times is a reduction in speed to the extent that there is little differenc in performance between pre- and post- revision hardware.

Let’s be realistic: Exactly how much faster is a 1.8GHz processor running Windows XP system than a 3.8GHz (equivalent) processor running Windows Vista? The same comparison holds for MacOS and Linux: the effective speed of a system remains fairly constant, or at least does not increase by the same factor as the hardware benchmark might imply…

Multiple modular packages performing a single of limited amount of tasks, invoked on an as-needed basis are far superior in terms of performance as compared to a single monolithic package that “does it all”. I mean, why run a firewall if you are not connected to a network? Why install an e-mail scanner on a system which has no active e-mail configuration?

OK. I’m done…. I’ll crawl back into my hole now…..

 

KevinBeaver   7610 pts.  |   Sep 26 2008  5:38PM GMT

Outside of posting on message boards such as this, the best thing for you is look for anti-malware reviews on the Web. I’ve always liked what PC Magazine does and I know there are others out there. Check out this link as well for some interesting info regarding performance:
 <a href="http://www.vipreenterprise.com/Why-VIPRE-Enterprise/VIPRE-Stats.htm" title="http://www.vipreenterprise.com/Why-VIPRE-Enterprise/VIPRE-Stats.htm" target="_blank">http://www.vipreenterprise.com/Why-VIPRE…</a>

Bottom line, there is no right answer. The best thing you can do is to try before you buy and then go with what seems to fit best.

 

Schmidtw   10995 pts.  |   Oct 2 2008  6:39PM GMT

One of the most important factors to me is the frequency of database updates.

Wether the threats are small or large, having knowledge is the first line of defense.

I have found Kaspersky to have the most complete and frequently updating database.

I have deployed this in a few environments (that I consider hostile) and the threats security breeches have virtually disappeared.

-Schmidtw

 

MUKUNDSAWANT   55 pts.  |   Aug 16 2009  5:54AM GMT

quick heal and avast are good .
all antivirus works on same principal but they are different in the detecting speed of virus.
i found above both have quick speed..

 

Bantot88   20 pts.  |   Aug 22 2009  6:50AM GMT

i use NOD32 for nearly half a year, and now im facing some errors and difficulties in my laptop..i regret using NOD32, its true that its powerfull but now it is ruining my computer

 
0