Microsoft Security Essentials

[ceyfer]

*Heuristic

ADVANTAGES :

• Can detect 'future' viruses
• User is less dependant on product updates

DISADVANTAGES :

• False positives are possible
• Judgement of the result requires some basic knowledge

example :

Avira - AHeAD (Advanced Heuristic Analysis and Detection) - which is pretty impressive!.

AFAIK topnotch AV does implement this technology. ( that includes MSE ).

[rnbv424140]

Anybody knows how it fares against the other Free AV like, Avast, Avira and AVG in terms of performance, and detection?

[hellnoire]

Anybody knows how it fares against the other Free AV like, Avast, Avira and AVG in terms of performance, and detection?

Avira - Top of the line, normally gives you the most for free. Have to deal with a popup ad that can be blocked.

Avast - Middle of the range, kinda like Norton back in the day and what it's trying to become again, pretty good though. License key needed to renew yearly.

AVG - Closest to Norton of recent. Doesn't detect much, if anything. No hassle install.

[Ronin]

Hi Everyone,

No Doubt that Avira is an Excellent AV. Kaspersky and Avast is also too nice. On the other hand i have also saw that many of you guys do hate McAfee and Norton. I know that there are so many reasons to hate these two product. But i guess we guys still living in past. Don't we ??

I guess many of you guys already tested Avira, Kaspersky and Avast. But have anyone tested NIS 2010 or McAfee 8.7i ?? Norton have improved a lot and McAfee too. Yeah No doubt that McAfee have two version and end user version is not upto the mark, but their Enterprise Version is still have solid protection (If Configured Properly). Many of IT professional always use Standard Protection of McAfee 8.7i, which is enabled by default, hence they got an infection. Due to lack of experience or negligence lead to infection.

I am not a seller or re-seller of these two products. I've tested both and find them good!

[rohitkch]

but their Enterprise Version is still have solid protection (If Configured Properly). Many of IT professional always use Standard Protection of McAfee 8.7i, which is enabled by default, hence they got an infection. Due to lack of experience or negligence lead to infection.

I'm pretty user that while we are talking about AV/IS it's about layman and common person who are not much aware about computer and it's very clear that no AV/IS can protect you if you could not handle the things carefully in spite of having AV/IS in your system and I believe IT professional can handle this easily.

Well MSE is coming up and surely with test and trial it will give best to the user (if comes up with OS then only good for all)....

[lefrade]

Now is working, putting on my XP works, my server don't work this because is a server and because is not original but the main is because is a windows server anyway thankyou this works fine on XP.

[leofelix]

for people interested in, here is a guide and a comparison with other free antivirus.
MSE missed hundred of virus samples and it took to long to scan and remove some malware (not to consider false positive)


http://translate.google.it/translate...virus-gratuito

http://translate.google.it/translate...state0=&swap=1

[safeguy]

Ronin, most of us here hate Norton and McAfee for good reasons. We have had bad experience with these products earlier and it takes time to put in our trust back to these brands.

Well, I haven't tried Norton 2010 yet but from what I hear, Norton is improving tremendously and that's a good thing for us consumers.

As for McAfee, like you said, it needs more involvement by the user (configure the settings, etc) but sadly, most laymen aren't used to such stuffs and this is a big weakness on McAfee's part. Why go through all the hassle when brands such as Avira, Avast and Kaspersky works 'right out of the box' and require less involvement by the user? Think about that and you will see my point.

[Polkadot]

McAfee, and Norton are designed for n00bs. They both offer good/mediocre protection. Once you go beyond the n00b stage, their false positives will frustrate you. They both have too tight control over your activities. That specialized program that you want/need, will be either not allowed to download, or not allowed to run. I, personally, will NOT run any program that tells me what I can/cannot run on MY computer. Most good AVs allow you to choose to Allow/Block any application, but those two do not give you (the owner of your PC) the option...they have already made the decision for you. I am WAY too independent to allow any millionaire to tell me how to run MY computer!

[gery79]

McAfee, and Norton are designed for n00bs. They both offer good/mediocre protection. Once you go beyond the n00b stage, their false positives will frustrate you. They both have too tight control over your activities. That specialized program that you want/need, will be either not allowed to download, or not allowed to run. I, personally, will NOT run any program that tells me what I can/cannot run on MY computer. Most good AVs allow you to choose to Allow/Block any application, but those two do not give you (the owner of your PC) the option...they have already made the decision for you. I am WAY too independent to allow any millionaire to tell me how to run MY computer!

with all the respect polkadot when you say that they have mediocre protection this is not very true. norton is among the best in terms of protection if we judge the antivirus part. the suite might be a different story though.The main glitch is the automatic treatment of the supposed or infected files . As for the rest i guess Norton is just fine so is McAfee or AVG