best free antivirus?

[Mr. Fusion]

I have MSE installed on my current laptop, but also have Avast (Free) installed on my parents laptop. Both seem good enough for me. Then again, I browse the interwebs with Pale Moon and the Adblock Lite extension. So that helps I guess.

BTW, since my current laptop is older and has Windows XP SP2 on it (don't hate), a pop-up told me to install a "Windows Roll-up Package" update before I could install MSE. Did anyone else with older systems have this happen as well?

 

[DlStreamnet]

I have MSE installed on my current laptop, but also have Avast (Free) installed on my parents laptop. Both seem good enough for me. Then again, I browse the interwebs with Pale Moon and the Adblock Lite extension. So that helps I guess.

BTW, since my current laptop is older and has Windows XP SP2 on it (don't hate), a pop-up told me to install a "Windows Roll-up Package" update before I could install MSE. Did anyone else with older systems have this happen as well?

MSE doesn't support XP does it?

 

[sgi02]

MSE doesn't support XP does it?

Yes it does.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

BTW, since my current laptop is older and has Windows XP SP2 on it (don't hate), a pop-up told me to install a "Windows Roll-up Package" update before I could install MSE. Did anyone else with older systems have this happen as well?

MSE needs a minimum of certain components to be installed on ancient XP. So yes systems that are far behind with Microsoft updates will have to have a minimum handful of components updated, including the Windows installer. If you're THAT far behind with updates...dunno that any antivirus will be able to really help you.

 

[zero2dash]

MSE only works on XP SP3, so if you're behind on updates, it won't install.

 

[DarkDonut]

nice, going to give MSE a shot. Thanks for all the replies! Made the thread a few days ago and forgot to check on it

 

[Mr. Fusion]

Well, after installing that package, MSE installed just fine. I also have XP SP2 fully up to date BTW. I've had bad luck in the past trying to install SP3 so I'm not bothering with it anymore.

When my finances aren't so tight as they are now, I will get with the times and upgrade to a Windows 7 system. Or even just wait for Windows 8.

 

[DarkDonut]

Well I can't use MSE because of the required validation of windows so getting avast again I guess

 

[ferby]

That was a very useless post. Do you have anything to base that opinion on or just microsoft hater?
Free antivirus in title as already stated by others.
Reading comprehension=fail.

go away troll, i read better than you. Go and read the AV comparative tests, & security forums and the like and you will see. MSE = crap, they have worse than 50% detection rate.in the tests that is appalling.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

go away troll, i read better than you. Go and read the AV comparative tests, & security forums and the like and you will see. MSE = crap, they have worse than 50% detection rate.in the tests that is appalling.

Actually those of us working "in the trenches every day" know much better than that.
av-comparatives tests do NOT show an average of <50% detection rates....it has done well in prior years, it's doing OK this past year...and with version 4 out now we're sure to see it do quite well again. The sheer volume of MSE installs I have out there show that it does fine....far from "appalling"....and I have TONS of other big name AV products that I resell to compare it to...including Eset, Kaspersky, Panda, etc. And I'm not talking about just a few dozen or even hundred or so installs...I'm walking way waaaaaaay more. To get a decent baseline of real world performance. Even the laptop I'm typing from right now...I could install my NFR licensed copies of Eset or Kaspersky or Panda or SymantSuck or others....but it has MSE..and does just fine....it has stopped things just fine. Haven't had to clean out crap on my own laptop...nor rest of the families..and its logs have entries from blocked jobs.

 

[Ticker305]

MSE is decent, but Avast seems superior in every way from alot of reviews I've read and Avast being more bloated is a non issue on high performance machines nowadays.

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

Actually those of us working "in the trenches every day" know much better than that.
av-comparatives tests do NOT show an average of <50% detection rates....it has done well in prior years, it's doing OK this past year...and with version 4 out now we're sure to see it do quite well again.

Not <50% but if I'm not mistaken it had the lowest detection rate of every other AV tested. At the end of the day I don't think that 2.1 vs. 4.0 is going to make that much of a difference. It still should use the same definitions.

MSE used to do very well in av-comparatives tests, since launch it seems like MSE has been slipping. You can only go by current data. 4.0 might make a difference but then again it might not.

On the other hand Avira has done very well in third party tests for a long time. The only gripe that I've ever heard with Avira is the occasional false positive, which is better than the alternative. Avira has been very consistent, MSE hasn't.

 

[Snufykat]

go away troll, i read better than you. Go and read the AV comparative tests, & security forums and the like and you will see. MSE = crap, they have worse than 50% detection rate.in the tests that is appalling.

Pretty easy to see who the troll is here.
Thank you for your "use full" insight on the subject at hand.
I have looked at the comparative tests for years now and have never seen MSE at a "worse than 50% detection rate." Please provide a link.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

MSE used to do very well in av-comparatives tests, since launch it seems like MSE has been slipping. You can only go by current data. 4.0 might make a difference but then again it might not.

It has slipped. But then....all brands rise and fall over time. Our regular paid products...specifically Eset NOD32, has risen and fallen in AV-Comparatives tests over time.

We also use MSE as one (of our many) scanning/cleaning tools to work on computers. I regularly see if find things that Malwarebytes and Eset and Kaspersky and Spybot and SuperAS (and other tools) miss. And visa versa.

All products miss things. Traditional AV tests look at viruses for benchmarks...and just about all products are above 93/94% detection.

However...the main threat these days...rogues/fake alerts...all AV brands are MUCH worse at detecting these...it is closer to the 60% range of detection...and worse in reality. The AV test companies can only test against current/known threats. They don't have access to the latest rogue variant of the hour....so they cannot test those...and I bet actual detection rates would be around 20% or less. All AV brands miss the latest variant of the hour. Most of us here come across cleaning rogues on our jobs..and we're familiar with the names....Safe Surfer, Smart Fortress 2012, SmartHD, XPAntivirus2012, etc. You can have a system catch on in the morning...and another system may catch one of the same name that afternoon...but the code is probably of a newer variant.

The other "Free" AV products usually come with drawbacks. I agree Avira has great detection rates (even though I've cleaned rogues from many systems that have Avira on them), and Avast works well but bogs down older systems more than others and it's a pain to keep managing it for the "freebie jobs" that you do for family/neighbors..and it expires on them or nags them to upgrade to the pro version, and AVG used to be decent, got bad, is getting better, but it's heavy.but it's occasional false positive sucks (holy crap when AVG had that "userinit" false positive that prevented Windows from booting up...OMG that sucked having to fix the "freebie" jobs that I did with it. Other free AV products usually have that constant nagging to upgrade to the pro versions.

Those above points there are where the IT techs that haven't been in the field for very long show it....because they haven't experienced the "issues" that other free AV products bring along with them.

MSE doesn't have the best detection rates out there...I'd say it's average in history. I'd say that its cleaning ability is above average (based on lots of actual experience). But just as importantly.....I like MSE because it doesn't come with the headaches of other free AV products. No nags to upgrade! Very simple interface! One of THE LOWEST FALSE POSITIVE rates ever!!! Reliable updates! No expiration..no renewal of license! Automatic upgrades to latest version via Microsoft Updates.

Those features in the above paragraph, are what make it a winner to me...for doing the freebie jobs. Friends/family/neighbors/freebie jobs that I don't want to manage. I don't want to get calls for help by those people....because I am not billing at my 125/hour...I'm not billing at all, they're freebie jobs. I do not want to get calls to help them! Clearly I will use whatever tool will help me avoid those calls. Using the other free AV products...through combinations of the above reasons I talked about, led to me getting more calls for help...which I do not want. The ones I've switched to MSE...calls nearly stop.

Now..the above topic (doing PC support for friends/family/neighbors/etc freebie jobs) is outside the scope of this thread. The thread was about the OP (assuming he is a PC tech savvy person) having it on his own system. I'm assuming (because he's a tech savvy person)...that his PC is relatively new...thus powerful. And that he's capable of tracking a license..and doing a renewal..which is why I opened my first post with "Avast".

 

[zero2dash]

Avast works well but bogs down older systems more than others and it's a pain to keep managing it for the "freebie jobs" that you do for family/neighbors..and it expires on them or nags them to upgrade to the pro version

I don't consider it to be nagging....but that's up to the user I suppose.
Sure the main window has the offer to upgrade to Pro, but other than that, it's not like a window pops up on updates (like Avira does) to upgrade to Pro. I do see popups on update about Avast having a free Android app, and it's a little annoying - but it does go away after a few seconds on it's own, and it doesn't impede what I'm already doing (since it pops up in the bottom corner and not the middle of the screen).

I'll gladly take a 1x a year 30 second signup and a few minor inobtrusive popups in the corner just to have the better detection rates and other features (more shields, cloud services, suspicious file sandboxing).

MSE is an OK program. It's good for basic protection. I'd put MSE on a system over something like ClamAV....but I'd definitely still choose to use a more fully-featured app like Avast over MSE in the end.

 

[Red Falcon]

MSE has worked great and so far hasn't let anything through on any of the Windows systems I maintain.

 

[ferby]

Actually those of us working "in the trenches every day" know much better than that.
av-comparatives tests do NOT show an average of <50% detection rates....it has done well in prior years, it's doing OK this past year...and with version 4 out now we're sure to see it do quite well again. The sheer volume of MSE installs I have out there show that it does fine....far from "appalling"....and I have TONS of other big name AV products that I resell to compare it to...including Eset, Kaspersky, Panda, etc. And I'm not talking about just a few dozen or even hundred or so installs...I'm walking way waaaaaaay more.

I feel sorry for the people who depend on you for web security, not good. MSE is better than nothing though

 

[Stone Cold]

I'm surprised by the MSE adoration. If the exact same program was provided by Best Buy, I think all these same people would see horns on the product, not a halo.

MSE hasn't scored at the top of the antivirus comparison reviews I've seen. And, with security in mind, it's always a good idea to avoid the most popular product, as that's the product that is most targeted by the bad guys.

On the other hand, without actually having used MSE, I would expect it to be one of the least bloated (focused on a core function, without frills) as well as least annoying (e.g. no nags/ads) of antivirus products. That may be all it takes to make it the best choice for most people.

 

[klank]

I feel sorry for the people who depend on you for web security, not good. MSE is better than nothing though

I feel sorry for all of the time and money you waste on commercial products that don't any better of a job.

 

[Red Falcon]

I feel sorry for all of the time and money you waste on commercial products that don't any better of a job.

+1
If commercial is needed, Microsoft Forefront will do the job.
For stand-alone systems that do not need or should not need to be monitored, MSE is right for the job.

ferby, if you don't like MSE, then don't use it.
But please don't come on here telling us that it's crap when you have provided no links and no evidence of your strong opinion.

You obviously have an opinion, and that's great, but I would honestly like to see a link supporting your argument so I know more of what you are talking about.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but at this point it's simply your opinion and speculation, we need more proof than your word.

 

[zero2dash]

If commercial is needed, Microsoft Forefront will do the job.

A bunch of our lab computers at school a few weeks ago got hosed while running Forefront 2012. I was surprised to begin with that the school was running Forefront in the first place; I'll be equally shocked if we come back from break (and the new Win7 machines we have coming are installed) and they're still running Forefront instead of something else.

AV-Test has corporate AV reviews. Forefront is similar to MSE. Average to dead last on detection. Again = basic.
http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/corporate-user/marapr-2012/
If 2.5 / 6 for protection is good enough for your business, by all means, have at it. I know if I was the IT guy for a business settling on Forefront, I'd be pulling for upper management for fork out for something more adept at protection.
(That's the BEST grade it got on detection; the lower months, it was 2 / 6.)

I'll say it again. Forefront/MSE = basic protection. Unprotected sex using the pullout method. Good luck with that.

 

[Mr. Fusion]

I don't consider it to be nagging....but that's up to the user I suppose.
Sure the main window has the offer to upgrade to Pro, but other than that, it's not like a window pops up on updates (like Avira does) to upgrade to Pro. I do see popups on update about Avast having a free Android app, and it's a little annoying - but it does go away after a few seconds on it's own, and it doesn't impede what I'm already doing (since it pops up in the bottom corner and not the middle of the screen).

I'll gladly take a 1x a year 30 second signup and a few minor inobtrusive popups in the corner just to have the better detection rates and other features (more shields, cloud services, suspicious file sandboxing).

MSE is an OK program. It's good for basic protection. I'd put MSE on a system over something like ClamAV....but I'd definitely still choose to use a more fully-featured app like Avast over MSE in the end.

There is a Silent mode option for Avast BTW. I have it turned on for my parent's laptop and from the times I used it for longer periods of time, there is little to no ads or pop-ups. Avast users should try this mode out and see if it helps.

 

[klank]

A bunch of our lab computers at school a few weeks ago got hosed while running Forefront 2012. I was surprised to begin with that the school was running Forefront in the first place; I'll be equally shocked if we come back from break (and the new Win7 machines we have coming are installed) and they're still running Forefront instead of something else.

AV-Test has corporate AV reviews. Forefront is similar to MSE. Average to dead last on detection. Again = basic.
http://www.av-test.org/en/tests/corporate-user/marapr-2012/
If 2.5 / 6 for protection is good enough for your business, by all means, have at it. I know if I was the IT guy for a business settling on Forefront, I'd be pulling for upper management for fork out for something more adept at protection.
(That's the BEST grade it got on detection; the lower months, it was 2 / 6.)

I'll say it again. Forefront/MSE = basic protection. Unprotected sex using the pullout method. Good luck with that.

As someone has pointed out before. AV-Test uses old versions of software. "System Center 2012 Endpoint Protection" is the current version.

 

[Red Falcon]

As someone has pointed out before. AV-Test uses old versions of software. "System Center 2012 Endpoint Protection" is the current version.

Ah, that makes sense, thanks for clarifying.

 

[Red Falcon]

I'll say it again. Forefront/MSE = basic protection. Unprotected sex using the pullout method. Good luck with that.

What would you recommend for a situation like that?
Have you used a more efficient/successful network managed and monitored AV program that would work better?

 

[zero2dash]

As someone has pointed out before. AV-Test uses old versions of software. "System Center 2012 Endpoint Protection" is the current version.

And you think that matters a whole lot....why? The program still has the same features and uses the same definition signatures.

The version doesn't matter unless features were added. Last time I checked - there were no new shields or new definition engines added in MSE v4 and I would expect the same lack of upgrades with Forefront 2012. Again - lab computers at my campus. Hosed. Running Forefront 2012. Multiple trojans, tons of malware.

I'm not anti-MS or anything, but the denial about MSE (and now Forefront apparently) are ridiculous. Look, they're basic apps. File shield, network shield. No email shield, no p2p shield, no IM shield, no cloud services, no sandboxing. It has average protection at best. I'm not saying I expect an antivirus to catch 100% of anything let alone trojans and rootkits, because that's not what they're made for. However, when there are apps out there for the same price that do a better job at catching those things (that normally aren't caught), vs. MSE.....sorry, I have no clue why in the hell anyone would choose a lesser solution. I've seen MSE completely ignore a lot of stuff that was not an easy click and fix problem. If it weren't for apps like Combofix, those MSE machines would have had to have been reimaged. Meanwhile my workstation running Avast on the same network was never compromised. Coincidence? I don't think so.

What would you recommend for a situation like that?
Have you used a more efficient/successful network managed and monitored AV program that would work better?

I have yet to be put in a position where I'm in charge of corporate level protection; I'm still working on my Associates. I will repeat though, once I do get put in a higher position and have some pull, if the company I'm working for is running Forefront, I'm certainly going to recommend that we switch to something else; judging from the AV-Test reviews, I'd say either Kaspersky or Symantec (Endpoint).

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I'm certainly going to recommend that we switch to something else; Symantec (Endpoint).

LOL you know how many rigs we clean that have SymantSuck on them?

You're talking lab computer at a campus used openly by students....fact is, no matter what AV is on them...they'll be tanked.

I don't fall prey to that marketing BS about "IM protection", or "P2P protection"....real time file protection is real time file protection is real time file protection.

FYI...MSE does (and has) employ cloud technology, its MAPS feature. Microsoft Active Protection Service. Which is an option you get when it's installed...and you can go in and crank it up higher also in the Settings tab. When a threat is detected...it can go look for latest definitions (from MS) that deal specifically with that threat so that it can better remove/clean it.

 

[YeOldeStonecat]

I feel sorry for the people who depend on you for web security, not good. MSE is better than nothing though

LMFAO...what I actually do for my work would fly miles and miles over your head...try your cute little digs all you want. Apparently cannot thoroughly read and grasp points either (as several others here appeared to point out also...LMFAO)

 

[nev_neo]

Years ago, targeting/being able to knock out pre-determined AV programs was common with viruses/worms. Back in the Win9X and earlier XP days we saw tons of bugs that had the ability to knock out/disable SymantSuck, McCrapee, AVG, some other common brands. However, these days....the mechanism is via rootkits....bypass the entire OS so the AV doesn't matter. And coming in via outdated web players instead of the OS (Java, Flash, PDF reader, etc).

This guy is soo right. Rootkits are the viruses of the future - i've been exploited once running Avast on a 64-bit Windows 7 machine. It came in through an "Adobe update", I just got lazy should've read what I was clicking yes for.

 

[Red Falcon]

I have yet to be put in a position where I'm in charge of corporate level protection; I'm still working on my Associates. I will repeat though, once I do get put in a higher position and have some pull, if the company I'm working for is running Forefront, I'm certainly going to recommend that we switch to something else; judging from the AV-Test reviews, I'd say either Kaspersky or Symantec (Endpoint).

Whatever you do, do not go with Symantec Endpoint.
I've worked with it in-depth and it was, bar-none, the worst AV product I have ever had the displeasure of using.

It would quarantine viri, but would not halt/deactivate them, allowing them multiply, especially worms, into the hundreds of thousands of files, before finally crashing Endpoint clients once and for all.
I haven't tried Kaspersky yet, but I do know that Endpoint will never touch any system that I am in charge of, ever.

 

[Red Falcon]

LOL you know how many rigs we clean that have SymantSuck on them?

You're talking lab computer at a campus used openly by students....fact is, no matter what AV is on them...they'll be tanked.

I don't fall prey to that marketing BS about "IM protection", or "P2P protection"....real time file protection is real time file protection is real time file protection.

FYI...MSE does (and has) employ cloud technology, its MAPS feature. Microsoft Active Protection Service. Which is an option you get when it's installed...and you can go in and crank it up higher also in the Settings tab. When a threat is detected...it can go look for latest definitions (from MS) that deal specifically with that threat so that it can better remove/clean it.

I fully agree, well said.

 

[ferby]

LMFAO...what I actually do for my work would fly miles and miles over your head...try your cute little digs all you want. Apparently cannot thoroughly read and grasp points either (as several others here appeared to point out also...LMFAO)

I'm picturing a KFC janitor,

I doubt you will have that job for very long though if you recommend MSE as a AV solution. I'm shocked really, the boys at the office had a nice laugh we stcky this in the coffee room lol.