Recommended Posts

BitDefender Free but I haven't found a single one ever, in fact I haven't found a single Windows virus in any of my files I've downloaded either >_>

Same here...

Even though I'm frequenting the back alleys of the net quite often, I've never caught crap. ;)

Glassed Silver:mac

Use Avira for Mac, it's by far better than the rest. =D

Interesting. I've used Avira for years on the PC, but didn't realize they had a free version for OS X as well. I've been using/recommending Sophos Free for OS X for almost two years now. Does Avira have the annoying pop ups like the Windows version?

Hello,

There are many companies which make anti-malware software for Mac OS X, including Avira (in beta now, I believe), ESET, Intego, McAfee, Sophos, Symantec and Trend.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Avast also have a free version for OSX (in beta, but it looks good):

http://www.avast.com/free-antivirus-mac

I personally don't use anything and I honestly can't remember the last time I've had a virus on any platform - I think the last one was the RPC exploit on windows which would make you constantly reboot (Blaster worm). And that wasn't to do with anything I downloaded was just a exploit in Windows

I have never really paid attention to the RAM it uses. Does it use a lot? This is what Activity Monitor tells me.

I have an iMac and I recently installed Sophos because of the Flash virus deal. I scanned the computer and all is good but to be honest, I don't have it running in the background. I use my Mac for business stuff only. I don't visit porn sites, poker sites or warez sites or do anything stupid with it so I'm not really too worried about catching a virus on it. Besides, Apple has a reputation to keep and their ego is way up there. They will never allow a virus or viruses to attack and destroy OSX so you can be sure they will patch whatever security holes come up within hours to make OSX secure again.

How can you tell which actually work and which ones do nothing at all? There is not a lot out there to test with

So at the moment they should have a 100% detection rate. Hell, they should be able to use heuristics to detect any software that makes use of known exploits. But that's my concern with the Mac at the moment - it's getting actively targetted with malware, but there's no idea which software properly protects. At least with Windows you know that MSE is free and relatively non-intrusive, so it isn't a case where the cure is worse than the disease, and it does actually catch malware, or alternatively if you buy WebRoot Secure Anywhere and install it on a clean system you're close to 100% guaranteed you won't get any new infections. The devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

Right now I would just pick a free Mac AV program that uses the least resources possible, run FireFox with NoScript and Web of Trust and make damn sure I know what I'm downloading.

I believe that having an "antivirus" program on your Mac would be like giving it a virus, using system resources that would otherwise be free. There's no need for one and if you can wait, there will be one built into Mountain Lion. I've haven't used an antivirus program since I started using Vista, there's just no need. Microsoft does a good job looking after its OS and I'm sure Apple will do so too. The amount of crap and popups that result in installing a majority of antivirus programs is just not worth it.

I believe that having an "antivirus" program on your Mac would be like giving it a virus, using system resources that would otherwise be free. There's no need for one and if you can wait, there will be one built into Mountain Lion. I've haven't used an antivirus program since I started using Vista, there's just no need. Microsoft does a good job looking after its OS and I'm sure Apple will do so too. The amount of crap and popups that result in installing a majority of antivirus programs is just not worth it.

Your faith is completely misplaced. Apple won't take care of security until they repeatedly get hit with malware and it causes them seriously bad publicity.

I believe that having an "antivirus" program on your Mac would be like giving it a virus, using system resources that would otherwise be free. There's no need for one and if you can wait, there will be one built into Mountain Lion.

Gatekeeper is not a malware detector or antivirus system.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Posts

    • My father still uses a programme written in dbase3. Still manages to work with a little help from dosbox. 
    • Microsoft hides these secret Windows 11 performance boost settings available on every PC by Sayan Sen Windows enthusiasts often look for ways to extract as much performance out of their systems as possible, and it's often the case that they try and do so while trying to minimize the heat and power consumption. This is especially relevant in the case of mobile Windows PCs since laptops and notebooks tend to get hot and management of that heat and power is harder in such a form factor. As such users often turn to techniques like under-volting which can be used to squeeze out the maximum capabilities of a chip while also maintaining lowered power levels. There are official apps from AMD and Intel with the likes of Ryzen Master and XTU (Extreme Tuning Utility). While these are quite handy, most enthusiasts probably prefer to dig into the BIOS and play around with settings there like Curve Optimizer on Ryzen, which lets users set various frequency-voltage scaling values. These are essentially called P-States. If you are not familiar with them, Processor Power Management is done through Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) P-states and C-states. While P-states or performance pwoer states handle CPU voltage-frequency scaling, C-states deal with CPU sleep states so that some of the CPU functions, which are not necessary at that moment, can be disabled. The P-states and C-states work together to make the processor run more efficiently. It helps the OS and apps determine which cores can be parked and which should be boosted. Of course not every user is an enthusiast or knows the technicalities and integrities of how things like overclocking or undervolting work. Thankfully for them Windows itself offers something pretty cool, though it is hidden by default on all systems. By default, Windows only has two P-States, "Minimum Processor State" and "Maximum Processor State." However, this can be changed with a Registry trick to expand the options under a secret "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown. This essentially enables the HWP or hardware P-States available on a device, and these are not controlled just by the OS itself as the underlying hardware gets involved too. In total there are five Processor Performance Boost Mode profiles that control how Windows requests and allows CPU turbo/boost behavior under the different power policies. They are: Disabled: In this mode, processor boosting is effectively turned off. The CPU will avoid entering turbo or boost frequencies and instead operate closer to its base frequency ceiling. This can significantly reduce power consumption and heat output, but at the cost of reduced burst performance and responsiveness in short workloads. Enabled: This is the standard behavior where boost functionality is allowed under normal conditions. The processor can opportunistically increase frequency when workload demands it, balancing performance gains with power and thermal constraints as managed by the system. Aggressive: Aggressive mode favors performance more heavily, allowing the CPU to enter higher boost states more readily and sustain them longer. This should in theory improve responsiveness under bursty or heavy workloads but increases power draw and thermal output compared to the default enabled behavior. Efficient Enabled: This mode still allows boosting, but with a stronger bias toward energy efficiency. The system attempts to use boost more selectively, avoiding unnecessary frequency spikes when the performance gain is marginal. Efficient Aggressive: This is a hybrid approach where boost is still performance-responsive, but the system continuously weighs efficiency more heavily than in Aggressive mode. It aims to deliver noticeable performance improvements while reducing wasted power in less demanding scenarios. Here's how to enable the Processor performance boost mode: Open Registry Editor: Press Win+R, type regedit, and click OK. Go to: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power\PowerSettings\54533251-82be-4824-96c1-47b60b740d00\be337238-0d82-4146-a960-4f3749d470c7 (where HKLM stands for HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE_) Modify the value of Attributes from 1 to 2 (you can find modify option by right-clicking) After that, exit Registry, you should now be able to see the new "Processor performance boost mode" dropdown menu: As you can see there are now five new P-States or CPPC states or power profile available that help define the boost mode processor setting on your PC. Wrapping it up here's a quick run-down of the settings as defined by Microsoft itself. Setting Description Disabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is disabled. Collaborative Processor Performance Control (CPPC) behaviour is disabled. Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is enabled. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Efficient Enabled The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Efficient Enabled. Efficient Aggressive The corresponding P-state-based behaviour is Efficient. CPPC behaviour is Aggressive. Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows calculates the desired extra performance above the guaranteed performance level, and asks the processor to deliver that specific performance level. Efficient Aggressive At Guaranteed Windows always asks the processor to deliver the highest possible performance above the guaranteed performance level. In the next part we shall be comparing these settings to explore how much of a benefit or regression they can provide in terms of performance and power efficiency. If you decide to change the values on your system and are experiencing problems like crashes or an overheating PC, make sure to revert the steps back to the original state.
    • I think he means you haven't reviewed previous UFC games. Of course it doesn't matter... Every time you just report on something that involves the President even if just simply what happened you guys usually get accused of being anti-Trump. We live in fun times.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      rolfus earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Leroy Jethro Gibbs earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Conversation Starter
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Month Later
      AndreaB earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      agatameier earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      518
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      198
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      ATLien_0
      93
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      78
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!