• 0

Definitive Best *Paid* Antivirus 2013


Definitive Best *Paid* Antivirus 2013  

206 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Choice?

    • Agnitum Anti Virus/Outpost
      0
    • Alwil Avast! Pro/Internet Security
      4
    • AVG Antivirus PRO/Internet Security
      4
    • Avira Antivirus Premium/Pro/Endpoint
      3
    • Beijing Rising Anti Virus/Internet Security
      0
    • Comodo Endpoint Security/Internet Security Pro
      2
    • Emsisoft Anti-Malware/Internet Security
      2
    • ESET NOD32/Smart Security/Endpoint Security
      68
    • F-Secure Anti Virus/Internet Security
      0
    • G Data Anti Virus/Interet Security/Total Security
      1
    • Kaspersky Anti Virus/Internet Security/Pure
      28
    • MalwareBytes Anti Malware PRO
      5
    • McAfee Anti Virus/Internet Security/Total Protection
      1
    • Microsoft Forefront
      1
    • MWTI eScan Anti Virus/Internet Security
      0
    • Norman Anti Virus/Security Suite
      0
    • Panda Anti Virus/Internet Security
      0
    • BitDefender Anti Virus/Internet Security/Total Security
      29
    • Sophos Endpoint
      3
    • SUPERAntiSpyware
      0
    • Symantec/PC Tools/Norton
      38
    • Trend Micro Anti Virus/Internet Security
      4
    • Webroot
      6
    • Other (please specify)
      7


Question

It's a new year, and a new poll for Definitive Best Antivirus. The 2012 thread can be found here.

This is a poll for best Paid antivirus, there is a separate thread for free antiviruses here.

Any questions or software that I've missed, please post here and I will update the thread.

Regards

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1128434-definitive-best-paid-antivirus-2013/
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Another vote for ESET for me. Does absolutely everything that I need it to do, good protection in the network etc, easy to disable temporarily to allow certain stuff that could be potentially dangerous but I know isn't really. :shifty:

  • 0

Hello,

If you are dealing with a determined adversary, such as a nation-state, then you had better have multiple layers of defense, i.e. a policy of defense-in-depth using multiple technologies and processes. Anti-malware software is an important tool in that layer, but it is only one of many.

Regards,

Aryeh Goretsky

Your antivirus software probably won't prevent a cyberattack :angry:

http://money.cnn.com...rity/antivirus/

  • 0

Btw your poll is fubard, you have to select both 1 option in the original and extended list.

Back to topic, I've always been recommending Kaspersky to people since I first started using it 9 years ago. It'd been nothing but a breath of fresh air and not exaggerating but I've been virus free in all this time and it has blocked quite a fair few things.

Kaspersky is a very good product. I used to use it but then I changed to Avast AIS as it was 1/2 the price and it does a great job for me.

  • 0

Kaspersky is a very good product. I used to use it but then I changed to Avast AIS as it was 1/2 the price and it does a great job for me.

+1 to this. I've been using KIS (Kaspersky internet security) for more than two years now, and never regretted I purchased the program or renewals.

  • 0

I've been a customer of ESET for, well, a very long time. I did however try Norton Antivirus 2013 just because everyone was raving about it. (Despite my nightmares of Norton during the 90s and early 00s.) I must admit that I' was thoroughly impressed by the program itself - it was extremely lightweight and scanned very quickly. However, I can't tell if it's good or bad because I never get a virus.

After a few days I went back to good old NOD32 because it feels better, I can't explain why, and because of the GUI. Long Live, I guess.

  • 0

Norton once again this year, I really cannot fault it. It doesn't affect performance at all, the UI is good and it updates silently.

norton, symantec corporate and mcafee allegedly have govt backdoors built into them.

 

I use bitdefender 2014, got a 943 day key free off a forum, love it. Kaspersky is also great, those 2 nearly always come 1st or 2nd in antivirus tests.

  • 0

Kaspersky is a very good product. I used to use it but then I changed to Avast AIS as it was 1/2 the price and it does a great job for me.

you can *always* get 3-user KIS for <$20, if not on sale at your neighbourhood brick and mortar store, then on Amazon often for ~$10-ish but pretty much always available for ~$20. Hard to beat that price. No need to get the latest edition, any of the most recent 3 will work just download the installer.

  • 0

just in a week ago:
 

Do Antivirus Companies Whitelist NSA Malware?

Microsoft, Symantec, and McAfee fail to respond to a transparency plea from leading privacy and security experts.

Source: http://www.informationweek.com/security/vulnerabilities-and-threats/do-antivirus-companies-whitelist-nsa-malware/d/d-id/1112911

just saying that their product might be compromised and can't be trusted.
Perhaps its better to move toward companies that less likely influenced American Govt political powers.

  • 0

Hello,

 

The very idea that any intelligence agency would share information about exploits or malware they are using with anti-malware product developers is ludicrous:  It would be against their own principles of keeping the operation covert and being able to have plausible deniability about it. 

 

It is far more likely that the reason the large vendors did not respond in time was because (1) the response to the letter was still being drafted by a committee set up to write the response; or (2) their federal and/or aerospace sales divisions were trying to score some brownie points with their customers (which, by the way, may have had an opposite effect).

 

Regards,

 

Aryeh Goretsky

 

just in a week ago:
 
Source: http://www.informationweek.com/security/vulnerabilities-and-threats/do-antivirus-companies-whitelist-nsa-malware/d/d-id/1112911

just saying that their product might be compromised and can't be trusted.
Perhaps its better to move toward companies that less likely influenced American Govt political powers.

  • 0

I had been Kaspersky user since long time. But 2014 version for Windows 8.1 is atrocious. It slows down web browsers and any flash based games. Their forums are littered with such complaints. Remaining 4 months subscription has gone to waste.

Hence I went with Avira free. Working well so far.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!