• 0

Definitive Best *Paid* Antivirus 2015


Poll: Definitive Best *Paid* Antivirus 2015  

282 members have voted

  1. 1. Your Choice?

    • Avast! Pro/Internet Security
      11
    • AVG Antivirus PRO/Internet Security
      1
    • Avira Antivirus Premium/Pro/Endpoint
      7
    • BitDefender Anti Virus/Internet Security/Total Security
      16
    • Comodo Endpoint Security/Internet Security Pro
      1
    • Emsisoft Anti-Malware/Internet Security
      0
    • ESET NOD32/Smart Security/Endpoint Security
      64
    • Kaspersky Anti Virus
      20
    • MalwareBytes Anti Malware PRO
      4
    • McAfee Anti Virus
      0
    • Panda Anti Virus/Internet Security
      0
    • Sophos Endpoint
      0
    • Symantec/PC Tools/Norton
      19
    • Trend Micro Anti Virus/Internet Security
      1
    • Vipre Anti Virus
      0
    • Webroot
      6
    • Other (please specify below)
      5


Question

It's a new year, and a new poll for Definitive Best Antivirus. The 2014 thread can be found here.

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

 

If your choice of Paid Antivirus is not listed, please choose Other and specify in the comments.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1241710-definitive-best-paid-antivirus-2015/
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Another one for a sandbox in conjunction with safe computing habits. Along with regular backups of course. No AV is 100% guaranteed to catch everything, never mind the performance drag and false positives, plus too many people use it as a crutch and assuming it's ok to be stupid with what they're doing. If you're frequently having issues, you're definitely doing it wrong.

  • 0

can we get 360 internet security added to the list?.

 

edit: nevermind, clicked into the wrong thread

 

a vote for ESET from me for paid :)

 

Actually I think 360 Total Security is better than a paid AV.

  • 0

ESET, I love that they take the threat of bloatware seriously saving me time cleaning useless toolbars and extensions. The remote administration is awesome too but takes some getting used to.

  • 0

I've used the free Avast for a while now but needed a change. So I've been using Norton Antivirus for the last 3 months and it's pretty good. Doesn't nag as much as Avast or have as many false positives. Also it makes it easy to whitelist files I trust.

  • 0

We've been deploying AVG CloudCare to clients for about a year. Only had one person with it installed successfully get reinfected, which is a much better ratio than we've seen with anything else we've tried.

 

I figure no AV protects against 100% of everything so why pay for it.

 

Don't you do tech support? What do you tell your customers?

  • 0

Don't you do tech support? What do you tell your customers?

 

Pretty much what I wrote above.  I usually give them Avast.

 

over the years i've seen people infected while running

 

webroot

Eset

Kaspersky

Avast

AVG

MSE

Norton

Mcafee

Trend

Secure it

Frontier Security (F-secure)

 

So why pay for an AV just go free.

 

I mean just upload an newly infected file to virus total. One file Avast will detect it and Norton won't and then the next file Norton Will detect it and Avast won't (example).

 

Sometimes only 5 of the 52 AV companies will detect an infected file. Sometimes less, sometimes more.

  • 0

Kaspersky Internet Security has been my choice for several years. I buy licenses for my family and also have a pool of friends who use it as well. The UI is great and most of all, there are very little false positives and the performance doesn't take a big hit.

 

I voted for Antivirus but Internet Security should be added to that item.

 

360 Total Secutiry is really awesome and my opinion is the best free alternative out there. The option to use Bitdefender and Avira engines is an added bonus. The only downside to it is that it has a module to disable services and startup entries that can cause more harm than good in the hands of less tech savvy people. It also shows many false positives.

  • 0

Eset Nod32 was once a top notch product, unfortunately it has been leaking for some time now and I have several customers that hadregularly updated their boxes and definitions caught some nasty stuff, and the replacement that I use "MalwareBytes Antimalware" proved to be  impenetrable for now.

  • 0

ESET is the one. I am a virus writter and they released a definition for my last creation within days of its release. And it was not a binary release so they had to compile it and test it etc, they were really fast. Oh, its a Linux virus to make it better. More info about it: www.virusradar.com/en/Linux_Zariche/detail

  • 0

Using Kaspersky, although I don't 'pay' for it. I get it free from my bank for doing online banking. They've given a new license every year since 2007 or something, although it wasn't always Kaspersky

  • 0

I'm using Avast Premiere and I'm happy with it, but Avast the company has disappointed me a fair number of times. I suppose it works really well and I still deploy the free version on PCs I repair, but I'm looking at other solutions.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
    • Microsoft confirms Windows 11 26H2, urges IT admins to prepare for release by Usama Jawad Windows 11 typically follows an annual update cycle, but Microsoft recently broke that tradition a bit by releasing a "26H1" version in the first half of this year as a "scoped" build for select new silicon PCs only. This version was not available for customers using 24H2 and 25H2 builds, as Microsoft is busy preparing version 26H2 for them, confirmed officially for the first time. In a Windows IT Pro blog, Microsoft has urged IT admins to prepare for the upcoming release of Windows 11 version 26H2. The company has confirmed that this will be a small enablement package (eKB) that will simply light up certain disabled features that are already present in the operating system's code base. This means that the "refined" Windows update and deployment experience will be simpler and quicker, with minimal disruptions, as the feature update will simply toggle a few flags rather than performing a complete replacement. Microsoft has explained that this is all possible because the standard Windows 11 releases share the same servicing branch and hence, the same source code. However, this also means that Windows 11 26H1 users won't be able to upgrade to 26H2 as that is a different branch, but this is something we have known for a while now. Similar to previous annual feature updates, Windows 11 26H2 will offer the following support cycles: 24 months of support for Home, Pro, Pro EDU, and Pro for Workstations editions 36 months of support for Enterprise, Education, IoT Enterprise, and Enterprise Multi-session editions Microsoft has not confirmed a concrete release date for Windows 11 26H2, but noted that it is "coming soon". If we go by the ongoing release cadence, we can expect it to begin rolling out in early October 2026. As such, IT admins have been encouraged to begin validating Windows Insider releases in the Experimental Channel, plan rollout rings, and strategize the utilization of their existing deployment tools.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      576
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      78
    5. 5
      neufuse
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!