• 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

I am using Norton, Norton 360 for me. It hasn't failed me yet these past few years and it has been light on resources and stable ever since I used it. Was using ESET before but there some things they were scanning that somehow wasn't picked up by them, hence the move back to Norton.

 

Scirwode

  • 0

Somehow DrWeb is missed in the list. It's main competitor to Kaspersky in its home market. And it's older. Back in 1990's-mid 2000's it was more popular than AVT. Kaspersky came to front mainly thank to marketing and rebranding.

I use mainly standalone scanners - AVZ (most of its technologies were acquired by Kaspersky many years ago), Kaspersky AVT, DrWeb CureIt.

  • Like 2
  • 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


Put your talents to better uses rather than pissing off people and needlessly causing problems with their systems.

  • 0

Secureaplus

the thread title said "paid"

looking at this it looks like a free mashup of other companies engines...  in cloud.    not even sure how can they do this as the engines are paid for.     i am confused now.   sounds like a hack.

  • 0

the thread title said "paid"

looking at this it looks like a free mashup of other companies engines...  in cloud.    not even sure how can they do this as the engines are paid for.     i am confused now.   sounds like a hack.

 

You can pay for it. I paid for it. I really like the whitelisting aspect of the AV.

  • 0

Trend Micro Anti Virus/Internet Security, seems I'm the only one. :(

 

Worked on  military contracts and the department of defense use it on their computers and gave me a license from their enterprise plan that they re-license every year.

So I use it basically cause its free for me, until they decide to change anti-virus companies.

 

It fairly lightweight and I haven't picked up anything nasty with it so it seems to do alright.

 

Haven't used Symantec/PC Tools/Norton in awhile but when I last used it, it was very resource heavy and not sure why it has so many users. It was like the Internet Explorer of the anti-virus world, bloated, slow and very behind in comparison to the competition and most systems came with it (like a free 3 month license or something). Will have to check it out again one day.

 

Before my free Trend license I used Kaspersky and I will likely go back to it if my trend license stops working.

  • 0
On 12/5/2015, 9:22:37, Luc2k said:

Have they fixed the huge amount of space it uses for monitored files?



I know about that bug, I actually heard about it here first, then researched it a little.  People would all of sudden have a 600GB AV folder and run out of disk space - pretty crazy.

I would like to say, yes, it was fixed - but I dont know as the 25 or so machines I admin for (family, friends, clients)  through my enterprise license have never experienced it and when you dont have problems, you tend not to research them much.
 

  • 0

Another nod for ESET. I truly do not even remember it is running on any of my machines until I get prompted for an update. I use it on all of my devices, even my phone, and it is so lightweight and actually does work.
The easiest recommendation I can make from a software standpoint.

  • 0

I like this thread - through 2 pages there have been a bunch of different solutions mentioned, but instead of someone just saying, "Oh that sucks - you dont know" - people are giving their reasons why they rely on a certain brand.  When you deal with people who only use the free crap - their expectations are lower, and they tend to be a little out of the loop on things.  Still of the mindset "well you have to use 2 different programs..."  - not if you're main AV program is good... I havent had MBAM installed in 2 years.

  • 0

ESET always wins these popularity contests by far. I'm confused why though, it rarely scores better than Kaspersky on AV-Comp. Why do people prefer ESET so overwhelmingly?

ESET always wins these popularity contests by far. I'm confused why though, it rarely scores better than Kaspersky on AV-Comp. Why do people prefer ESET so overwhelmingly?

  • 0
3 minutes ago, primexx said:

ESET always wins these popularity contests by far. I'm confused why though, it rarely scores better than Kaspersky on AV-Comp. Why do people prefer ESET so overwhelmingly?

ESET always wins these popularity contests by far. I'm confused why though, it rarely scores better than Kaspersky on AV-Comp. Why do people prefer ESET so overwhelmingly?

Uh-oh. The "double post bug" is back.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Free Software Foundation Europe pushes EU to force Google to allow AI uninstalls on Android by Paul Hill Credit: Pexels Users should be able to fully uninstall AI-based features from Android devices and be able to access interoperability functions, free from Google’s verification requirements, the European Commission has heard as part of an Android interoperability consultation under the Digital Markets Act. These measures were proposed by the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) last week when it submitted its documentation. The FSFE noted that Google had started silently installing AI models without telling users. It noted that the EU’s DMA requires companies like Google to allow users to uninstall pre-loaded software from their devices, but in the case of the AI models Google is installing, they reinstall if you delete them, contravening the DMA. To get Google back under control, the FSFE has told the European Commission that there needs to be improvements within the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). First, it said that users should be able to fully remove pre-loaded AI components from their devices, with companies being prohibited from silently reinstalling or reactivating them. Second, access to Android interoperability features should not be contingent on registration, authorization, or contractual relationships with Google. This pertains to Google’s attempt to force developers to register with Google, even to publish apps to alternative app stores like F-Droid. Discussing its submission, Lucas Lasota, FSFE Legal Programme Manager, said: Google is planning to roll out its Android Developer Certification in September 2026. This will force every Android app developer to register with Google before their software can be installed on certified Android devices, but it should affect those who have removed Google Apps from their device. The program is controversial because it entails the signing of contracts and payment of account fees to Google, as well as the handing over of the identities of developers. It said: The FSFE said that if the Commission’s draft measures remain unchanged, then Google will be allowed to make developers verify their identity. The FSFE believes that asking developers to register is contrary to the text and spirit of the law. In summary, the FSFE has told the Commission that no developer should need a Google account, a Play Store presence, or any agreement with Google to access Android’s interoperability features.
    • You could disable this "functionality/feature/whatever" with 2 registry keys, ages ago.
    • My Photos app is version 2026.11050.1001.0 and it remembers the window size and position. My Snipping Tool is version 11.2602.49.0 and it can capture the taskbar.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      519
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      184
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      87
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      81
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!