• 0

Definitive Best FREE Antivirus 2017


Definitive Best FREE Antivirus 2017  

136 members have voted

  1. 1. Which do you choose?

    • 360 Total Security
    • Ad-Aware
      0
    • Avast!
    • AVG AntiVirus
    • Avira
    • Baidu Antivirus
      0
    • BitDefender
    • ClamWin/ClamAV
    • Comodo Anti-Virus/Internet Security
    • Dr. Web Cureit!
      0
    • Panda Cloud Antivirus
    • Malwarebytes
    • Microsoft Security Essentials/Windows Defender
    • SecureAPlus
    • Sophos Virus Removal Tool
      0
    • Tencent PC Manager
    • ZoneAlarm Free
      0
    • Kaspersky Free
    • Other (please specify below)


Question

It's a new year, and so we have a new poll for Definitive Best Free Antivirus.
 
The 2016 thread can be found here.
 
This is a poll for best FREE antivirus software. There is a separate thread for PAID antivirus software here.
 
If your choice of free antivirus software is not listed, please choose Other and specify in the comments.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1317870-definitive-best-free-antivirus-2017/
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0

I won't speak on BitDefender, as I haven't tried it in about a year. I do know that I didn't like how sluggish it was at the time. Qihoo's 360 Total Security used to be my go to, but I read some not so great things on them as a company, coupled with common false-negatives.

 

For 2017!

I've always been a big critic on Avira over the years, as I never liked their little pop-up ad that shows up once every what... 48 hours? Either way, that's what I'm using right now. It definitely comes loaded ready to do a lot when you first install. I had to scale it back to tailor it better to do what I wanted. The good thing is Avira has plenty of options even in the free version that really let you have full control. It also isn't a resource hog, as I barely remember it's there (until the notification ad pops up). I have pushed some tests to ensure that it does work too, which it successfully notified me of what it blocked, why, and whether I wanted to continue running a scan. 

 

My only concern now is that behavior based inspection with AI learning is the way forward. Microsoft is heading this direction with their enterprise Windows Defender, and there are numerous paid softwares out there going this route too. In a world of ransomware, I feel this is something to pay attention to, rather than just checking signatures. With that in mind, I don't recommend anyone ever really sit complacent on an AV software just because it's always worked for you. Reading up is always important, which I hope is focus point for threads like this.

 

On that note, I'll be trying out Avast here shortly, given the number of people I've seen using it and recommendations elsewhere. Stay safe! :) 

  • 0

Windows Defender is totally fine if you just script a DAT update more often than 1x a day... do it like every hour.  That's the only reason it gets rated low for zero day vulnerabilities.  Out of the box all the highly rated zero-day scanners do updates that often, but Defender (really: Windows) gets knocked for trying to be conservative.

 

Consider that Microsoft gets pummeled with attacks more than most, and they use Defender.  The only real difference is Intune knob turning of the service, which is what I'm proposing here... nothing that can't be done with some scripting and no money.

  • 0
54 minutes ago, mram said:

Windows Defender is totally fine if you just script a DAT update more often than 1x a day... do it like every hour.  That's the only reason it gets rated low for zero day vulnerabilities.  Out of the box all the highly rated zero-day scanners do updates that often, but Defender (really: Windows) gets knocked for trying to be conservative.

 

Consider that Microsoft gets pummeled with attacks more than most, and they use Defender.  The only real difference is Intune knob turning of the service, which is what I'm proposing here... nothing that can't be done with some scripting and no money.

It's a terrible resource hog when working with a lot of large files.  Disk usage runs at 100% almost non-stop for me, so it makes it unusable.  I still find it lacking when compared to a "real" AV solution.  Especially with ransonware and such making such a big impact.  Of course there are some free anti-ransomware tools available, as well.

  • 0

Hello,

 

There is a commercial anti-malware thread at

that you may wish to post in, if you have not already done so.

 

Regards,

 

Aryeh Goretsky

 

14 hours ago, Mando said:

webroot secure anywhere only time i give any time for, but it aint free.

 

Webroot corp@ work.

 

if i was pushed to recc a free one, probs sophos home or Kapersky free home av.

 

  • 0

I didn't expect Microsoft Security Essentials/Windows Defender, being the most voted.

 

It's because is the default in Windows or because it's actually good?

 

I use AVG, works fine for me.

  • 0

For Second Half of 2017, (When Fall Creators update arrives, don't wanna mess with uninstalling as yet) 

 

I'm Probably Switching from Avast Free on Household systems to Windows Defender for the following reasons,  1 Avast new direction seemingly, new threat alerts (present in current beta,  and just feel it's time to rely on Defender, and less on 3rd party antivirus

 

 

Avast Webshield, File Shield, Behavior Shield eventually gonna popup like this photo, and center themselves in Computer screen and has to be closed manually, no response from Avast staff on why the change at all.  Currently on the 3rd Beta release, been thru 17.6.2305, 17.6.2306, and now 17.6.2307 and so far these alerts like that still remain

 

 

 

Avast 17.6 Threat alert.jpg

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.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • 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
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!