So the winner for best AV is [tear open envelope -->] Kaspersky

[Steve A.]

Damn activation window! [Minus 10 pts]

Ok, my trial version of Kaspersky Internet Security was expiring today so I went ahead and installed the 3-computer retail copy of Kaspersky Pure 3.0 I picked up on eBay (which incidentally came without a box so there was no UPC code to do the scam at Fry's. Darn!)

Complaint #1: I think it should be intelligent enough to uninstall a copy of its own program (other programs do that but that isn't a biggee.)

Complaint #2: I think that it should have prompted me to disconnect my computer from the internet after uninstalling KIS and before installing Pure 3.0 (no biggee for me but other people could get infected)

Complaint #3: Now this my main complaint. When I went to activate the program it opened a window for me to enter the activation code which I was able to do. But the window was not sized properly so the buttons presumably on the bottom were not visible and with no scroll bar to reach them. I rebooted hoping that might correct the problem but no such luck.

New plan- try pressing the Tab key and then hit Enter. One press brought up the Help screen. I think it was the 3rd press that hit the Activate button. Hooray! Kinda like shooting at ducks in the dark...

It really ticks me off how companies are so interested in having a slick looking installation/activation window that they don't bother to do enough beta testing to ensure that the slick window actually works. The god-damned dumbing down of the PC interface so that users can look at pretty pictures...

I blame those non-standard windows on Mac computers! A lot of them started popping up about 10 years ago, totally disregarding the standards that Microsoft set for proper Windows applications (standards that Microsoft itself abandoned when they came out with Office 2007!) I like a window with a title bar on top and a menu bar right under that: File, Edit, View... Tools, Help. If someone else wants to use an alternate "skin" by all means let them do that. But do not make it mandatory for all users. especially me! The Office 2007 "ribbon" was so unwieldy for me that I spent $20 buying a 3rd party macro which allowed me to access the traditional menu- while still being able to use the Ribbon for some tasks that were not easily accessible using the traditional menu. The best of both worlds.

Steve

P.S. So far I have no complaints about the actual Kaspersky program itself- just the damned installation/activation routine...

[big_teee]

I know it is a Global world, & Economy!
With that said, does it not bother any of you windows guys that most of the AV Companies are Foreign made?
The number one AV that comes to mind, is a top rated hacking Country, Russia, Their AV is Kaspersky!
I don't run any Linux that has an origin of Russia, or China!
I have visions of back door access and Doing Who Knows what, With my passwords, and accounts, Who Knows When?
Yes I am a Paranoid Computer User, and Because of that, probably contributes to me Using Linux!
T

[Steve A.]

The number one AV that comes to mind, is a top rated hacking Country, Russia, Their AV is Kaspersky!

With all of the news about the hackers at NSA, et al, it seems that the US is now the TOP rated hacking country. ("We're #1, we're #1!")
As for Kaspersky (a good Irish name!) it is rated highly by reviewers but is #7 in market share according to the following link. The top 3 are freebies: Microsoft Security Essentials, Avast and AVG- with MSE being one of the lowest rated AV programs.

? Antivirus vendors: global market share 2013 | Statistic

Steve

[soundguruman]

With all of the news about the hackers at NSA, et al, it seems that the US is now the TOP rated hacking country. ("We're #1, we'rw #1!")
As for Kaspersky (a good Irish name!) it is rated highly by reviewers but is #7 in market share according to the following link. The top 3 are freebies: Microsoft Security Essentials, Avast and AVG- with MSE being one of the lowest rated AV programs.

? Antivirus vendors: global market share 2013 | Statistic

Steve

Microsoft security is practically worthless.
Kaspersky will work better than any microsoft security update.
So would Panda...

In fact many just shut the MS automatic security updates off, and use the third party antivirus instead.

There are distinct advantages to doing it that way.
Especially if you are using XP.

[g1]

What on earth do microsoft security updates have to do with microsoft security essentials or any other anti-virus protection?
Windows updates are for patching security holes in windows or IE, they are not about virus protection.
So of course any anti-virus program is better for virus protection than windows updates.
But anyone who knows anything about computers would not recommend turning windows updates off. There is no way any third-party anti-virus software can do what windows update does.

[The Dude]

To get this, one must understand the difference between a software patch/security hole and a virus/malware. Once again, this clearly illustrates he has no idea what he's talking about.

SGJA: "In fact many just shut the MS automatic security updates off, and use the third party antivirus instead. There are distinct advantages to doing it that way."

What, pray tell, are these "advantages" you speak of? This is a new level of asinine idiocy. Now your advising people to turn off Windows Update. Why would you not patch known security issues, compatibility issues, software glitches, updated drivers, etc.

[Jazz P Bass]

SGJA?

[The Dude]

Yes, or it could be a typo.....I'll never tell.

[big_teee]

I do have my Windows Updates Turned off!
http://www.extremetech.com/wp-conten...rt-348x196.jpg
Sorry Guys, I couldn't contain myself!
T

[Steve A.]

"Patches? Patches? I don't have to show you no stinkin' patches!"

[soundguruman]

What on earth do microsoft security updates have to do with microsoft security essentials or any other anti-virus protection?
Windows updates are for patching security holes in windows or IE, they are not about virus protection.
So of course any anti-virus program is better for virus protection than windows updates.
But anyone who knows anything about computers would not recommend turning windows updates off. There is no way any third-party anti-virus software can do what windows update does.

I have considerably better experience turning windows update off.
Especially on older computers.

This is what happens (on older machines especially) with updates turned on:
The more updates that are loaded, the slower the computer runs.
Drivers disappear after updates, audio driver gone, printer driver gone, video driver gone, blue screen of death, etc...
Registry is corrupted, DVD or CD no longer functions, no stand alone driver to reload, but still fixable in registry...
Personal settings changed to defaults.

This will afflict P4 P3 processors running XP particularity. But it won't happen all the time, just on certain brands.
The updates are incompatible with certain models.
So quite a bunch of people just leave the updates turned off.

I became tired with my drivers disappearing, etc...It became a pain.
And I found that XP computer ran better without the updates.
And I'm not the only one to reach that conclusion.

But now that I have a different newer system, quad core, win 7, I can run updates without too much problems.
Still there are incompatible updates, even with this system. Still, in 64 bit system, some updates won't work.

And I load them manually, the automatic update is still shut off. I choose only the necessary ones.

[dmartn149]

I have considerably better experience turning windows update off.
Especially on older computers.

This is what happens (on older machines especially) with updates turned on:
The more updates that are loaded, the slower the computer runs.
Drivers disappear after updates, audio driver gone, printer driver gone, video driver gone, blue screen of death, etc...
Registry is corrupted, DVD or CD no longer functions, no stand alone driver to reload, but still fixable in registry...
Personal settings changed to defaults.

This will afflict P4 P3 processors running XP particularity. But it won't happen all the time, just on certain brands.
The updates are incompatible with certain models.
So quite a bunch of people just leave the updates turned off.

I became tired with my drivers disappearing, etc...It became a pain.
And I found that XP computer ran better without the updates.
And I'm not the only one to reach that conclusion.

But now that I have a different newer system, quad core, win 7, I can run updates without too much problems.
Still there are incompatible updates, even with this system. Still, in 64 bit system, some updates won't work.

And I load them manually, the automatic update is still shut off. I choose only the necessary ones.

I had the same experience with updates on my XP machine. Every time it updated I had to re-install my printer. I finally turned the updates off. For AV I've been using AVG free for years. Works pretty good. I changed my OS to Linux Mint recently , so I guess I don't need AV?

[big_teee]

I had the same experience with updates on my XP machine. Every time it updated I had to re-install my printer. I finally turned the updates off. For AV I've been using AVG free for years. Works pretty good. I changed my OS to Linux Mint recently , so I guess I don't need AV?

On the Linux Mint, it will tell you when the updates are available, but you have to tell it to install them.
Mint Updates work, and never had any problem with it.
Never had any problems with viruses since I've run Linux.
I do enable Adblock, and do not track on my Firefox browser.
Linux software is usually a lot more current than other OS's because it constantly updated, and upgraded.
Most Linux Brands offer 2-4 upgrades a year. It is ever evolving.
The Ubuntu group is constantly upgrading their software, and the Linux Kernel is constantly being upgraded.
GL,
T

[dmartn149]

I think I updated right after the install. It only took a few seconds. My wifes Vista machine is always giving her trouble, and updates seem to take forever. If the AOL browser would work on Linux I'd change her OS

[g1]

Choosing which patches to apply or applying them manually is not the same as "just turning them off". Yes, there may be some updates that cause issues, system restore is there to set you back to before the problematic patch.
If you are running XP or older, and not applying any patches, better stay off the 'net.