A Sea Of Red

I've had Windows 7 for several weeks now and I need to install an anti-virus?? Any suggestions?? Please advise. Thx!

Microsoft Security Essentials.

Free. From Microsoft. Not resource-intensive.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

It's a no-brainer at this point.

With all due respect to Scorcho, we may need a second opinion.

Medic, can you also confirm this?

El Scorcho wrote:Microsoft Security Essentials.

Free. From Microsoft. Not resource-intensive.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

It's a no-brainer at this point.

So then why don't they recommend it since it's free and Windows 7 is a Microsoft product?

El Scorcho wrote:Microsoft Security Essentials.

Free. From Microsoft. Not resource-intensive.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

It's a no-brainer at this point.

agreed. not only is it not a hog but its actually really good at stopping viruses. people using avast/avg for free and paying for norton/macafee/CA don't know what they are missing.

bozlady wrote:

El Scorcho wrote:Microsoft Security Essentials.

Free. From Microsoft. Not resource-intensive.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

It's a no-brainer at this point.

So then why don't they recommend it since it's free and Windows 7 is a Microsoft product?

who doesn't recommend it.

i've got the business version of avg that I can get at work for free. it's effective.

flamesbball84 wrote:i've got the business version of avg that I can get at work for free. it's effective.

That is a significant upgrade from the version that is free to the public.

bozlady wrote:

El Scorcho wrote:Microsoft Security Essentials.

Free. From Microsoft. Not resource-intensive.

http://www.microsoft.com/security_essentials/

It's a no-brainer at this point.

So then why don't they recommend it since it's free and Windows 7 is a Microsoft product?

Perhaps it has something to do with past Anti-Trust rulings. But did anyone notice the word FREE?

I am using Microsoft Security Essentials on my computers with no hassles at all. It is also recommended by Leo Laporte.

I appreciate bozlady starting this thread and the input. I've been using AVG free and spybot, and haven't had any major problems, but spybot has to be run manually, and it takes longer every time they have an update because of the way it is set up. I think I'll be switching to Security Essentials. Might do it tonight.

Comodo is also a good program. I just use the firewall rather than the entire security package. Would be using zone alarm for my firewall, but that thing has way too many issues with it that screw up so many things I need.

Thanks ElSchorcho ~ I took your advice and feel better about it.

bozlady wrote:Thanks ElSchorcho ~ I took your advice and feel better about it.

You're welcome!

HenryGale wrote:It is also recommended by Leo Laporte.

Leo is good people. Love the Laporte.

Best thing you can get for viruses is a Mac. Don't need to waste any money on getting your PC fixed once the anti-virus fails. Or once you computer crashes. Mac is the way to go.

we just got a customer the other day because of a vulnerability on their mac network that was found. our customers running our mac agent have reported this vulnerabilty getting stopped with our product.

what that mean is that buying a mac doesn't stop you from being vulnerable to threats and unwanted programs.

i haven't ran a av client on my 2 home pc's for close to 4 years and have had to run a malware scan once in those 4 years.

Same here Rubber. This whole" If you have a Mac, you don't get a virus" statement is ridiculous. I have owned PC's for 9 years and have only had 1 virus (which was due to Limewire). I pay $499 for a laptop and it lasts me 3 years versus the new and big product that Apple puts out every year, where people pay $1000-$2000 for it. Not every can afford to own a Mac and unless you are into graphics, I have yet to see where the big difference is.

i enjoy using my brothers mac but i'll probably never own one. the reason being i'm too lazy to learn something new. i fought tooth and nail at work to not lose xp.

flamerbob wrote:Same here Rubber. This whole" If you have a Mac, you don't get a virus" statement is ridiculous. I have owned PC's for 9 years and have only had 1 virus (which was due to Limewire). I pay $499 for a laptop and it lasts me 3 years versus the new and big product that Apple puts out every year, where people pay $1000-$2000 for it. Not every can afford to own a Mac and unless you are into graphics, I have yet to see where the big difference is.

I was with Rubber, but I can't say that I'm with you.

Vulnerabilities do not equal viruses. If you have a Mac, right now I can say absolutely truthfully that you will not "get" a virus. There are no known viruses for Mac OS X. There are known vulnerabilities, known trojan horses and known malware, but there are no known viruses. You may think it's semantics, but the differences are very important. Will there eventually be a virus for Mac OS X? Maybe, but it hasn't happened yet.

So, say what you will, but it's not a ridiculous statement. The fact is that Microsoft earned the virus-susceptible reputation for Windows by waiting too long to implement a software firewall in their product (and even longer to default the firewall to on). This problem was compounded by the security model of Windows prior to Vista/7 and Microsoft's tendency to leaving GAPING holes in their code. In previous versions of Windows all you had to do was plug your computer into an always-on Internet connection and usually within a few minutes it would be infected with you, the user, having taken no action. This is still the case today. You can take an un-patched Windows XP machine, plug it directly into a cable modem and within a few seconds you'll probably have the Sasser or Blaster virus controlling your machine. That simply is not the case with Mac OS X. You can argue it's because of popularity, because of security model differences or take any other tangent you like, but it's still true.

I'm glad your $499 PC's work for you and that you keep them secure. That's great. I really mean that. And I know that people here think I'm an Apple fanboy. I'm not. I always recommend that people use whatever works best for them and I don't really care what other people use, so long as it doesn't cause problems for me. That's what got me to switch to the Macintosh platform over a decade ago and it's what keeps me there now. However, I do prefer that people let facts be facts.

Now that's security. If you want to get into price, we can do that, but that's not what this post is about so I'd rather not. Besides, shuk is gonna end up in here counter-ranting about this before long and then it'll just get annoying.

El Scorcho wrote:Besides, shuk is gonna end up in here counter-ranting about this before long and then it'll just get annoying.

Don't get me started lol