PCMatic

[Mystic]

Which is what I was talking about when I started this post. Those commercials drive me crazy. Sometimes they have the same commercial right after the first one.

And the guy makes a big deal about how PCMatic is supposedly all American and all the other AV programs are developed somewhere else-in India, Romania, or wherever. But they have to use an antivirus in PCMatic. If that antivirus is Dr. Web it is not American either.

 

[lugNutz]

Originally Posted By: BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted By: lugNutz
Originally Posted By: Mystic
I keep seeing that commercial again and again on TV. I am sick of it.

I will stay with programs like ESET, Bitdefender (maybe), Kaspersky, maybe F-Secure, Hitman Pro and Malwarebytes, and the ESET Online Scan.

Ever consider Microsoft's security?? It's free and works great. Been running it for 3 years and never had an issue. I work for a .NET environment in IT and it's all we use. Never had an issue there either.


Are you talking about MS Security Essentials? IIRC they stopped supporting it a couple of months ago.


As I had mentioned, MSE and MalwareBytes is the best combo. Yes, MSE is STILL being supported. I am running it on Windows 7 on another one of my personal computers (one of my non-corporate ones). And also as I mentioned, the corporate version and home versions are near identical engines, the corporate packs a few extra features for MS .NET environments.



Originally Posted By: Subdued
Yes, exactly. Everyone here is talking about home use stuff and he chimes in with enterprise stuff.

I took the liberty of doing some bold text and even changed the color for better readability on a key statement that I could only assume you overlooked? (see quote above screenshot) Maybe a good Google search will help you with definitions, dissection, and to better understand the interpretation.

 

[Rand]

Still not the best combo

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/security/384...ivirus-rankings

http://www.howtogeek.com/173291/goodbye-...arty-antivirus/

or a simple pic

oh and malwarebytes recently has started sucking, Eset finds way more..(even the free online scanner)

Originally Posted By: lugNutz


As I had mentioned, MSE and MalwareBytes is the best combo. Yes, MSE is STILL being supported. I am running it on Windows 7 on another one of my personal computers (one of my non-corporate ones). And also as I mentioned, the corporate version and home versions are near identical engines, the corporate packs a few extra features for MS .NET environments.

 

[Mystic]

The one thing that troubles me about that testing is how Norton and McAfee could rank fairly high. I think Norton has really gone downhill recently. And as I have said here for some crazy reason I downloaded a trial version of McAfee. Even if it protects as well as the testing indicates I would never use that McAfee again. The root kit scan took forever and eventually the firewall would not start up at all. It was horrible. And it was the most recent trial version also-downloaded right from their website.

I like how Microsoft Security Essentials (Windows 7 and before) and Windows Defender (Windows 8/8.1) run. Except the full scan takes a very long time. But the bottom line is I don't think Microsoft AV protection provides enough protection. So a person has to go with something else. I like ESET Smart Security pretty good myself. Bitdefender and Kaspersky are other possibilities but I have moved away from Kaspersky for various reasons. I would use Bitdefender but it has been kind of buggy when I have tried it and I don't like that.

I use the free version of Malwarebytes but if it is going downhill I can get rid of it. I also use HitmanPro. And if the ESET online scan is better than Malwarebytes I may just use the ESET online scan as a backup. I is free.

 

[Mystic]

You can see how well the Panda free AV works. If somebody wanted something totally free they could use that AV and the ESET online scan as a double check. The German AV programs also look pretty good and so does Titanium Maximum Protection. I don't know very much about that eScan AV.

 

[Rand]

I would take the charts with a grain of salt, I dont see avira free as being better than eset or a few others that they ding'ed a half point on.

McAfee is horrid,
norton.. at least last years version worked great

 

[Subdued]

MSE is complete [censored] so anyone that thinks any iteration of it is any good at this point is completely off their rocker.

Continuously stating that MSE is at all acceptable is dangerous. You're literally better off with nothing at all.

At least if you know you have no AV protection you might be more inclined to be careful. Running MSE and expecting you're protected is dangerous!

 

[lugNutz]

^^^ This is like arguing with my wife. Keep thinking what you want

. So defensive over something that you don't like/use (common theme in this forum). 3+ years and counting with ZERO issues -- my security setup MUST be TERRIBLE.

Here's the point.... again... To the OP, get some free trials, see if you like them. You don't buy a car without driving it, so don't buy software until you try it. Try them all, see if you like them -- see if they work for your daily use (monitor usage). Everyone has their own preference for security -- there is no ONE PERFECT security software. PCMatic sounds like it's still in early stages, assuming it's legit. I would shy away.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
^^^ This is like arguing with my wife. Keep thinking what you want

. So defensive over something that you don't like/use (common theme in this forum). 3+ years and counting with ZERO issues -- my security setup MUST be TERRIBLE.

Here's the point.... again... To the OP, get some free trials, see if you like them. You don't buy a car without driving it, so don't buy software until you try it. Try them all, see if you like them -- see if they work for your daily use (monitor usage). Everyone has their own preference for security -- there is no ONE PERFECT security software. PCMatic sounds like it's still in early stages, assuming it's legit. I would shy away.


About 3 years ago AVG Free turned into a virus itself with popups constantly trying to get me to subscribe to the paid version, the final straw was when it snuck a toolbar in during an upgrade. I switched to MSE and my computer has been just fine. I install all the Windows updates and don't click on just any link or spam email that comes in and everything has been working perfect. This Dell Windows 7 laptop is going on 5 years old and other than that AVG fiasco has been truly a joy to use.

 

[OVERKILL]

How are you guys who have "no issues" verifying that you in fact, have no issues?

I literally cannot count the number of computers I've cleaned up that have MSE on them and it says they are perfectly clean and ESET or MWB reveals that clearly not to be the case. Reminds me of the Maury flatulence meme.

To be clear: I've used every major antivirus solution out there. Most of the multiple times. I've had to deal with them many, MANY more times than that on machines I end up servicing outside of work (coworkers computers, family....etc). My opinion of a product working or being a useless pile is based on that experience. When a product can stop an infection from occurring, I'll praise it. And when a product can sit there and let a computer get riddled with malware and be completely oblivious to it, I'll rip on it.

This is why McAfee, Norton and MSE are on my "steer clear of" list, whilst ESET, Kaspersky (and AVIRA/Bitdefender for free products) are on my "recommended" list. And that list DOES change. I used to be a big fan of Avast! But it became bloated, toolbars happened...etc. Then my aunt got an infection that Avast! couldn't touch that ESET's on-line scanner took care of and well, you can guess what product she ended using going forward.

I was really impressed with MSE, for a free solution, when it was new. But it has not kept up with other free products on the market (like Bitdefender and Avira, the latter having that annoying "buy the full version" notification every once and awhile but does perform well) in terms of performance and gets blown out of the water by quality paid-for solutions like NOD32.

 

[Mystic]

A quality AV product is not that expensive. And certainly cheaper than paying a lot of money to have your computer cleaned of malware and perhaps endangering yourself if your bank account gets plundered or your personal information is compromised.

If Microsoft's AV was good enough I would use it. As far as performance is concerned it seems fine. The only things I dislike there is that the full scan takes a long time and you cannot set it up to automatically shut off when the scan is done. But the bottom line is that as far as I have been able to determine it is simply not good enough to stop malware.

Based on my personal experience I will not touch Norton or McAfee. And look how poorly Vipre performed in that testing.

The same products are generally somewhere near the top year after year. These include Bitdefender, Kaspersky, ESET, often F-Secure, Gdata, Avira, and TrendMicro seems pretty good. I personally can eliminate some of these for various reasons such as a product slowing down a computer or not seeming to be compatible with 64 bit operating systems or for other reasons.

So I basically end up with a small list of products-ESET, Kaspersky, Bitdefender, Gdata, and Avira. I really like ESET Smart Security 7 at this time. Maybe the ESET NOD32 with the Windows firewall would be just as good and cheaper. I like HitmanPro also and why not use Malwarebytes-the free version? It is free. And the ESET online scan is free and seems like the best online scan at this time for me. If ESET seemed to go down in quality I would probably turn to Bitdefender. And there are free versions of Bitdefender and Avira.

So even if a person simply would not pay for AV software there are still products that can get the job done. Maybe the free Bitdefender or free Avira, the free Malwarebytes, and free ESET online scans. If a person has just one computer the ESET NOD32 for one computer is cheap.

And of course it goes without saying (or should go without saying) that you have to use good common sense on the internet and have good passwords.

 

[Mystic]

All of these people who are using MSE or Windows Defender or Norton or McAfee really need to do an online scan with ESET. It is free. They need to do the full scan even though it will take a while.

They might be very surprised.

 

[ClutchDisc]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
All of these people who are using MSE or Windows Defender or Norton or McAfee really need to do an online scan with ESET. It is free. They need to do the full scan even though it will take a while.

They might be very surprised.

+1 Some may say that they have been using MSE for years and never had an issue, but how do you know? MSE will tell you all is well, but you could very well be full of malware and unwanted programs. I've seen enough PCs with MSE say that all is well, but that was far from the truth!

Run the ESET online scan and you might be reconsidering how well MSE is protecting your computer.

 

[Mystic]

I know a guy who should know better, who knows a lot about computers, who says he has not used an AV for years. He says he never gets any malware. Another guy asked him how does he know he does not have malware?

If you are not running an AV program at all, or if you are running an AV of questionable quality, there is no knowing if something might be on your computer.

There is really no excuse for somebody to not use the ESET online scan. It is free. So it is no excuse to say that it costs money. You have to run it in the Admin account which should be no problem for a lot of guys who run their computers in the Admin account anyway. The full scan takes a while. Even the short scan might find something. But I always use the full scan.

There is really no excuse to not use an AV of decent quality. There are free versions of Bitdefender and Avira, and the Panda free AV looked pretty good in the testing. Any of these can replace MSE. They cost nothing.

There is a free version of Malwarebytes.

The ESET online scan is free.

There is a free 30 day demo of HitmanPro people can download.

So there are no excuses except that a guy might be too lazy to do anything. And if a guy simply does not care if his computer might be infected with malware and if the guy is too lazy to even do the proper checks (such as running the ESET online scan) I say the guy deserves to have his computer infected.

 

[lugNutz]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
How are you guys who have "no issues" verifying that you in fact, have no issues?

Simple. Remote scans with other security clients. ZERO BSOD's, viruses, malware, spyware, etc. etc. etc.

Originally Posted By: Mystic
All of these people who are using MSE or Windows Defender or Norton or McAfee really need to do an online scan with ESET. It is free. They need to do the full scan even though it will take a while.

They might be very surprised.

Not the case. Due to my work environment and job, I have to VPN into our systems remotely. I cannot have access without other applications checking my computers for viruses, malware, etc., upon attempting to connect. There are 3 security applications running on our servers that check my computers -- those security applications happen to be talked about as being "better" than MSE in this thread. so far, these superior products have found nothing, while using MSE locally....

Online scans are all about marketing (been there, done them)... They make themselves look good by dumping harmless files on your computer and saying they are terrible because they hope you will purchase their full products. Those online scans are not running a full AV engine remotely for free to the public. No company would bog down their servers and bandwidth for an extended period of time, unless there was some perk/benefit to them.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: lugNutz

Simple. Remote scans with other security clients. ZERO BSOD's, viruses, malware, spyware, etc. etc. etc.


Thank you for clarifying, that's what I was wondering.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
Not the case. Due to my work environment and job, I have to VPN into our systems remotely. I cannot have access without other applications checking my computers for viruses, malware, etc., upon attempting to connect. There are 3 security applications running on our servers that check my computers -- those security applications happen to be talked about as being "better" than MSE in this thread. so far, these superior products have found nothing, while using MSE locally....


But would you consider your browsing and download habits normal for the average person? Would you click on a phishing e-mail thinking that somebody was legitimately trying to send you a "PDF" via "Google Drive" with a link that doesn't take you there? Are you a person who would be easily exploited by a driveby or something of that ilk?

MSE might work for YOU because you are a safe operator. That's hardly the case for the vast majority of users who are not in an IT-related profession.

That's like a professional driver saying he doesn't need anything more than good brakes on a 900HP car and then recommending that configuration for the average Joe. The reality is that Average Joe then piles said car into a rail/building/lake because he has no traction or stability control to save him.

Quote:
Online scans are all about marketing (been there, done them)... They make themselves look good by dumping harmless files on your computer and saying they are terrible because they hope you will purchase their full products. Those online scans are not running a full AV engine remotely for free to the public. No company would bog down their servers and bandwidth for an extended period of time, unless there was some perk/benefit to them.


ESET isn't dumping garbage on your computer. Their full version of the product finds the EXACT same infections; infections that can easily be looked up and matched to ones found by other major products. I also see a lot of overlap between what ESET detects with their on-line scanner and what MWB finds. With ESET often finding MORE than MWB. Same goes with Hitman Pro.

Now there ARE garbage products that will tell you that your computer has "infections" and they want you to buy their full product, but the irony here is that the ESET on-line scanner (the one you appear to be slagging) DETECTS those products as "PUPS" (potentially Unwanted Programs) and gives you a warning about opening them.

Also, the ESET "on-line scanner" downloads a program that runs ON YOUR COMPUTER, which then downloads definitions ON YOUR COMPUTER, and uses the resources of YOUR COMPUTER to perform the scan. The "on-line" component of it is what initiates and gives you the status of the scan, the actual processing is all done locally. All they are giving up is bandwidth, and bandwidth is cheap.

 

[Mystic]

I just now finished a scan with ESET online scan. It found nothing. It did not even take that long. It was as easy as falling off a log.

Another online scan I have used is the F-Secure online scan.

I have also used the free Kaspersky Rescue Disk (a person downloads the software and installs it on a CD) and the free F-Secure software for a CD. I have not used these on my Windows 8.1 computer so I don't know if they will run on a Windows 8.1 computer (they run in versions of Linux). But I have used them in Windows 7. They are both free (except for the cost of the CD-which is dirt cheap).

I have also used Combo Fix but a person has to be sure to get it from Bleeping Computer, turn off the AV when running it, and there is some risk in using it. It scans a computer quickly.

OVERKILL how does HitmanPro compare with the ESET online scan?

 

[lugNutz]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
But would you consider your browsing and download habits normal for the average person? Would you click on a phishing e-mail thinking that somebody was legitimately trying to send you a "PDF" via "Google Drive" with a link that doesn't take you there? Are you a person who would be easily exploited by a driveby or something of that ilk?

MSE might work for YOU because you are a safe operator. That's hardly the case for the vast majority of users who are not in an IT-related profession.


This is touching on one of my earlier posts where I basically said the worst internet security is yourself. If you are clicking around on some link that you don't know what it is, that is stupid and no internet security will stop it before it does some sort of damage. Sure, some software's may find it, but can't always clean it.

BUT I also mentioned that I use this on all my computers, not just my corporate computer. I do things in which the "average person" would do on my personal one's, probably even less safe from an operators standpoint, but I tend to be a little more careful on my work one (only because of sensitive data).


Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
ESET isn't dumping garbage on your computer. Their full version of the product finds the EXACT same infections; infections that can easily be looked up and matched to ones found by other major products. I also see a lot of overlap between what ESET detects with their on-line scanner and what MWB finds. With ESET often finding MORE than MWB. Same goes with Hitman Pro.

Now there ARE garbage products that will tell you that your computer has "infections" and they want you to buy their full product, but the irony here is that the ESET on-line scanner (the one you appear to be slagging) DETECTS those products as "PUPS" (potentially Unwanted Programs) and gives you a warning about opening them.

Also, the ESET "on-line scanner" downloads a program that runs ON YOUR COMPUTER, which then downloads definitions ON YOUR COMPUTER, and uses the resources of YOUR COMPUTER to perform the scan. The "on-line" component of it is what initiates and gives you the status of the scan, the actual processing is all done locally. All they are giving up is bandwidth, and bandwidth is cheap.

That's not an "online scan" from the sounds of it.....

I have yet to speak bad about any ONE specific product EXCEPT McAfee. Many of my posts are speaking direct about my knowledge of MSE.

Maybe ESET has changed, but if you remember a few years back when all of these companies played the game of "do my online scan and see how great our product is", they wouldn't show you results, just numbers... and they were putting blank files on your computer, then coding their engines to consider them spyware/adware. But again, I am not one of the ones that is on here bashing a specific product. I was giving information that was tested and proven by a fortune 500 company willing to protect their data with MSE/Endpoint Security. I had tried ESET back in the day. Hated it. BUT that was 4-5 years ago, and maybe it is different now. I will not go away from a combination of software that I know works and has proven it to me for a while now. I would especially not pay for it when what I use is free.

Another thing to consider is there is no "standard" for what is a threat to your PC. Obvious threats, yes, others, no. Some will see files as a threat that others don't. I have seen a few times people lost photos because one of these "superior" products deleted "infected" photos because they were being monitored by a 3rd party application. Not infected, just monitored. But there is no way that an engine such as ESET or Norton or ANY others will write code to check what 3rd party applications/services are using the files to see if it's a legitimate process. It's just the world of software development. Something that I am familiar with.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
This is touching on one of my earlier posts where I basically said the worst internet security is yourself. If you are clicking around on some link that you don't know what it is, that is stupid and no internet security will stop it before it does some sort of damage. Sure, some software's may find it, but can't always clean it.


Actually, ESET's network driver DOES intercept most things before they ever get to your computer (terminate the connection and notify you). I've observed this behaviour many times. It will block sites, terminate downloads....etc. These are things that MSE DOES NOT DO.

That has ALWAYS been my biggest gripe with "traditional" security solutions, that they don't prevent the threat from getting to your machine, they just catch it once it is already there. And by that time it has usually already done some damage. I was extremely pleased to observe that this was something ESET was doing differently with their NOD32 product.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
BUT I also mentioned that I use this on all my computers, not just my corporate computer. I do things in which the "average person" would do on my personal one's, probably even less safe from an operators standpoint, but I tend to be a little more careful on my work one (only because of sensitive data).


But you know what is safe and what isn't. I assume you aren't trying to download warez and cracks to get Photoshop for free. Plenty of home users are unfortunately. So while you may be "more careless" with your home rig, you still know what you are doing. And that's my point.


Originally Posted By: lugNutz
That's not an "online scan" from the sounds of it.....


Sure it is. It just leverages the client's resources, which is how most of the good ones are. Heck, Norton's on-line scan from what has to be a decade ago operated in the same manner.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
I have yet to speak bad about any ONE specific product EXCEPT McAfee. Many of my posts are speaking direct about my knowledge of MSE.


OK, but we were discussing ESET's on-line scanner. I'm sure you can see how easy it was to conclude you were slagging their on-line scanner with your comments.

And I'm speaking as to my knowledge of and experience with ESET, McAfee, Norton, Trend, MSE....etc. I've used them all.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
Maybe ESET has changed, but if you remember a few years back when all of these companies played the game of "do my online scan and see how great our product is", they wouldn't show you results, just numbers... and they were putting blank files on your computer, then coding their engines to consider them spyware/adware.


I don't remember any of the majors that had on-line scans at the time (Trend Micro, Norton, Panda and McAfee are the ones that I recall having on-line scans during that time-frame) leveraging that particular tactic (the "infected" blank files), though I do remember them finding threats that they then wanted you to purchase their retail product to remove. Panda did that. I also remember products like SpyBot, Ad-aware and not long after, Malwarebytes, discovering software that those products didn't.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
But again, I am not one of the ones that is on here bashing a specific product.


But you seemed to be, hence my comment. If that was not your intent, then I apologize for misreading into what you've written.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
I was giving information that was tested and proven by a fortune 500 company willing to protect their data with MSE/Endpoint Security. I had tried ESET back in the day. Hated it. BUT that was 4-5 years ago, and maybe it is different now. I will not go away from a combination of software that I know works and has proven it to me for a while now. I would especially not pay for it when what I use is free.


I've had a corporate site-license for NOD32 (now ESET Endpoint Protection on the enterprise-side) for at least that long. I've never found their business product miserable

And of course a combination of software is your best approach. I tend to use ESET, MWB and Hitman Pro as my "go to" products because they've proven to me they are effective on infected machines.

Originally Posted By: lugNutz
Another thing to consider is there is no "standard" for what is a threat to your PC. Obvious threats, yes, others, no. Some will see files as a threat that others don't. I have seen a few times people lost photos because one of these "superior" products deleted "infected" photos because they were being monitored by a 3rd party application. Not infected, just monitored. But there is no way that an engine such as ESET or Norton or ANY others will write code to check what 3rd party applications/services are using the files to see if it's a legitimate process. It's just the world of software development. Something that I am familiar with.


And that's what makes the Adware/Spyware/Malware umbrella such a *bleep*-show. And this is also why I find it nice that ESET's products have the option of whether you want them to pick up things like annoying toolbars, adware...etc that are often bundled in with other products. Things that aren't really malicious but have the potential to be annoying.

False-positives can certainly be annoying (and MSE isn't immune to them). I've had ESET's network-level protection prevent a custom piece of software written for a major automotive OEM from functioning as it deemed the product's behaviour malicious. Nothing was quarantined, it just didn't like the product's behaviour and so it blocked its communication ability. Added the software as an exception and we were off to the races.

Another one was Avira quite a while back quarantining a legitimate DLL at one point. Don't remember the exact specifics of that one other than it was extremely annoying to deal with.


At the end of the day MSE has proven to me that it is no longer an effective product for your typical home user and their PC. For an enthusiast perhaps it is adequate but that isn't the biggest chunk of the market. I've seen enough infections walk right by MSE and exist while the product was oblivious to the infection that I've lost all confidence in it. And this is a pity since it was a very promising product initially and Microsoft certainly has the resources to produce an AV solution that is truly world-class.

 

[Subdued]

I just think it's extremely dangerous for someone to take their own clearly limited experience and suggest that the product works great, when there is a mountain of opposing evidence suggesting it's ineffective.

Cognitive dissonance at its finest.