Thread: Which is the Best Antivirus software package for your computer?

There is no end to antivirus software in the internet that you can get free. But do you think that all are reliable and can really offer you the protection. Perhaps not! There are very few companies that manufacture antivirus software packages which are really effective and can provide complete protection to your computer or laptop. Those are not free off course.

However you can get free trial version for a particular period. And there is some antivirus software package that you can install in your computer to scan your mobile phone storage memory and delete the viruses. Given below are few names of the antivirus companies that create wonderful antivirus software packages.

Norton Antivirus Software: This has been one of the most trusted antivirus software packages till date to protect your computer. But the only demerit is that the Norton software is incompatible to latest and very intelligent viruses. And above all there are complains of making the system very slow. The Norton is the known to eat up lot of RAM space while being active.

MecCafe: This is another trusted name when it comes to antivirus. This has been latest choice of people and has been considered better than Norton in the sense that it doesn’t slow down your computer. This antivirus software package is little expensive but you can get the trial version of the software from the internet and get worked for your computer.

Quickheal: This is one antivirus which is known to scan both your computer and mobile phones as well. The software package has been identified as the best mobile and computer scanner. Off late the trial version of the software has been available in the internet where you can use it for one month to test how the antivirus removes the virus and offer protection to your system.

My Vote goes to Quick Heal.....Norton is not good at detecting Trojans

Norton is the best

norton 360's the best and the lightest

norton eats up the ram n makes the comp slow,doesnt detect virus
kaspersky is the best...

for me it is Avira.. though free av it has the highest detection rate and uses a lot less ram.

Combination of avast & immunet protect
avast = good scanner
immunet protect = good protection (cloud based)

Microsoft Security Essentials for the win!! Totally unobtrusive and integrates really well with win 7...very light, great detection capabilities and totally free!

Originally Posted by StarK

Microsoft Security Essentials for the win!! Totally unobtrusive and integrates really well with win 7...very light, great detection capabilities and totally free!

I Agree. Even removed AVAST 5 now

Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 FTW

Originally Posted by imrock

Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 FTW

its like asking whose boobs are better, bipasha's or mallika's

Originally Posted by imrock

Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 FTW

Is this genuine?
Because it is FTW

But anyway, i like ESET THE BEAST!
It beats all the viruses!

Originally Posted by Kadamba

Is this genuine?
Because it is FTW

FTW = For The Win ..

Mc Afee is light on resources, good on protecting the computer from viruses.

//Moderator note:
Welcome to India Broadband Forum.

You have not activated your account and hence your posts are going into moderation queue. Please click on the link in the mail you received from the forum admin in your mailbox. Failure to do so will cause all your posts go into moderation.
- just4kix

Originally Posted by cool_techie_tvm

FTW = For The Win ..

I know what ftw means!

Kaspersky Pure

I hate (well not really hate, just get exasperated with) these AV softwares. They all take a lot of memory or CPU. That is one reason why I like Linux. Unfortunately not many office apps on Linux are available.

Originally Posted by just4kix

I hate (well not really hate, just get exasperated with) these AV softwares. They all take a lot of memory or CPU. That is one reason why I like Linux. Unfortunately not many office apps on Linux are available.

I know CAs who use Linux + OO.o. No complaints to date. When your code is open to scrutiny, any problems detected are fixed immidiately. If you want to to see it yourself, you should really read the archives of any important linux/open source project mailing list dedicated to reviewing software. Each and every line of code is scrutinized. Cannot happen at MS, where this would be considered a "disrespect to interlectual property".

Originally Posted by safeguy

Each and every line of code is scrutinized. Cannot happen at MS, where this would be considered a "disrespect to interlectual property".

Do you know what SLDC is ? what is a QA process ? if not then don't post just comments which does not makes sense.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

Do you know what SLDC is ? what is a QA process ? if not then don't post just comments which does not makes sense.

It's SDLC, by the way.

I can't claim to having been an MS employee, but I do know one thing. There's a reason open-source software is so successful (I'll come to my definition of successful later). It's because of source code being publicly available for scrutiny, modification and testing. A QA process exists in the open source world also. There is a limit to how much a QA process can catch problems and loopholes in the code. That's exactly why ethical hacking is used nowadays.

I fail to understand why Microsoft makes its own anti-virus. The reason viruses exist is that there are holes in the code that allow you to get past certain restrictions set by the OS. When you find that hole, you either fix it (the Linux way) or try to kill everyone who knows about that hole (the anti-virus way). Why would someone not fix the holes when they are discovered? Why do you think that despite Linux's market share of servers exceeding 90%, people are unable to make viruses that destroy servers world over?

I consider Linux a success today. Linux may not have even 10% of the market share in desktop computers, but it has made an impact - it known to be stable and secure. The FUD MS injects into the media is nonsense. This is NOT because Linux doesn't have a market share. It is because of the concept of open source itself. A leading American newspaper conducted a survey of how many days browsers remained vulnerable in a year (i.e. sum of all the delays between detection of hole and fixing the hole for all security issues combined) and found Firefox to be vulnerable for 9 days in a year. The supported version of IE was vulnerable for over 250 days. What are you attributing that to, huh? Bias against MS? Not in the Washington Post, I'm sure.

Linux and open source software in general have reached a point where they are sustainable and have enough momentum to continue. There may be fears now and then (MySQL, etc) but it has enough people contributing that it can be used in production environments without closed source software. It continues to grow on the desktop market without any marketing. (You know how much marketing does and you when the last time you saw an MS advert was - yesterday - and the last time you saw a Linux advert was - never).

That MS has to constantly fallback to FUD proves my point.

EDIT: To everyone else - please do not take this rudely. I do not intend to start a flame war. I am simply defending myself. Expect never to see unprovoked aggressive writing from me - not before, not now, not in the future.

you need to grow up kid. all i can say is good luck. and you think that big giant like MS will ignore any errors in OS ?
and speaking about linux, you think it has no bugs ? you think it has got no virus cauz it has not got bugs ? lol u really need to learn a bit of programming and then only you can comment now.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

you need to grow up kid.

Like I said, I'm not starting a flame war here. I'm not replying to that sentence.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

all i can say is good luck. and you think that big giant like MS will ignore any errors in OS ?

I'm sorry. It's about time you stopped believing that just because MS is giant it will behave in a certain manner. It doesn't ignore bugs. Far from it. My only complaint about it is it's FUD.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

and speaking about linux, you think it has no bugs ?

No. Nothing like that. There are many. And there will ALWAYS be bugs in software as long as humans are writing code. I write code myself and I know it very well. The number of bugs in any Linux distro exceeds many many thousands. I am not denying that. I am simply saying FOSS has a much better way of dealing with it. Nothing, whatsoever about how many bugs it has.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

you think it has got no virus cauz it has not got bugs ?

Again. NO. It's because the source is available for people to locate the bug and I can get the update without having my computer being checked for genuineness.

Originally Posted by talktoanil

lol u really need to learn a bit of programming and then only you can comment now.

:bows: I've learned far more than a bit of programming. I actually deal with the bugs you're talking of.

Thank you.

If you'd like to continue your aggression please be mature and PM me. You've dragged this thread off-topic, don't derail it any further.

Originally Posted by safeguy

Like I said, I'm not starting a flame war here. I'm not replying to that sentence. I'm sorry. It's about time you stopped believing that just because MS is giant it will behave in a certain manner. It doesn't ignore bugs. Far from it. My only complaint about it is it's FUD. No. Nothing like that. There are many. And there will ALWAYS be bugs in software as long as humans are writing code. I write code myself and I know it very well. The number of bugs in any Linux distro exceeds many many thousands. I am not denying that. I am simply saying FOSS has a much better way of dealing with it. Nothing, whatsoever about how many bugs it has.Again. NO. It's because the source is available for people to locate the bug and I can get the update without having my computer being checked for genuineness. :bows: I've learned far more than a bit of programming. I actually deal with the bugs you're talking of.

Thank you.

If you'd like to continue your aggression please be mature and PM me. You've dragged this thread off-topic, don't derail it any further.

in that case you should have posted a sensible comment at first rather than ranting about linux. i can also do same for Mac OS or for Windows 7. But thats not the point here.

Originally Posted by safeguy

You've dragged this thread off-topic, don't derail it any further.

Check what the topic was about and who started about Linux here.

Hello,

KASPERSKY is the best

Norton 360 Version 4.0