Best antivirus software recommendations?

Joz said:🙂
just don't start

maybe learn some English first, they say:
don't-start-that-mess 😁

NOD32 is miles ahead of the competition. It’s lightweight, streamlined, and doesn't hog your system resources. It gets the job done perfectly.👍 You can set it up so you barely even notice it's running, yet it stays more vigilant than anything else out there.

The price point isn't bad either—not sure of the exact figure right now—but you can actually run it for free if you want.😁😁

Eric Gonzalez11 said:NOD32 is hands down the best. It’s tiny, super simple, doesn't hog your system resources, and just works perfectly.👍

Plus, it isn't even that pricey... I can't remember the exact price right now... but you can actually find ways to get it for free too.😁

$107 😁

mr. ex said:It’s free for me🙂

BTW I don't even bother with antivirus because I'm pretty careful about what I click, plus I've ditched IE for Netscape...

LOL
mr. ex😁

Man, if that's the case, you might as well just grab a free one—like, actually free, say AVG—then at least you're running something legal and free, and honestly, it'll probably stay ahead of Sophos for another decade anyway.

driftingnomad68 said:$107 😁

If I heard correctly, there’s some kind of discount involved, making the total lower. Personally, I haven't paid a dime yet, even though I'm running the full version.😁

If you opt for the commercial license during that initial year, you’re looking at a hit of $133, though the rate drops by half to 200 once you hit year two. I find myself weighing whether a cracked version offers the same level of stability and reliability; frankly, given how much data sits on my machine, the risk feels a bit too high, especially since I’ve never been particularly disciplined about maintaining a solid backup strategy.

McAfee

Based on a recommendation from Time Magazine, I started using this. It’s an excellent antivirus

It’s not even about being bad... the thing can't even stop them from starting in time, let alone give them a chance to "nest."

Try digging around the web—there are plenty of sites run by "experts"—but this thing didn't pass a single test on any of the three pages I checked...

Look, man, it just can't be any more obvious than this... sorry, but it's the truth.

driftingnomad68 said:Look, if you're gonna be that way, just grab something free—like AVG—so at least you're legal. You'll be ten years ahead of Sophos while doing it.

I don't give a damn about being "legal" because my entire setup is pirated anyway😁. And I don't need "free" software because I'll just crack whatever I want. Honestly, I don't even need Sophos because I haven't caught a single damn thing in over three or four months...

BTW, nice avatar😁, looks like something straight out of a retro TV commercial, right?😁

Forbes
Mr. X😁

Mr. X said:I don't need anything legal since my whole setup is unofficial anyway. I don't need free stuff either because I just make it free myself. And honestly, I don't even need Sophos because I haven't
caught a single thing in over three or four months...

BTW, nice avatar. Is that ABC News you're rocking now? lol

Forbes
Mr. X😁

Haha 😁

I took down the photo so I wouldn't annoy you guys too much😁

😂😈😈

---------------

Well then take it down, stop wasting everyone's bandwidth😉 😉

driftingnomad68 said:Then just kill it already. Why waste the damn bandwidth? 😉😉

Look, I just run a quick scan whenever I get a bad feeling about something...

Forbes
Mr. X😁

Norton Antivirus
It’s lightweight, and honestly, it just gets the job done..
The price point is pretty decent too... an annual license runs you $45 plus tax, and if you renew, each following license is about 30% off the original price...

Where are you getting that subscription price from? I'm paying $8.50!!!!
By the way, that 2002 version isn't exactly "small" compared to McAfee... plus, 75 MB isn't nothing—at least in my book.

Sure, 8MB is tiny, but this thing is pretty beefy. It works great, though—it doesn't hog any resources, so like you said, you basically forget it's even there.😎

Yeah... over here, people tend to forget things more often—especially when it comes to renewing a license. They'll get ten different notifications, but Americans, well... let's just say they don't always notice. (And I think you know why)🤔
Then they act all surprised when the automatic updates stop working 😁 ...typical behavior around here.

They give you 50% off if you're a full-time student
you just gotta bring some proof 😉

Give McAfee a shot

Cut the crap.

Here’s some stuff to test that McAfee software and the paid shills over at Microsoft.

http://www.filez.com/antivirus_test.htm http://www.eicar.org/anti_virus_test_file.htm http://www.gfi.com/emailsecuritytest/ http://www.avast.com/eng/viruses/eic...ard_antiv.html http://www.yournew.com/101701mail.htm]test[/URL]

So go ahead—give this "top-tier" antivirus a spin and please, for the love of God, stop coming to me with these "so-called" intelligent questions.

Alright, now I’m just confused.
I don't know if the folks over at Microsoft saw that CNET review where McAfee was crowned the best of 2004, with Norton coming in second. In that specific breakdown,
only McAfee and Norton pulled top marks for effectiveness; meanwhile, the Norton currently protecting my machine barely scraped into 5th or 6th place.
Since my license is about to expire, I'm asking because I genuinely want to know—not because I'm trying to prove how smart I am, but out of pure curiosity. It's interesting that even Kaspersky, which I've heard nothing but great things about, didn't even make the list... maybe it's just political propaganda, kidding. Most regular people (the little guys like us) rely on these reviews, and then we just end up more lost because you "experts" can't seem to agree on anything!
Peace!😕

Joseph Davis5 said:Alright, I’m genuinely lost here.
I honestly can't tell if the folks over at Microsoft actually read the reviews on CNET, where McAfee was crowned the absolute best back in 2004, with Norton coming in second. During that run,
McAfee and Norton were the only ones pulling top marks for efficiency, while the Norton instance currently guarding my machine only managed to scrape by in 5th or 6th place.
Since my license is about to expire, I'm asking because I'm genuinely curious—not because I'm trying to act like a know-it-all or prove how smart I am, but because I actually want to know! It’s also pretty interesting that Kaspersky, which I've heard nothing but glowing praise for, didn't even make the list... maybe it's just some sort of imperialist propaganda, haha, just kidding. But really, us regular folks (the little guys) rely on these ratings, and when you "experts" can't even agree among yourselves, it just leaves us feeling more confused than ever!
Peace!😕

Like I mentioned at the very start,

it honestly doesn't matter which antivirus you end up using (at least regarding the commercial versions, which you can easily grab for free anyway). The detection accuracy for known threats within a massive database—say, a zip file containing some 10,000 viruses—stays right around 99.5% to 99.8%, and they all hit nearly 100% when it comes to catching brand-new threats...

Joseph Davis5

Look, my license expired too, so I decided to give McAfee Total Protection a shot.

It couldn't pass a single test. Viruses didn't just settle on my hard drive—one actually tried to execute, and it only stopped because I manually killed it.
Scanning is pathetic—painfully slow and seemingly endless.
I honestly thought it scanned bit by bit... man, was I wrong. It didn't even recognize a single header from the virus I intentionally ran just to test it.

It failed fast. Norton ended up finding three headers that McAfee totally missed, which were already sitting on my hard drive.

The reviews are garbage. It's a rule: if you pay enough, you get a "five-star rating"—and that's true all over the US. 🙄

So, just a heads up, my Kaspersky passed all the EICAR tests with flying colors