![antivirus2[2].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/DUlth87.jpg "antivirus2[2].jpg")
1) I upgraded to the awful shit called windows 10 because it's just inevitable in the long run
2) w10 forces an antivirus to be running all the time, if not a custom one then it runs windows defender
3) therefore, if I have to run a stupid antivirus anyway, I might as well run something worth running instead of the objectively shit defender
>comodo
I'm impressed with its UI and features, but it nannies too much (even complaining about processes trying to start another process as if that's a red flag) and has a pretty bad performance hit on file reading
>avast
Ad popups, pleb av #1 and therefore huge attack surface increase because people will be writing exploits against avast the most, feels very thumbed down and overly noob-friendly
>qihoo 360
Oddly (given it's chink stuff) good UI and features but causes bugs and warnings in my system like my firewall not starting and errors in event logs
>bitdefender
Simplicity is nice but having no configuration at all is overdoing it, also window glitches (showing up in alt-tab without being opened and such)
>avira
Not bad but slow as fucking fuck and loves to run unstoppable scans every time it runs into the same false positive like a retard, also occasional ads
>nod32
The holy grail of AVs but scouring shady russian blogs for an hour every month to find new fucking keys got on my nerves
What to try next? Programs that are barely known or used like g-data, kingston av, etc etc are an automatic no for obvious quality reasons. What matters is that it doesn't nanny too much (I'd just use clam sentinel if it wasn't so overactive with the scanning) and that if it finds something suspicious, it asks me what I want instead of just deleting the file and breaking my work. Also performance counts: I don't like it slowing down my git repo manager every time I open it and such even after an initial scan showed everything's clean.
F-Secure
![Nd3uY6[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/5TXyKN9.png "Nd3uY6[1].png")
>>52480835
Sites with this kind of homepage should burn in hell
Malwarebytes, although I'd probably have in conjunction with something else.
uBlock Origin + Brain, use MBAM to scan every month or so.
>>52480987
>>52480973
That's what I do already. You also both missed the point I explained in 1/2/3. MBAM isn't a realtime scanner so windows keeps running defender, which I wanna replace with something at least worth running.
>>52480973
>>52480987
literal retards who didnt read op
he needs something windows will consider an av
>>52481016
cuck
>>52481009
Then turn off Windows Defender.
>Open up Local Group Policy Editor
>Navigate to "Computer Configuration/Administrative Templates/Windows Components/Windows Defender"
>Double click on "Turn off Windows Defender" and set it to "Enabled"
>>52481016
Since they're not recommending any antivirus, I'd say they pretty much implied to leave defender on
just suck it up and pay the slavbros at eset for nod32
What's wrong with Windows Defender? You can disable it sending samples and then it works well enough and doesn't nag you constantly like Avast and the other free ones do. Use that + common sense and maybe the free version of Mbam and you should be safe.
If you want to pay, then I guess Malwarebytes or Kaspersky are the best ones.
>>52481105
>not buying keys from shady key seller websites
>>52481112
>>52481083
Literally look up the av-comparison or whatever results; defender is objectively shit so if you have to run something anyway you'll wanna run anything but that.
>>52481072
I can't decide whether to not run anything at all since I've never needed it in years or if I wanna run something anyway because you never know you need it until it's too late (like a smoke detector)
>>52481207
You run common sense and the free version of mbam. Defender is able to pick up most browser exploits and common shit like that so you have nothing to worry about unless you visit a whole lot of shady websites.
If you want to run something else then I guess go with the best rated one on av comparison charts, last time I checked it out that was avira but that one will send a lot of popups (but still not as many as Avast or the other free ones).
>>52481254
Well if you really have to run something I don't know what to recommend to you since everything is basically the same trash.
>>52481288
Yeah that's unfortunately true. It's like that with everything these days, and the ones that are actually better are hardly known (I had to look in tiny corners to find some of the awesome stuff I've switched to lately, like my cellphone provider and domain name registrar)
>>52480246
>not waiting until best buy's boxing week sale and buying eset nod32 for $20 every year
But defender rates the best in all av tests, but that alt tab \ window issue espes?cially when gaming is fucked
>>52481619
Bitdefender =/= defender.
>>52481476
>spending money on annual licenses
oy vey
>>52481476
Excuse me for not being familiar with some american website and its customer-fishing promotions
>>52481698
that's what best buy gift cards are for
it depends on what you want, if you are stuck in Windows 10 hell and want to catch everything websites throw at you and alot of false positives go for BitDefender. If you want something that collects no info go for something made by eScan, they have a free scanner called antivirus toolkit.
I told my windoze friend that I'm so sick of the AV struggle, wrestling between longer startup times or battling malware, that I gave up and just used Linux. Lack of malware is one of the best things going for it.
>>52480246
Man what a cool robot toy, I'd love to have one
>>52480246
IMO you should run either Emsisoft or F-secure. Or just switch to Linux.
>>52485309
To follow up on F-secure:
Rated on best places to work in Finland 2003 and 2006.
Only anti-virus maker to mark Sony rootkit as a virus before the media caught on.
Has publicly stated they will 'out' any software backdoors and mark them as malware no matter which government created them.
>>52480246
Just use defender, and get yourself malwarebytes. Pay the $20 fee for pro, and that's the end of that. Very little performance hit, you're protected, and it'll get rid of anything that somehow makes it through.
>>52485620
Oh, and use chrome with adblock, wot (web of trust, to keep you away from shady sites), and something like ghostry. You're good to go from then on. Unless you, yourself, purposefully install the virus/malware, you're good to go.
>>52485560
Sounds like a nice company. Never tried F-Secure though. Don't think I will, but I'll definitely keep it in mind if I ever need it
>>52480246
IIRC IOBit has some pretty sweet AV software, look into it.
>>52480246
you are on /g/ you are a smart person you don't need an antivirus you are capable enough to disable netbios and sandbox any shady shit
>>52483181
>false positives: the software
>>52480246
NANO Antivirus
>>52480246
G-data is becoming fairly well known, but I still don't trust chink AV.
Nano might be worth trying. ZoneAlarm is back to being fairly good (I think it's still a modified version of Kaspersky's engine though, not sure) - although the main point their is the application and OS firewall.
I'm wondering a bit about what you're looking for though, as:
>even complaining about processes trying to start another process as if that's a red flag
is not AV, it's application control and firewall. I should also mention that all of this can be configured in just about ever suite.
For pure anit-malware Malwarebytes, Nano, and GMER should get the job done.
