Best . . . ? Best for what environment is my first need-to-know question? It is, I think, axiomatic that one does not employ an AV prog, one employs an AV strategy, a part of which is the AV prog. I'm going to assume (because you had to ask) that you are not in a complex business/server environment - which would be managed by your competent IT gal who long since resolved this question. In a home computing environment, I have never suffered an infected machine, although I have suffered attacks (2-3 a year), which were intercepted by my AV prog running in the bkg. I have always used any of the free progs available over the years. In the first place, NO prog is bulletproof. Does an $80 prog (Kaspersky) do better job than Avast (free)? I have no idea, notwithstanding the hype. I use Avast (have for many years) and it has NEVER let a "virus" through its firewall. That does not mean it can't happen: it just has not yet happened - and may never happen. Secondly, I am not terribly concerned about malware threats because I employ a strategy that minimizes (not prevents) the occasion for attacks: progs (ZoneAlarm, Soybot, WinPatrol, SpywareBlaster, Avast, A-Squared Free, e.g.); never open untrusted attachments; do not surf untrusted sites; DL progs from unfamiliar sites and run things like Torrents in an isolated environment where they are scanned; etc., etc. I used to use AVG and had a minor convenience issue with it that I do not recall; regardless, it served me well. I like Avast because it updates daily automatically which unburdens me. Whether an AV prog auto or manually updates is a matter of discipline, regardless: updates are available daily. Although serious hackers may stumble upon your machine (and overcome the most sophisticated AV progs/firewalls) the odds of that happening to the average user is nil. In my experience, the "best" of anything is a myth heaped upon an unsuspecting public, in the least by Mercedes salesmen, in the worst by forum computer "experts" armed with the latest review by CNET. You, of course, ALWAYS have current image backups available so I will not elaborate on that necessity. Avast and AVG are two widely used free progs that seem to work satisfactorily for many users. Are they the best: for me yes! For you? What kind of a car do you drive? Monk
well there are many good AV-products, but there is no clear winner in everything - where one does perform the best, in other performs worse, and vice-versa. There are several good products out there. The products that you need to pay for (except 30 days trial) are for example Kaspersky AV, Eset NOD Antivirus or Norton AV Gaming Edition (yep, I don't believed myself - hated Norton for years, but did some testing lately and it worked pretty well, low on resources etc.) The free products - AVG, Avira.... don't recommend Avast - simply because it lets too much crap inside. Some have their advantages in the recognition rate of new viruses, some have their advantages in the low-resources footprint, some - in the full scanning time. Read the reviews around the net - make your choice that suits you the best.
Free Progs I generally avoid programs-for-a-fee and prefer to donate to open source efforts or obtain a vendor's free offering. If you examine the test results at Matousec.com (link in my post #4, above) you will note that FREE suites by Comodo, PCTools, and OA, are rated better than Kaspersky, e.g. Are they better? As a matter of fact, I do not know: I do not test AV progs/suites. How does an individual decide? It is a matter of preferences, taking into consideration the gamut between the extremes of the mundane (does the prog offer a Dungeons and Dragons skin) to the sublime (does the prog block every attempt by xxx.ro to invade my space). I now use Comodo suite for convenience; used to rely on ZA and Avast - and was never violated. By the way, at Anti Malware Test Lab, Kaspersky and Avast are rated the same! Bottom line: to each their own aided by a little guidance from different folks who test AV progs. Are they correct in their assessments? Well, they are better than we who are, at best, Jacks and Jills of all trades. Monk
one word reply "clamav" its FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE! and beats others as good as the paid ones. :-D free as in free beer; and not free lunch.
With AVG, it has the free version which does actually, to my suprise, unbelievably well! It caught out a few trojans instantly, its lightweight and easy UI!
Hi, Well i have tested and used almost every kinda antivirus.I would always recommend Quick heal as best one in world.Use it and u find the difference. Hats offf for Quick heal
Might I suggest Comodo internet security. It's a firewall and anti-virus program in one. the two great things about it are it's free and you can seriously adjust the setting for more security. I run it full time in "paranoid" mode(seriously it has that). Now in paranoid mode pretty much everything is locked from running without explicit permission from the user. The first time you try to run even something like notepad after you enter paranoid mode a box pops up asking for permission. And of course you can give programs permanent permission or allow them just once. The only negative(which I admit I do bring on myself by choosing such a strict mode) is that for about a week or so after installation is it's a real pain in the @ss till it learns your habits. Of course this can be lessened quite a bit by choosing a less restrictive setting. However running it this strict and using Spyware doctor has allowed me to surf the net for quite some time without regard to which sites I visit or programs I download(it scans as they download) and run. And I surf and download a LOT(some weeks I install over 50 programs to try out)
There is no 'best' or 'worst' AV program. All of thems have strengths and weaknesses. I'm using Avast antivirus and i'm satisfied.