Best anti-virus for Windows 7 Ultimate

[Drd]

Hello I've just installed Windows 7 Ultimate on my PC. Can you tell me what would be the best anti-virus, anti-malware programs to  use? I use the internet occasion and also exchange files a lot through flash drives with other students at my universities and these tend to have all sorts of thing on them.
  I've  used AVG with my XP and have been happy with that.  The person who sold me the Windows 7 Ultimate recommends Kaspersky. Is there such a thing as a best program for a particular program? What do you advise?

Thanks for your help.

Dr. D.

[Salmon Trout]

There are plenty of different antivirus solutions. I don't think there is a "best" one. I use Windows 7 Professional and I use Microsoft Security Essentials which is free (as long as you can pass WGA! I can.). I think the question is "Why use anything else?". There are various considerations: memory/cpu footprint, cost, completeness of threat coverage, rapidity of response to new threats, and so on. Personally I don't think there is an awful lot to choose between the major offerings so after trying Anrivir and AVG free versions I went for MSE. I expect other people will disagree with me however. This topic tends to attract partisan views.

[Drd]

I don't know why but I find it hard to really see Microsoft Security as reliable. Maybe because IE has been the prime source of intruders in the first place! Anyone else have any other suggestions? I've going between Kaspersky and AVG.

Dr. D.

[Salmon Trout]

I don't know why but I find it hard to really see Microsoft Security as reliable. Maybe because IE has been the prime source of intruders in the first place! Anyone else have any other suggestions? I've going between Kaspersky and AVG.

That doesn't make sense.  IE is not the "source" of intruders. Anyhow I don't think Microsoft Security Essentials has anything to do with Internet Explorer. Or careless computer users. In October 2009, AV-Test.org conducted a series of trials on MSE and it detected and caught 98.44 percent of 545,034 computer viruses, computer worms and software Trojan horses as well as 90.95 percent of 14,222 spyware and adware samples. It also detected and eliminated all 25 tested rootkits and generated no false-positives at all. On 7 January 2010, Microsoft Security Essentials won the PC Advisor's Best Free Software award. Later, in December 2010, AV-Comparatives.org awarded Microsoft Security Essentials v1.0 the Bronze award for proactive detection of 55% of new/unknown malware, the Silver award for low false-positives (six) and the Bronze award for overall performance.

So it's an OK antivirus option. To choose between Kapersky and AVG you may as well toss a coin. I've tried both. They work. End of story.

[soybean]

I've been using avast! Free Antivirus with my Windows 7 Ultimate system for 6 months or so. I couldn't be more pleased with it.

[patio]

+ + 1 for MSE...

[mar.and65]

All depends on what you do with your computer;

If you just browse internet (most of times only well know sites like fb, gmail, ect ..) and you don't install unknown software to test them out. You are pretty secure with Microsoft's Security Essentials and Windows Defender.

And if you need to more control of your PC like firewall, application control, parent control or you are a use who browser suspicious web sites, installs everything you get you must go for a Internet Security suite which probably be Kaspersky.

For a Beginner or intermediate user of internet and computer MSE + Defender + All windows updates will do..

What ever you use, need to update regular and don't forget about OS updates too.
For you I would suggest MSE and remember to scan flash drives manually..

[pugboy]

I would opt for Avast! Free. It gives you all the shields you need PLUS it also has Sandboxing, which can seriously save your *censored*. MSE missed over 40% of all Trojans in languages other than English. I don't think there is a law that hackers have to speak English. Kaspersky - the 2012 version, I believe, is very good, but not better than Avast! - which is free and will fully support you Exchange-based email accounts as well from malware.

You can get it here - http://download.cnet.com/Avast-Free-Antivirus/3000-2239_4-10019223.html?tag=rb_content;main

Hello I've just installed Windows 7 Ultimate on my PC. Can you tell me what would be the best anti-virus, anti-malware programs to  use? I use the internet occasion and also exchange files a lot through flash drives with other students at my universities and these tend to have all sorts of thing on them.
  I've  used AVG with my XP and have been happy with that.  The person who sold me the Windows 7 Ultimate recommends Kaspersky. Is there such a thing as a best program for a particular program? What do you advise?

Thanks for your help.

Dr. D.

[Allan]

The current version of Kaspersky Anti Virus is 2011.

[quaxo]

*censored*, Allan beat me to it. 2012 hasn't been released yet.

Kaspersky - the 2012 version, I believe, is very good, but not better than Avast!

Matter of opinion.

[pugboy]

@Sage - give the new Avast! Free version 6 a go. It destroys MSE, which just got downgraded because of its lack of non-English support. Here is a link to it on download.com - http://download.cnet.com/Avast-Free-Antivirus/3000-2239_4-10019223.html?tag=rb_content;main

+ + 1 for MSE...

[pugboy]

Relax Brother, that is why I said latest version. You know how the names keep changing - plus they have AV, IS, etc. Also, many companies release the next year's version name over 6 months before - like a car.

*censored*, Allan beat me to it. 2012 hasn't been released yet.

Matter of opinion.'

[Allan]

@Sage - give the new Avast! Free version 6 a go. It destroys MSE, which just got downgraded because of its lack of non-English support. Here is a link to it on download.com - http://download.cnet.com/Avast-Free-Antivirus/3000-2239_4-10019223.html?tag=rb_content;main

No need to repeat yourself. You stated your opinion above. Stating it twice doesn't make it more or less valid.

Relax Brother, that is why I said latest version. You know how the names keep changing - plus they have AV, IS, etc. Also, many companies release the next year's version name over 6 months before - like a car.

Don't be defensive. Nobody is attacking you.

[quaxo]

@Sage - give the new Avast! Free version 6 a go. It destroys MSE, which just got downgraded because of its lack of non-English support. Here is a link to it on download.com - http://download.cnet.com/Avast-Free-Antivirus/3000-2239_4-10019223.html?tag=rb_content;main

Downgraded by who? You? Anyone who matters?

Relax Brother, that is why I said latest version. You know how the names keep changing - plus they have AV, IS, etc. Also, many companies release the next year's version name over 6 months before - like a car.

What do name changes have to do with anything? Kaspersky hasn't changed it's name in years and neither has Avast, so what are you talking about? And what does any of that have to do with the fact that there is no Kaspersky 2012 yet. You didn't say "the latest version", you said "2012". The latest version is Version 2011 (11.0.2.556). I know, I've used Kaspersky for years and I also sell it.

[pugboy]

You sell Kapersky, and you don't know MSE was downgraded? That is said. Check www.av-comparatives.org and www.av-test.org - Avast! is rated no. 1 for malware. Kaspersky has been back near the top the last 2 years.

Downgraded by who? You? Anyone who matters?

What do name changes have to do with anything? Kaspersky hasn't changed it's name in years and neither has Avast, so what are you talking about? And what does any of that have to do with the fact that there is no Kaspersky 2012 yet. You didn't say "the latest version", you said "2012". The latest version is Version 2011 (11.0.2.556). I know, I've used Kaspersky for years and I also sell it.

[Salmon Trout]

The lack of non-English support in MSE may be a problem for monoglot speakers of the languages it doesn't support, but I don't see how that makes it a less effective AV tool. It does the job, it's free. What is it with software app and OS fanbois? 

[pugboy]

You can also read this:
Free vs. Fee: Free and Paid Antivirus Programs Compared                   Can free antivirus software protect you? Or is it worth paying   for a full-blown A/V app? We look at the benefits--and pitfalls--of free   and paid antivirus products.                                                  By Nick Mediati, PCWorld                         Nov 29, 2010 9:00 pm        
Depending   on whom you ask, paying for antivirus software is either a good   investment or a total ripoff.  In reality, neither viewpoint is   accurate. You can find plenty of good reasons to choose a paid antivirus   product, and plenty of good reasons to go with a freebie.
We teamed up with security testing company AV-Test,   to find out what you get--or don't get--with free antivirus, and when   it makes sense to subscribe annually to a fee-based program.
   Antivirus, Deconstructed        Four basic levels of antivirus products exist: free, paid   antivirus, suites, and "premium" suites. As you move up the ladder from   free antivirus to premium suites, you typically get more features, such   as identity theft protection, firewalls, parental controls, and system   performance tools.
Free antivirus software usually provides a bare minimum level of   protection. It will scan for malware, and often can perform automatic   scans, too. Some free apps may have additional protection tools such as a   browser add-on that checks for bad links--and Comodo's free Internet Security Premium   has a firewall. But such features are usually limited to paid antivirus   products. Some free apps offer behavioral malware detection, which   finds malware based on how it acts on your PC--a good way of detecting   brand-new malware outbreaks. (Behavioral detection is standard on paid   products.)
Paid antivirus straddles a middle ground between the basic freebies   and the feature-packed security suites: They typically offer more   comprehensive security tools (such as parental controls  and identity   theft protection) and more flexibility than a free antivirus package,   but they have fewer additional features than suites, which are intended   to be one-stop security shops.
One of the biggest drawbacks to going with a free product is the   lack of technical support.  While most companies offer some sort of   phone support for paying customers, free antivirus users usually must   fend for themselves. Avast does offer e-mail support for its free   customers; most others provide only a knowledge base or forum where   users can go for help.
Another tradeoff is that free antivirus products often have some sort of advertisement for the company's paid product. Avast Free Antivirus has an upgrade link in the upper-right corner of the main window, and Avira AntiVir Personal will display an ad for Avira's paid antivirus software.
How about malware signature updates? The security software   companies I spoke to tell me that they treat their free and paid   products the same as far as signature updates are concerned, although   there may be some under-the-hood differences between their free and paid   products (as is the case with Panda's software, for example). And one   company, Avast, says that its free product is intended for average   users, and that its paid antivirus is for more advanced users.
On the other hand, free products do give you some flexibility. You   can augment a free tool's basic security with countless security   utilities. For instance, you can start with Avast Free Antivirus, add   PCTools's Threatfire Free (which does a good job at bolstering malware detection), toss in one of the many firewalls available   and a link-scanning utility to create your own custom security setup.   This approach does require you to do your homework, though, and may be   more complicated in the long run.
   Interface        User interfaces are typically as good (or as bad) in free products   as they are in their paid counterparts. Avira and Avast, for example,   use the same basic interface for their free and paid versions; they just   include or leave out certain features and toggles as needed. Panda Cloud Antivirus (a freebie) is not a scaled-down version of the paid Panda Antivirus Pro, but rather a completely different product with a different interface and different internals.
   Detection        Most of the free products we tested put up identical or nearly   identical malware detection scores to the paid varietals put out by the   same company. But we did see some subtle differences. One notable   example is Panda Cloud Antivirus: The free Cloud Antivirus and Panda's   for-pay Antivirus Pro 2011 performed about the same on the   signature-based malware detection tests, but Antivirus Pro did a better   job in "real world" malware detection tests that help determine how well   a product can block brand-new threats.
(Note: Panda recently released version 1.3 of   Panda Cloud Antivirus. The company says that version 1.3 should improve   its detection of new malware, but the new release didn't come in time   for us to test for our roundup. Check back here for future updates.)
We found that, on the whole, paid antivirus products did a slightly   better job at detecting malware than their freebie counterparts. In   traditional signature-based detection tests, paid antivirus software   that we tested found 96.2 percent of the malware samples overall. By   comparison, free products' scores were ever-so-slightly worse, detecting   95.7 percent of samples.
In real-world detection tests, free products missed 15.2 percent of   samples, while paid products missed 10.2 percent of samples. When it   came time to remove malware infections, again, the results were close,   but paid antivirus software held a slight advantage.
All the products we tested--both paid and free--detected all the   test infections we threw their way, but paid products did a slightly   better job overall at removing the active components of an infection,   scoring a 74 percent success rate on average. The same held true when we   tested how well the products removed all active and inactive components   of an infection: Paid products achieved a 44 percent removal rate in   this test, while free products averaged a full removal rate of 34   percent
   Speed        Although you lose some effectiveness against malware with free   antivirus, you do gain a little speed. The free products we looked at   were faster on average than the paid products in 9 of the 12 speed tests   we take into account. Again, the difference was slight--the largest   speed difference was around 10 percent. Both free and paid antivirus   increased system startup times: A test PC with no antivirus software   installed booted up in 40.1 seconds on average. With free antivirus   installed, the test system started up in 44.1 seconds on average; and   with paid antivirus installed, startup times increased to 46 seconds.   It's hard to pin down the exact reason for this difference, but again,   the difference is slight enough that it's basically statistically   insignificant.
Scan speeds, however, are a mixed bag. In our on-demand scan tests,   paid antivirus programs edged out the freebies, scanning 4.5GB worth of   files in an average of 2 minutes, 25 seconds. Free products, by   comparison, completed the same test in an average of 2 minutes, 44   seconds.
Free and paid products were nearly neck and neck in the on-access   scan tests, which show how quickly the software can scan files for   malware when they're opened or saved to disk. Using the same 4.5GB of   files, free products completed the on-access scan test in an average   time of 4 minutes, 50 seconds. Their paid counterparts completed the   test 8 seconds later.

   Top Picks        Given how close the two classes of products are in terms of speed   and effectiveness, the two biggest factors are features and customer   support. With some exceptions, you get better customer support and more   comprehensive security features with a paid product, but if you're   willing to forgo these, it's definitely worth considering going free.
Which free and paid antivirus products are best for you?
Avast Free Antivirus comes out tops among free products thanks to its all-around strong malware-detection scores, good design, and low system drag. Avira AntiVir Personal takes second place: It put up solid malware-detection scores, but its interface is kludgy.
Norton Antivirus   leads the paid-software pack owing to its excellent malware detection,   very good interface design, and comprehensive feature set that includes   file-reputation analysis, a cloud-based scanner (which can help identify   new malware more quickly), and system performance analysis tools. BitDefender Antivirus Pro 2011   is a close second thanks to strong malware detection; but slow scan   speeds and some interface issues prevented it from taking first.
Check out our lists of the top five free and top five paid antivirus products. Our summary reviews of the top two free and paid antivirus programs are below.

Top Free Antivirus: Avast
Avast Free Antivirus couples good all-around malware detection with   a speedy, well-designed package. We liked its easy installation   process, smooth interface design, and minimal impact on system   performance.
In traditional signature-based malware tests, Avast Free Antivirus   detected 94.8 percent of samples, which is neither particularly good nor   bad. It also did a decent, though not outstanding, job at detecting   malware in our real-world malware detection tests: It completely blocked   76 percent of attacks (which is right about average), and partially   blocked 4 percent of attacks.
But on the plus side, Avast Free Antivirus didn't falsely identify a   single "safe" file as a piece of malware, the only free product we   looked at that achieved this. Avast Free Antivirus also did a good job   at disinfecting a PC; it removed all active components of malware   infections 80 percent of the time, which set the pace among the free   products we looked at.
Scan speeds are also very good. Its on-demand scan speed of 90   seconds was a close second to Avira AntiVir Personal, which completed   the test in 87 seconds. And Avast Free Antivirus completed the on-access   scan speed tests in 3 minutes, 40 seconds, tops among the products we   tested.

Top Paid Antivirus: Norton Antivirus 2011
Norton Antivirus 2011 ($40 for a one-year, single-PC license as of   10/26/2010) leads the pack of 2011 paid antivirus products. It does a   very good job at detecting and removing malware, and has a smooth   interface, although its speed is decidedly average.
Installing Norton Antivirus 2011 is a breeze: The well-designed   installer only requires you to click through two screens before it   begins installing. Norton Antivirus has a smooth, polished interface:   The main screen shows on-off toggles for its various protection   features, as well as a map showing the global cybercrime activity over   the last 24 hours.
When it came to malware detection and removal, Norton Antivirus put   out strong all-around scores. Norton Antivirus detected 98.7 percent of   malware samples using traditional signature-based malware detection.   This is an above average score, but it trails Panda Antivirus Pro 2011,   which detected 99.8 percent of samples.
Norton also put up excellent scores in the blocking of real-world   malware attacks:  Norton completely blocked 24 of the 25 samples we   threw at it, but it did miss one sample completely. Norton also detected   all active infections in our tests; it removed the active components of   an infection 80 percent of the time, and was able to completely remove   the infections 60 percent of the time--both above-average scores.
Norton put up good scores in our speed testing, but not top-notch   results. It completed an on-access scan of 4.5GB of files in 4 minutes,   32 seconds. This puts it ahead of the average of 4 minutes, 59 seconds,   but but it behind the top-performing product, which completed this test   in 3 minutes, 35 seconds. Its on-demand scan speed of 2 minutes, one   second is also above average, but again, it trails the top performing   program by a good 30 seconds.

Downgraded by who? You? Anyone who matters?

What do name changes have to do with anything? Kaspersky hasn't changed it's name in years and neither has Avast, so what are you talking about? And what does any of that have to do with the fact that there is no Kaspersky 2012 yet. You didn't say "the latest version", you said "2012". The latest version is Version 2011 (11.0.2.556). I know, I've used Kaspersky for years and I also sell it.

[Salmon Trout]

Pugboy, what are you trying to prove with all this bold type and bulk copying and pasting of a magazine article by some guy?

[quaxo]

You sell Kapersky, and you don't know MSE was downgraded? That is said. Check www.av-comparatives.org and www.av-test.org - Avast! is rated no. 1 for malware. Kaspersky has been back near the top the last 2 years.

From the very website you linked:
Avast placed 14th overall for protection (3.5 out of 6)
Avast placed 20th overall for repair (2.5 out of 6)
The ONLY thing it took first place in was usability. (5.5 our of 6)

Check your sources' facts before you start citing them.

And your senseless copy and paste of some webpage still doesn't back up anything you said other than PCWorld giving it a good review in the line of FREE antivirus. I could just as easily dig up 10 good reviews for MSE or Kaspersky or anything else.

Look, unless you have some real facts to back up your claims, stop digging your hole. It's deep enough already.

[Salmon Trout]

stop digging your hole. It's deep enough already.

+1

[patio]

+ 2...

[2x3i5x]

did av-test.org test the MSE 2 yet?

I see their terrible protection rating for MSE 1. But MSE seem do well on my vista PC. No virus of concern found yet and I've double checked with trendmicro, bitdefender and f-secure's online scanners and they tell me MSE is doing its job.

I would imagine MSE wouldn't be crippled on a legal WGA-passed win 7. 

[patio]

av test org will never admit an MS product does it's job...
It goes against their very nature...

[pugboy]

I tried MSE 2, and it is much better than v1. Other than CNET, PC MAG, etc., I don't think any of the AV-testers (companies) have hard numbers on it. Avast! has a lot of features - much more than MSE, and it offers Sandboxing. This is a MAJOR advantage over any other FREE malware product, no matter what Humpty and Dumpty say down there. Then again, they think a program is written in English, when I said MSE failed to identify over 40% of viruses that were not written in English. Maybe they can get a job at SONY  - and YES, I own a PS3 and a 360, before anyone says something stupid(er).

did av-test.org test the MSE 2 yet?

I see their terrible protection rating for MSE 1. But MSE seem do well on my vista PC. No virus of concern found yet and I've double checked with trendmicro, bitdefender and f-secure's online scanners and they tell me MSE is doing its job.

I would imagine MSE wouldn't be crippled on a legal WGA-passed win 7. 

[Allan]

and YES, I own a PS3 and a 360, before anyone says something stupid(er).

You know, you're new here. Why don't you try to not antagonize everyone right off the bat? Also, PLEASE stop posting using "glow" effects - it's very difficult to read. Thank you.

[Salmon Trout]

Then again, they think a program is written in English, when I said MSE failed to identify over 40% of viruses that were not written in English.

Amazing. he writes that, yet bandies around the word "stupid"...

[quaxo]

This is a MAJOR advantage over any other FREE malware product, no matter what Humpty and Dumpty say down there.

First you were comparing Avast to Kaspersky (a paid AV program) and now you say over any other FREE malware product. So which is it?

Also, I doubt name calling and a poor attitude will be tolerated for long. No one here is insulting you, just questioning your opinion. If you can't handle someone questioning your opinion and responding to it like an adult, I suggest you try another forum.

[patio]

Then again, they think a program is written in English, when I said MSE failed to identify over 40% of viruses that were not written in English. Maybe they can get a job at SONY

I'd like to see some documentation for this off the wall claim...

[pugboy]

You right a-holes. It's my bad for assuming their were actual IT people here, and actually knew anything regarding a professional IT environment. Definitely a waste of my time. I will stick to the sites for the "Big Boys".

Now kiss my glowing *censored*!

[patio]

Warning issued...

Post priveledges restricted for now.

[Salmon Trout]

I'd like to see some documentation for this off the wall claim...

The fact that he doesn't seem to realise that viruses are written in programming or scripting languages, (C, C++, Visual Basic, Java, whatever) makes everything he has written look profoundly ridiculous. Well, it did anyway.

"Viruses written in English" [chuckle]

[quaxo]

The fact that he doesn't seem to realise that viruses are written in programming or scripting languages, (C, C++, Visual Basic, Java, whatever) makes everything he has written look profoundly ridiculous. Well, it did anyway.

"Viruses written in English" [chuckle]

Who needs antivirus then? I'll just teach my computer not to accept questionable gifts from foreigners. 

[Salmon Trout]

I'll just teach my computer not to accept questionable gifts from foreigners.

"I fear the Greeks even when they bring gifts." Virgil, 19 BC

[patio]

The fact that he doesn't seem to realise that viruses are written in programming or scripting languages, (C, C++, Visual Basic, Java, whatever) makes everything he has written look profoundly ridiculous. Well, it did anyway.

"Viruses written in English" [chuckle]

Possibly why he turned into a putz to get kicked....that shoe leater must not have been so tasty.