said by simmery :

I don't think it's pure FUD. I would say it's over-reaching. Naturally, he has a stake in selling Symantec products, and I will give him the benefit of the doubt regarding his sincere belief in the superiority of his product (or perhaps similar commercial products).

I think you can probably meet or exceed the level of protection a commercial suite offers by frankensteining your own free collection, but you have to be knowledgeable about each product's limitations, compatibility with other products, quality of its update procedures, and so on. Some people enjoy keeping up with all this; some don't.

Commercial suites are invasive and do measurably slow down you computer, but a lot of this can be attributed to weak/old hardware and OEM crudware/bad configurations. I have not been bothered by slowdown with any suite I've used on the computers I build and maintain myself.

Right now, I'm quite happy using NIS 2009 and have no interest in chasing around after free applications. I do not put my faith in NIS 2009. I merely hope it will protect me if I make a mistake. Meanwhile, I try to be careful about what I click on and keep recent disk images on an external hard drive.

said by La Luna :

There's been more than one time that a "paid" AV has screwed up.

I think the clarification is that the regular user at home would not be protected properly with a free product.

said by lhamp :

I think you replied to the wrong person.

said by lhamp :

Smart computing will win every time.

said by lhamp :

And I disagree with your statement. Although it's true that the landscape is evolving incredible fast, it's still not an excuse to not do Smart Computing.

said by Smokey Bear :

I have to disagree, today such is not valid anymore. Thread landscape evolve(d) incredible fast, smart computing and a simple AV is not enough (anymore) for adequate protection.

said by Hangetsu :

... the regular user at home would not be protected properly with a free product.

... But for the regular user who just knows how to turn the PC on, hits the web on their browser (IE, since they'd have no idea about getting another one, much less that there IS another one!), opens emails with the web-based birthday cards, etc., more layers of protection that is as EASY to use as it is effective is important.

The free products don't offer that in a one-stop offering. As was mentioned above, you could roll your own with free products, but again that regular user isn't going to have a clue - And in fact, would be more likely to download a copy of AntiVirus 2009 and infect their PC in that process.

said by EGeezer :

I agree with the practice of setting up a security implementation that's consistent with the user's environment, practices and abilities. However, as you read in my previous post, the point I responded to and disagree with is the article writer's assertion that free products can't do the job for a home(or any other) user.

I've provided many non-technical users with a list of complementary and free self-updating products that cost the user nothing and are easy to install. I combine that with education on basic good practices (IMO the most important single non-default layer) and a list of settings for the OS and browser. Those users have an effective multi-layered technical solution and a set of rules that have through time and experience shown to be very effective for them.

Also, I always recommend at least an El Cheapo router, even if there's only one PC. It does wonders eliminating all the internet noise and scary "You are being attacked" messages issued from PC based security suites and PC based firewalls. We often see the results of these messages when distressed users post here asserting that they are being targeted by hackers or the government when in fact it's nothing more than the usual internet noise or a lagging connection.

I note with a smile that Googling on "El Cheapo Router" returns Link Logger 's world-famous topic at the top of the list.

said by Hangetsu :

Most users don't necessarily have access to best practices unfortunately, nor know where to get them online. For those that do, how do you tell someone to download X, Y, and Z when plenty of other people say the best way to avoid viruses is to not download things from the web?

said by Hangetsu :

But back to the original topic, I don't think the statement was complete FUD, just VERY biased - There is a large segment of the population who is not tech-savvy and going the free route would be more difficult and risky (unless they had the products installed by someone who knew how to configure them).

said by Smokey Bear :

Current threats demand sophisticated AV security products to defend yourself in an acceptable way, and it is true that free antivirus software isn’t able to keep up with full-price suites.

said by urbanriot :

We use ClamAV on our corporate proxies and intermediary mail gateways, and it doesn't catch nearly as much as our corporate Symantec products catch. Of course, that's on the corporate end of the spectrum and the engines are considerably more comprehensive than the home offerings.

I have no experience with Avira. I'll give it a shot... AVG is pants though.

said by Somnambul33t :

Avira uses the most advanced and proven malware engine on the planet and has a free version that doesnt really do Spyware.

said by bobince :


Mind you, if you replace the words 'free antivirus' with 'paid-for antivirus', it's still true. Security is not a product in a box!

said by pandora :

On 3 occasions recently, I've been to friends PC's who had NIS 2009 and after installing superantispyware (free edition) a lot of stuff was found.

NIS is a great product, and I'll continue to use it, but so are products like AVAST, AVG and Superantispyware.

said by mod_wastrel :

Norton used to be good--tops, even; then Symantec bought 'em--the Symantec curse**.