|
Yes, usually I would say the same... but the current marks of Microsoft AV in AV-Test look good...
Anyway, AVAST seems to be the one to choose from the free ones...
|
|
|
|
|
I'm happy with windows defender, it's enough and relax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem with Windows Defender is that it's a good anti-virus.
This may sound strange, but keep in mind that it's ONLY an anti-virus.
Got a hijacked browser extension changing your home page and underlining random links?
Sorry - That's Adware - "Resolved - Will Not Detect"
Got an illicit application that's sending a third party all your key pressed and passwords?
Sorry - That's a Trojan - "Resolved - Will Not Detect"
A program lurking on your PC that's happily encrypting all your files for a required payment?
Sorry - That's Ransomware - "Resolved - Will Not Detect"
Yes - Windows Defender is a good Anti Virus - But it's only an Anti-Virus to things that Microsoft specifically classifies AS viruses - Anything else will be specifically ignored.
I used to have a list of virustotal links that contained situations where most of the results were "Positive", but "Negative" to Windows Defender since it wasn't considered strictly a virus - Things like this [^] were alarmingly common. You know that wave of Steam viruses awhile back? All negative since they're 'technically' not viruses, but application hijackers (Positive to every other AV though). Here[^] is one of my submission links to one of them - Still marked as "No malware detected" 3 years later...
I submitted dozens of samples of known viruses to them (I was doing Malware research for awhile), and almost all of the submissions were "No malware detected", or marked as clean, or some such. NOD32, AVG, Kaspersky, and BitDefender all added the definitions within a week of submission - Windows Defender refused to add most of them due to its super-strict definition of "virus".
I currently use NOD32 and am very happy with it.
-= Reelix =-
modified 6-Apr-18 7:01am.
|
|
|
|
|
as a NOD32 user... I concur. I have been quite happy with the speed and performance.
So much so, I don't bother turning it off when I install trusted software!
|
|
|
|
|
One problem depends on the Browser's security.
The rest depend on not getting the "problem" "installed" in the first place; you're talking about situations where the machine is already infected.
An ounch of prevention is not the same as a "cure" (for an already infected machine).
Been using MS since XP; with notifications and updates / scans on demand.
Found others who got "prompted" forever after, once their subscriptions expired and they didn't have the rights to remove obsolete "expired" AV software. That's fun.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
Reelix wrote: I was doing Malware research for awhile
It seems you know what you are speaking about...
I'm using now bitdefender free... It looks nice by the numbers and I'm satisfied with it...
I've not been able to find it's specifications though... so not been able to compare it...
|
|
|
|
|
I've never used anything other than the Windows Defender that comes with Windows. I did try Norton and Mcfee for a short time. They did no better and gave me lots of problems, so I got rid of then after a couple of weeks. Windows Defender seems to do just fine and interefere with fewer things!
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Joan,
I use it daily for over 7,000 computers, servers and workstations. Natural replacement for a really obtrusive product (McAfee). Enough protection, transparent, highly integrated, quick.
Fairly satisfied with it so far.
We changed over to Microsfot Antivirus on 2014-2015.
Regards from Spain.-
|
|
|
|
|
50 years ago today, 2001: A Space Odyssey[^] opened.
Well, at least the part about newspads came true...
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer.
The End
|
|
|
|
|
That movie is two hours (almost three?) of my life I'll never get back 
With all the hype around it this was the most disappointing movie of my life.
0/10 would watch again or recommend to a friend.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: That movie is two hours (almost three?) of my life I'll never get back
You have to view it in context, it was one of the very earliest sf movies and is 50 years old back then we barely knew what a computer was and AI was firmly in the speculative arena.
Still I would not bother to watch it again, it can't compete with today's overblown SFX films which I enjoy.
Try watching A Clockwork Orange for a really surreal experience.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: Try watching A Clockwork Orange for a really surreal experience.
One of the few movies worth watching more than once.
Showed "A Clockwork Orange", "Easy Rider" and "Apocalypse Now" to my son before he went of to college. Not only showed what a movie could be, but lessons lessons lessons.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: "Easy Rider"
That one disappointed as well. Nothing happened.
W∴ Balboos wrote: "Apocalypse Now"
I LOVE THE SMELL OF NAPALM IN THE MORNING!
I've seen this movie three times and I've loved it every time.
Really one of my favorites! 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Easy Rider
Sander Rossel wrote: That one disappointed as well. Nothing happened.
It must be cultural - it was a short story, outsiders in a time and a place. Also, possibly the ultimate surprise ending of all time.
Waxing philosophical: what ever happens, anyway? Even in real life? Same sh*t repeated generation after generation. The accessories change - the story remains the same. And, even if were to change, what difference would it make?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos wrote: Waxing philosophical: what ever happens, anyway?
Super humans, aliens, and even gods fight intergalatic beings, if I am to believe other movies that I enjoy more than Easy Rider 
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've seen this movie three times and I've loved it every time.
Weird, that is one of the most boring movies I have ever sat through. I think it must be me as it was hailed as a great movie in its time.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes wrote: Try watching A Clockwork Orange for a really surreal experience.
You like some of the good old ultraviolence then?
Proves them wrong too![^] 
I liked other Kubrick works as well, like The Shining, Fullmetal Jacket and Barry Lyndon.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't think moloko was only milk!
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
The BEST Kubrick was Dr. Strangelove. Peter Sellers as Strangelove, the President, and a British officer named Mandrake facing off against General Jack D. Ripper? What could have a better ending than Slim Pickens riding an H-Bomb, buckin' bronc style to Doomsday? I ask you, what?
|
|
|
|
|
For me, the key to appreciating 2001: A Space Odyssey was to read Clarke's novel first and then see the movie. Large portions of the movie can be difficult to follow without the context the novel provides.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary R. Wheeler wrote: was to read Clarke's novel first
I had read the book a few times before seeing the film so I agree with you there. The same does not apply to todays SF films, even when there is a book preceding the film.
I look forward to Fahrenheit 451 and how they interpret that in film.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
I see that they are remaking this, but there was a nice 1966 film from this book.
|
|
|
|
|
Book was as boring as the movie, just took longer to complete. But to be honest I was never a fan of Arthur C Clarke to begin with. I also did not read it in my first language, so I had to do it with a reference dictionary, which probably didn't help.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
