8 replies to this topic

[Vinton]

I'm looking to buy the paid version. What the difference and is it worth the $$$
Thanks

[lordpake]

Difference is background protection and automatic updates. Plus you support further development


Is it worth it, I guess that depends on the computer and its users where you intend to install MBAM. High risk surfers with little regards to what they do and where, yeah I'd say it's worth it

[exile360]

You also get to schedule automatic system scans with the paid version.

[Electrobrandino]

I concur with the above comments

Although it is not at all essential to purchase this software, it helps those who develop it and strive so hard to keep up safe

[whatmeworry?]

MrOreo, on Feb 25 2009, 11:37 AM, said:

So even if I don't need the auto-updates or schedules, I'd still buy the full version.

Even if you don't feel you need to support the company or arrange for auto-updates or schedules, I'd still advise you to buy the full version, since it includes real-time protection. As I understand it, this blocks malware from even getting started on your computer. Certainly it's far preferable to stop malware before it starts rather than having to deal with it after it's already done damage.

[CharlesT]

I probably did not have to purchase the product either , could have gotten by with the free version but like some of the earlier posts to this thread I believe in supporting the product I use and its not that all expensive (if you stop and think about it ) for what it does. I happy with this product been using it for about 3 months now just last week found the forum,Keep up the good work I think you have a excellent program here.

[Raj]

I saw someone mentioned PRO version, is this a paid version? I checked my version, it has no PRO. Checked MalwareByte's website, there was no mention of PRO as well.

When you mention real-time protection, is this similar to Symantec's Auto-Protect?

Lastly, does the MBAM conflict with Symantec Client Security? I seems to think it is as it seems to behave like Spyware Doctor 5 - 6.x which crashes Symantec Auto-Protect processes eventhough this problem was reported way back in 2007. (Basically I want top notch malware tool to sit side by side with Symantec Client Security or Symantec Antivirus without crashing it).

[MysteryFCM]

Raj, on Feb 25 2009, 07:26 PM, said:

I saw someone mentioned PRO version, is this a paid version? I checked my version, it has no PRO. Checked MalwareByte's website, there was no mention of PRO as well.

There is no "Pro" version, just free and paid (the paid isn't called "Pro"). The name is the same regardless of whether you pay for the additional features or not.

Raj, on Feb 25 2009, 07:26 PM, said:

When you mention real-time protection, is this similar to Symantec's Auto-Protect?

Yep, realtime - prevents malware getting into the system to begin with.

Raj, on Feb 25 2009, 07:26 PM, said:

Lastly, does the MBAM conflict with Symantec Client Security? I seems to think it is as it seems to behave like Spyware Doctor 5 - 6.x which crashes Symantec Auto-Protect processes eventhough this problem was reported way back in 2007. (Basically I want top notch malware tool to sit side by side with Symantec Client Security or Symantec Antivirus without crashing it).

I've not heard of it conflicting with Symantec's products, but no two systems are the same, so it's a very difficult question to give a 100% accurate answer to. In saying this, if you do notice conflicts, mention it to to the developers (e.g. by posting it in these forums), and the developers will do their utmost to correct the conflicts.

[Raj]

Thanks MysteryFCM.

PC Tools (Spyware Doctor) consistently avoid the issue of conflict with SAV by saying it is a good practice not to have two antivirus residing on same PC. But I also consistently said SAV is antivirus and Spyware Doctor is malware tool so they are different product altogether and thus should be developed as such! But getting no where.
I hope this does not apply to MBAM. However my gut feel is that MBAM 1.3.4 does in fact showing sign of conflict. I shall report this in another thread after I have sorted out the google re-direction problem I had on my notebook.