15 replies to this topic

[A1comp]

Is it neccessary to have an Anti-Virus program, Security Suite Etc., in addition to Malwarebytes to fully protect my computer? Or will Malwarebytes do the job?

I have heard many different stories on this subject.

Thanks for any advice.

[yardbird]

yes you also need a Anti-Virus program! I believe AVIRA AV works well.....

[sys-eng]

Although you should have only one Anti-Virus program running at a time, Malwarebytes runs fine with Avast in real-time protection. I don't know about other AV programs.

[GT500]

sys-eng said:

Although you should have only one Anti-Virus program running at a time, Malwarebytes runs fine with Avast in real-time protection. I don't know about other AV programs.

Our software runs OK next to almost any anti-virus software. AntiVir is the anti-virus we always recommend though.

[A1comp]

GT500, on Mar 14 2009, 01:50 PM, said:

Our software runs OK next to almost any anti-virus software. AntiVir is the anti-virus we always recommend though.

[A1comp]

Thanks for the reply. But, the question remains, will Malwarebytes handle the job or do I need another Anti-Virus program to be safe?

Thank again.

[AdvancedSetup]

Yes you will need an Anti-Virus product, MBAM is NOT an Anti-Virus product. It is an Anti-Malware product.

[Insomniac]

Yep, an A/V program is essential as MBAM is not designed as an antivirus and doesn't function as such. There are many things MBAM doesn't catch, as the developers don't waste their time adding detection rules for malware that is already caught by the majority of AV programs. Instead they concentrate on the things AV programs generally miss. A good AV paired with MBAM is a very effective combination as each will genearlly catch what the other fails to find.

[coppertrail]

GT500, on Mar 14 2009, 03:50 PM, said:

Our software runs OK next to almost any anti-virus software. AntiVir is the anti-virus we always recommend though.

Just curious as to why you recommend Avira Antivir over say Avast!. Based on your post, as well as curiosity, I ripped out Avast! and installed AntiVir. Although its too early to compare, one of the first things I noticed is it uses far less memory resources than Avast!.

[exile360]

Avira typically has a better detection rate of viruses and is light on system resources, although Avast is pretty good too. Probably a big reason why Avira gets recommended so much is due to the tests done by sites like AV Comparatives. Avira typically leads the pack in overall detections.

[rydall]

and even better way to find out the best antivirus is visit

anti-virus-software-review.toptenreviews.com

most Antivirus company's do there own audit and say "We are number one"

but iv found the top ten don't get swayed over that, they do extreme tests and recommend the best product.

Edited by AdvancedSetup, 16 March 2009 - 05:53 AM.
Removed hyperlink

[exile360]

I looked at that site, but I'm iffy about Webroot being more effective than G-Data. AV Comparatives doesn't get swayed because they don't get paid. They do their own independant testing. The reality is though, no comparison can tell the whole story. Trying an AV for a bit with a trial is often the best option to see how it works with your own system and how intuitive the interface is for you. Detection rates are important, but not everything.

[AdvancedSetup]

I've not tried to track down or verify the validity of the site but many reviews I've read just seem off course from this site on all their software reviews. They might be legit but they seem like paid reviews or borderline plain wrong.

[exile360]

Agreed, I saw an ad for stopzilla on there, that always throws a red flag for me, because even though it's a Roxio product, who is (at least somewhat) reputable, it's often advertised on rogue-ish sites. Paretologic (known rogue maker) is also in their actual list of reviewed AV's (although it does have a somewhat low rating).

[GT500]

AdvancedSetup said:

I've not tried to track down or verify the validity of the site but many reviews I've read just seem off course from this site on all their software reviews. They might be legit but they seem like paid reviews or borderline plain wrong.

Agree 100%.

Stick with AV-Comparatives for real tests of Anti-Virus softwares. They seem to be the only ones who actually try to do real tests (even if they aren't doing them as well as they could).

[sys-eng]

TopTenREVIEWS is not trustworthy. You never see free programs rated high there. I have seen them rate program A as #1 and program B as #9 when every other site has nearly the opposite ratings. I suspect that the higher rated programs are either buying ads on their site or compensating them another way.

Both Avira and Avast are good products. One month Avira is rated higher and the next month Avast is rated better. Some are better at e-mail scanning and others at internet browser scanning. The competition is good for us. Avira did have a problem recently when it was missing a lot of infections for several weeks. They finally got it fixed but I have never heard of that happening with Avast.

I bought Malwarebytes several years ago when it detected and removed several infections that AVG, Symantec, MCAfee, and Avira all missed. I was not using Avast at the time but loaded it after the computer was cleaned. You can have both Avira and Avast loaded on your computer, just be sure to run only one at a time.