vote up 9 vote down star
1
  1. Does anyone know if this is adequate protection for my computer?

  2. Does anyone have any experience with this product that they will share?

Thanks

EDIT. On October the 31, 2009, I found out about this comparison of AV Suites. MSE did VERY well. http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/removal/avc%5Fremoval%5F2009.pdf

flag

Bear in mind that security is an extremely difficult thing for the non professional to judge, so I'd consider the second question more valuable. – David Thornley Sep 29 at 16:52
@alex, It was meant as a joke :\ – Phoshi Sep 29 at 17:14
@Phoshi sorry, I didn't mean to sound that harsh. I should relax a bit :) – alex Sep 29 at 20:33

10 Answers

vote up 20 vote down check

I've been using Microsoft Security Essentials for a while now, both in 32-bit and 64-bit flavors, and it works extremely well. I've previously used Avast!, and would choose Microsoft over Avast.

It detected a threat the other day when I was getting the address to block the Antivirus 2009 website, so I know it's working. Otherwise, it's quiet, does it's job, and doesn't slow my computer down in the least bit.

My favorite bit is the amount of information Microsoft provides when it detects a threat. When it picked up the Antivirus 2009 (aka Trojan:Win32/FakeXPA), it provided this huge page filled with information, including screenshots!

Personally, I highly recommend it.

link|flag
I've got two PC's that I get to support as the family technician running Avast! that I was considering replacing. Glad to see a good recommendation. – Nicolas Webb Sep 29 at 20:48
vote up 8 vote down

It's as effective as any other anti-virus product. Which is to say, not very. On the plus side, it's not in your face all the time like some of the others.

No packaged product is ‘adequate’ protection for a PC, really; today's anti-malware products will not protect you from the mass of ever-evolving malware out there today. It's much more about ensuring your net-facing software is up-to-date, reducing attack surface by removing net-facing software (like plugins) that you don't need, and not falling for social engineering attacks (like the fake codecs and scanners).

link|flag
This is a very interesting answer. Can you say more and be more specific? Thanks – Xavierjazz Sep 29 at 17:32
There's not much to say really: I study browser security hole exploits on the web, which are probably the largest source of infection at the moment. When I submit their payloads to AV testing services such as virustotal I typically get very low detection rates. You may once have been able to rely on anti-virus software to keep your PC clean, but that was a long time ago; today the virus writers are way ahead of them. – bobince Sep 30 at 11:38
vote up 3 vote down

Only time will tell - but from my first impressions and testing recently, I LOVE IT!

I installed Microsoft Security Essentials Beta and it worked brilliantly a while ago, very low memory footprint, small size e.t.c.... I have become less impressed with Nod32 recently (they are going down the Symantec trap - money in advertising and not product development), Anyway, I thought it was fast and did the job.

However, I upgraded my pc a few months ago and I have not been using any AV (I have Windows 7, UAC on maxmium, and I never install programs that I do not know / used in the past), and generally been very happy. However, If you must have an AV solution, I would seriously consider this if you do not need central management / enterprise AV.

link|flag
vote up 2 vote down

Since I tested the pre-beta build, it is quite difficult to draw the final verdict. But one thing that held out is it’s ease-of-use and small memory footprint. The overall size of the software installer is only 4.8MB and takes around 6.6MB + 36MB(runs two different processes) when running on my system. Which is quite impressive if you look at the fact that it detected and removed a Trojan downloader that NOD32 even failed to detect in the first place.

link|flag
vote up 2 vote down

It's meant to be a successor to OneCare, which surprisingly provided pretty adequate protection. I'm running it now on Windows 7 and although I cannot attest to it's security, I've been very happy with the UI and the footprint. It's incredibly unobtrusive (adds nothing to the desktop other than a taskbar icon) and actually has a large number of options to configure. I'm exceptionally happy with it.

link|flag
vote up 2 vote down

Anti-virus/malware software has to have a pretty intimate relationship with the operating system in order to function effectively. Who better to create that relationship than the creators of the OS? And, it's free to boot. I would think that, if you're going to use AV software, this is the one to go with.

link|flag
1  
Interesting comment. Thanks. – Xavierjazz Sep 30 at 0:23
+1. I have switched. Thanks. – Xavierjazz Oct 1 at 2:36
1  
I no longer see a reason to use any other free anti-virus and very little reason to use a paid anti-virus at home or in a small office. McAffee, Norton and other companies must be bummed. I always felt that antivirus should be part of the OS and glad MS stepped up. – webdtc Oct 9 at 21:15
vote up 0 vote down

It seems to be getting pretty good comments at DownloadSquad.com. I'm going to give it a go.

link|flag
vote up 0 vote down

I've been using it, but I'm not convinced that it's as good as some other free solutions. Previously, AntiVir would pop up warnings about things like the password dumper in OphCrack, Backtrack, Metasploit, and a few other security tools I have, whereas MSE doesn't seem to care. Granted, I consider them a "false positive", but I think it should still be detecting these sorts of things..

link|flag
I guess I think that its better if it is able to detect the difference betweem "false" and "true" positives. Less to worry about. Thanks – Xavierjazz Sep 29 at 16:33
Different security systems will detect different things. That's the way it goes. – David Thornley Sep 29 at 16:52
vote up 0 vote down

I can't understand one thing: why Security Essentials ALWAYS removes all files with viruses instead of fixing it? Kasperksy fixes the same files very easy...

link|flag
I used to use Kaspersky, and indeed, I actually have 1 more year on my license. However, after a few years of being very happy with Kaspersky, I received some bad inbfo from them and when I tried to fix that, I felt the service REALLY got poor. I have switched, and am very happy - its much easier than Kaspersky and seems to do at least as adequate a job. Best regards. – Xavierjazz Dec 24 at 1:40
vote up 0 vote down

AV-Comparatives gives it an Advanced+ score, which is their highest rating. Security Essentials uses the same AV engine as Microsoft's Forefront business AV offering. I went with MSE for all my home machines.

link|flag

Your Answer

Get an OpenID
or
never shown

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.