Battle Avira Free 10 vs MSE 2.0

[Linuxfever]

Place your bets gentlemens.

 

[Jack]

Both are basic antiviruses.....nothing that can really protect you from most 0 day malware.As a antivirus engine ,Avira has probably a better heuristic engine..... but :
If I had to choose one ...... i would choose with my eyes close.. .

 

[jamescv7]

The only difference from them are FP's, MSE is have few fp while Avira have more FP's.

 

[Jack]

Do you think that MSE is hard on resource usage? I've tried it and althought it uses 70MB of RAM I find MSE to be lighter than Avira.
What do you think.... who is lighter ?

 

[Dieselman]

Yes MSE is a ram hog. It was using about 100MB for me. Avira uses only about 15MB.

 

[jamescv7]

Well from the startup usually avira is striking up to 80mb and that's due to avguard however it will be drop to 15-20mb.

 

[mhartsellm]

Very close but the nod here would go to MSE, just experienced far too many false positives from Avira as already mentioned.

 

[bogdan]

I've used avira free for a long period of time back when mse didn't exist and avast had a silly interface and no real heuristics engine. But I had to switch from it since avira got stuck in the past while other free alternatives evolved. I also encountered an issue: the process that displayed the malware warnings wouldn't start after an update (I'm sure it is fixed now). Avira was always a light product (I hope it still is) but with sufficient RAM installed MSE doesn't seem to slow sown your system (ram usage is really high compared to other alternatives). MSE integrates Dynamic signature service, Live system behavior and it is able to stop worms using Network Inspection System. Although its feature list is impressive, in real world it will miss sufficient malware (as any other stand-alone av) but at least it won't produce many false-positives. My vote: MSE

 

[Valentin N]

I will go for MSE 2; Aviras annoying pop of buying their paid version is not okey + slows down the start up.

 

[McLovin]

Aviras annoying pop of buying their paid version is not okey + slows down the start up.

They are both good antiviruses but I have to agree with val is that the pop ups are bad but mine would have to be MSE

 

[Ramblin]

If I had to choose between this two, I ll choose MSE. I used both
and for me the changes made by Avira in version 10 are terrible.
If the choice was between Avira9 and MSE, my choice would be 9.
Both felt very light on my system and even though MSE used
more ram, Avira using quite a few processes was not of my liking.
So, my choice is MSE.

Bo

 

[moonshine]

I would choose MSE over Avira because of ease of use and I can combine MSE with any security application without worrying about compatibility problems.

 

[LochNess]

MSE 2 along with SandboxIE has been a nice combo for me... MSE and Avira are both sufficient, MO... but Avira's FP's can be annoying... and, I realize it's pure 'ascectics', but I sure wish that Avira would improve its User Interface...

 

[Gnosis]

Avira by a mile. I have used Avira 10 free edition for about two years. I am very pleased with it and it does not drag my system down. Until I buy an antivirus, I will probably always utilize Avira. Avast is good if you are a noob. MSE does nothing for me.

 

[McLovin]

I will definitely say Avira. The effect that Avira does on your machine is far less than what MSE does. Plus you can get a lot more options in Avira. Options I like

 

[Valentin N]

the main thing I hate with Avira is their pop up at start up; it slows the computer down and I dislike that this done each time your start your computer. Why should they push a user to buy.


Regards,
Valentin N

 

[Dieselman]

the main thing I hate with Avira is their pop up at start up; it slows the computer down and I dislike that this done each time your start your computer. Why should they push a user to buy.


Regards,
Valentin N

Its called "Advertising". All companies do it.

 

[Valentin N]

Its called "Advertising". All companies do it.

That's true but not the way Avira does...