BSOD's configuration

[BSOD]

RE: BSOD's config

What you should know, is that some of us (the paranoids ) like to test security apps vs malwares, goes to risky sites, etc...
Personally, i like testing compatibility between security apps to making the best layered config possible.

But what i do on my system is not what i will do to my friends or customers computer, i set for them the most simple and silent config possible

How would you rate my config? Would you make any changes?

I just looked at the latest AV-Comparatives and Avira,AVAST! look appealing to me but I don't know if I want to change because MSE is just so silent. I am looking for an AV with the best low footprint/best detection ratio.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's config

I just looked at the latest AV-Comparatives and Avira,AVAST! look appealing to me but I don't know if I want to change because MSE is just so silent. I am looking for an AV with the best low footprint/best detection ratio.

If you don't play around with malwares, keygen, cracks and malicious websites your config is good (even if i don't like MSE at all, but just my opinion )

i think you should remove:

- Soluto since it slowdown the boot (just use it one time, check your boot-time, write on a paper the apps that slow you down, tweak them manually)

- CleanMem (useful only for low RAM system, btw Win7 manage the RAM quite fine so it is useless)

the rest is fine

Generally the AVs i used to install to my friends/customers because they are light and silent are:

Free solutions:

1- Panda Cloud AV free (for its lightness)
2- Avast ( for risky users, since it has many proactive features)
3- Avira (for its High detection rate)

Paid Solutions

1- ESET Smart Security (my favorite for its ultra-lightness on the system responsiveness, high detection, fast signature update, many really useful features.)
2- Webroot SA (the lightest of all with many features but not the cheapest ^^)
3- Norton IS (light and complete)

 

[Littlebits]

RE: BSOD's config

I just looked at the latest AV-Comparatives and Avira,AVAST! look appealing to me but I don't know if I want to change because MSE is just so silent. I am looking for an AV with the best low footprint/best detection ratio.

If you don't play around with malwares, keygen, cracks and malicious websites your config is good (even if i don't like MSE at all, but just my opinion )

i think you should remove:

- Soluto since it slowdown the boot (just use it one time, check your boot-time, write on a paper the apps that slow you down, tweak them manually)

- CleanMem (useful only for low RAM system, btw Win7 manage the RAM quite fine so it is useless)

the rest is fine

Generally the AVs i used to install to my friends/customers because they are light and silent are:

Free solutions:

1- Panda Cloud AV free (for its lightness)
2- Avast ( for risky users, since it has many proactive features)
3- Avira (for its High detection rate)

Paid Solutions

1- ESET Smart Security (my favorite for its ultra-lightness on the system responsiveness, high detection, fast signature update, many really useful features.)
2- Webroot SA (the lightest of all with many features but not the cheapest ^^)
3- Norton IS (light and complete)

I will have to mostly agree, Soluto and CleanMem are not needed on newer and higher performance systems. WinPatrol can change your startup programs. If you have 2GB of RAM or more, memory optimization tools will have a negative impact on your system.

I do however disagree with recommended free AV's.

I recommend for free solutions:
1. Avast
2. Microsoft Security Essentials
3. Panda Cloud
4. AVG

The only paid solutions that I will recommend is ESET products.
Unless users want a Pro version of Avast, Panda Cloud or AVG.

I don't recommend Avira because of its high false positives.
Excellent detection but the false positives are too much.

Of coarse if Microsoft Security Essentials is working for you, there is no reason to change. Many of my customers use MSE + Windows Firewall and never get infections.

Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's config

if Microsoft Security Essentials is working for you, there is no reason to change. Many of my customers use MSE + Windows Firewall and never get infections.

Just use what is fine for you, you have to change only in the case you are no longer satisfied by MSE or being heavily infected.

I always said to my friends, use what you can master rather than something that masters you

 

[3link9]

RE: BSOD's config

I just want to throw my charts out here. Here are my recent opinions I have based off of my own testing and tests I seen recently.

In order:
Free AV:
1. Avast Free 7 - Good Detections, good prevention features, Light.
2. Avira Free 2013 - Great detections, Somewhat Light, slightly lacks features.
3. AVG Free 2013 - Good Detections, good features, Can be heavy at times.
4. Comodo Anti-Virus w/D+ and Sandbox - Great prevention features, HIPS, Somewhat light, AV has average detection, Lacks web protection (Unless running Comodo DNS), More geared towards Advanced Users.

Free AV's to Avoid:
1. Microsoft Security Essentials - Terrible Detections, Lacks features, User Friendly, Light.
2. Comodo Anti-Virus w/D+ and Sandbox Disabled - Average Detection, No prevention, No web protection (Unless running Comodo DNS), slow scanning speeds, Light, User-Friendly.


Good Companions:
1. Emsisoft Anti-Malware - Amazing Detection and Prevention, Light-Medium depending on task, Runs on 2 engines, User-Friendly, Paid.
2. Kingsoft AV 2012 - Good Detection, User-friendly, Light.
3. Webroot SA - Average detection, Light, amazing speed, User-Friendly, Paid.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's config

You put Comodo in both recommended and avoid

Btw, i dont recommend Comodo now since the new release will be out soon. i prefer wait to see how it does.

 

[3link9]

RE: BSOD's config

You put Comodo in both recommended and avoid

Btw, i dont recommend Comodo now since the new release will be out soon. i prefer wait to see how it does.

Yeah but one has D+ and Sandbox disabled and true, I have Mixed feelings on V6 but its 2 soon to tell.

 

[Littlebits]

RE: BSOD's config

Free AV's to Avoid:
1. Microsoft Security Essentials - Terrible Detections, Lacks features, User Friendly, Light.

Terrible detections based on what?

Microsoft Security Essentials may not do well in a testing environment, but for end users it does very good. Many users will agree in spite of testing results saying its detection is bad. If its detection was terrible it would have not got 7 VB-100 awards- http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/vendor?id=70

The only one that it did not pass was because of one wildlist miss back in April 2010. It has passed all of the recent tests afterwards.

Thanks.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's config

Terrible detections based on what?

maybe because of many of our members' reviews/tests.

example: http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Review-Microsoft-Security-Essentials-version-4 (this one is not recent but act as an indicator)

Biozfear's tests are among the few ones i trust mostly because i know he does them with a totally neutral opinion and correct them if he may did a mistake.

 

[Littlebits]

RE: BSOD's config

Terrible detections based on what?

maybe because of many of our members' reviews/tests.

example: http://malwaretips.com/Thread-Review-Microsoft-Security-Essentials-version-4 (this one is not recent but act as an indicator)

Biozfear's tests are among the few ones i trust mostly because i know he does them with a totally neutral opinion and correct them if he may did a mistake.

Ok that might explain. I'm not trying to doubt anyone testing methods but purposely downloading malware to test and the experience an end user might face on accidentally downloading malware is not the same.

I'm sure if someone wanted to download malware from the web then MSE may appear to have bad detection, but for an end user who only stumbles onto malware the end result is very different. MSE has very good detection for end users who don't purposely look to download malware. You can't always go by testing results.

Enjoy!!

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's config

I'm sure if someone wanted to download malware from the web then MSE may appear to have bad detection, but for an end user who only stumbles onto malware the end result is very different. MSE has very good detection for end users who don't purposely look to download malware. You can always go by testing results.

yes it is what i told him, MSE will be still good for him if he has a safe surfing habit and behavior.

malware players and common users are different and they don't have the same expectation from a product.

Malware Players = "i want be safe in all situations even the one i know are not safe"

Common User: "i want be safe when i am surfing or download some software"

 

[Ink]

RE: BSOD's config

+1 Very good and valid point.

MSE has very good detection for end users who don't purposely look to download malware.

---

Take note for paranoid users.

 

[TheWindows8Expert]

RE: BSOD's config

Instead of Microsoft Security Essential I Would Suggest Avast Free Antivirus

 

[BSOD]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Update:

Added Process Lasso, CleverCache, IObit Uninstaller and Hitman Pro (on-demand.)
Removed WinPatrol and Revo Uninstaller.

 

[Deleted member 178]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Can you tell me the CPU usage of Process Lasso on your system?

 

[BSOD]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Can you tell me the CPU usage of Process Lasso on your system?

When minimized to tray.

When the GUI's open.

 

[BSOD]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Update:

Added Startup Delayer.

 

[Spirit]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Hi,
You dont need clevercache and process lasso together.Clevervache is much better

 

[BSOD]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

Hi,
You dont need clevercache and process lasso together.Clevervache is much better

I thought so too but apparently, they do not conflict and do different things, explanation:

They are different. CleverCache manages the memory cache generally making it smaller so more ram is available for applications. It's debatable whether or not there's value in doing this since Windows memory management is supposed to free memory from the cache as needed. My systems have a good amount of ram and I don't place enough load on it for the cache size to make any difference. I used the CleverCache trial for a while and didn't see any difference.

Process Lasso smooths multitasking by automatically restraining processes that hog the CPU and I do find it useful.

I ran Process Lasso and CleverCache at the same time without conflicts.

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=2123072&postcount=5

 

[Spirit]

RE: BSOD's configuration (Updated 2-10-2012)

I have some slowdown while using process lasso and same i read it on many forums so I avoid it on my machine but its nice to hear its doing well on your machine.
Sometimes one software is light on one machine but unusable on other