Is paying for antivirus a waste of money?

[Morvotron]

In my opinion, security suites are not a waste of money. Better see like spending, paying for your safety. As far as i know, with the few tests i've done, and seen all over the web, most free antivirus offer basic protection. Most of the ones who are actually "good" (understand good=decent protection level), either use BitDefender Engine or Avira's. Thing is security suites offer lots of modules or complements that may do browsing experience a safer experience. Of course, lots of them are useless for most of people. For example, i'm pretty sure most of us don't use Parental Control. Most of us have third-party firewalls and don't need the one provided with the AV vendor. Still, Internet Security versions usually include better web protection modules as SSL encryption and link checkers.

In my opinion, if you know about how malware is spread and how to protect yourself, you are safe with a free antivirus/migrating when trial is over. If you're a regular user that just want to browse and not configure stuff, then you should buy it. I remember this friend who actually asked for my help to "find a crack" for the antivirus he had. I tried to explain how cracked worked, how they are coded and how they can actually ruin your software/your system. He skipped my advice and found himself a crack.. Then he reached me again to ask me if i knew how to fix blue deathscreens and "annoying ads all over the web and system".

Don't be silly. If you don't know, don't look for alternatives. Better spend some cash and not worry.

Now if you pay for AVG Internet Security i hope you get all cryptos in the world.

 

[OokamiCreed]

Of course you can get Norton for free... if you have Xfinity (Comcast) as your ISP. lol Even better that they do not screw around with the settings, files, etc of Norton Security (like some ISP do - looking at you Atlantic Broadband with your crap McAfee IS knock off piece of... well you know the rest). Only thing Comcast does is add a logo where there would normally be subscription info.

Spoiler: Constant Guard (Norton Security) UI

Now for the question, is it a waste to pay for antivirus? No. Just like it isn't a waste to buy food at a store rather than hunting/growing it for yourself. In the long run you are supporting a greater cause than yourself. An economy can't run on dust. One can certain say free products are as good or better than some paid, but free may not have the money to support developers to work on their product or to invest money into further enhancing ground breaking security measures. Can not also forget that paid products typically offer better privacy which is important to many people (despite if it is true or not that there is no privacy on the internet).

Windows Defender is good because Microsoft isn't exactly running on thin air. They have very talented programmers. And they get paid well because Microsoft is a giant. Microsoft knows Windows better than anyone which gives them an advantage. I don't believe Windows Defender will be overtaking other vendors anytime soon. After all, it's their reason to exist. The better Windows Defender does, the better other vendors will be. All around this is a good thing. Competition drives innovation, creation, invention, etc.

If I didn't get Norton for free, I'd either buy Norton, Kaspersky, ESET, or Emsisoft. Yeah I COULD use anti-executables and such but for someone who installs/uninstall software all the time, it's just a very poor and frustrating choice. Besides, anti-executable are just as vulnerable as any software. They don't give a second opinion either so if you make a mistake, you just got infected. We are human, and humans make mistakes. A lot of them. If our AV makes a mistake, we can fix it. If we make a mistake, our AV could fix the mistake via behavioral, etc. Don't take second opinions for granted.

 

[hjlbx]

OK...

So Kaspersky all of sudden decides all of its products are now freeware - with development and on-going support continuing the same as when paid.

Less effective now because it is freewares ?

Paid versus Free is not the issue.

The real issue is the quality of development, features and support.

Let's assume security soft vendors A and B offer essentially equivalent quality in most areas.

Security soft A costs $59.99 per year and offers features X, Y and Z. Security soft B costs $39.99 per year and offers features U, V, W, X, Y and Z.

Which is better deal ? - obviously, based upon cost and the number of modules, security soft B.

Which one will protect the system better ? - not so clear-cut. There are just too many variables - like user computing habits - that can rail-road even the best security soft. Theoretically and generally, the more quality features - the more protected the system.

At the same time, a savvy user can create any number of freeware combos that will adequately protect the system. Once again - user computing habits play a large factor is whether or not the system is compromised.

Is the system safe because the user is a cautious user or is it because of the installed security soft(s) - paid or free ?

What are you really paying for ???

I say support, but others will no doubt disagree. And I would also argue that, since most support encounters are pretty disappointing, that paying for support is a relative bad deal, but nevertheless a necessary evil for the rare cases where no online fix can be found. After all, most problems can be solved by visiting a support forum such as MalwareTips or a few online searches.

You are also paying for all the additional rubbish - optimizers, driver scanner, registry cleaner, file shredder, etc - that most users really do not need.

Those that need a certain-degree of hand-holding in case of issues and don't know what freeware is available - paid is probably their best option.

Those that are savvy can essentially do as they please - paid or freeware.

 

[Morvotron]

OK...

So Kaspersky all of sudden decides all of its products are now freeware - with development and on-going support continuing the same as when paid.

Less effective now because it is freewares ?

Pretty sure a free version won't include as much protection modules as paid suite

EDIT : just saw you said all version freeware my bad

What I meant was, most of the times security suites are paid because they offer lots of complements free versions do not. Like, some extra protection to make users pay. That's why I said paid suites offered more protection. Of course some paid antuviruses protect less than a freeware. It depends.

 

[hjlbx]

Pretty sure a free version won't include as much protection modules as paid suite

EDIT : just saw you said all version freeware my bad

What I meant was, most of the times security suites are paid because they offer lots of complements free versions do not. Like, some extra protection to make users pay. That's why I said paid suites offered more protection. Of course some paid antuviruses protect less than a freeware. It depends.

If we are talking about Kaspersky, Bitdefender, Norton and similar, then paid most definitely does provide better protection than free.

However, I will use Avira as an example. Free offers essentially the same protections as the paid. Avira Pro baits users with needless features.

COMODO, on the other hand, used properly will keep the vast majority of user systems safe - and it is freeware.

It depends upon the soft. It depends upon the user. There is no clear-cut answer.

If one's goal is to minimize as many risks as possible, then I would say paid is the best option.

However, the level of risk is largely dependent upon user behaviors, knowledge, experience. Of course, even the most IT security savvy user can make a mistake or be fooled.

There is no right or wrong answer, but generally I would say paid is better.

 

[Deleted Member 333v73x]

Or if you where one of the lucky ones : The first few months of bèta testing zemana did give out lifetime keys. Product translators also get a lifetime key for up to 7 pc's if i remember corectely

I wasn't a lucky one

 

[Logethica]

IMO Yes,..Paying for ANY security software is a waste of money..
I personally do not see the benefit of doing so unless it is for perhaps Business purposes..but for a "Home user" I consider it pointless..
..All of the people that I personally know that have had their system breached have used paid products,and by doing so they have felt an unjustified sense of security because they genuinely thought that having a paid antivirus on their PC would make their system impregnable...
I have never paid a dime for security software,and have never had my system breached.
IMO Free security software + half a brain should keep most peoples systems infection-free..
I must admit that I am thankful that many people do waste money on security as without them many of the free versions would not be available.

 

[DardiM]

I use paid products and free products, and both can do good or bad job, but often the culprit is the user
@Logethica said "IMO Free security software + half a brain should keep most peoples systems infection-free.."
I agree, but for many un-brain users (from security point of view), I think no internet it's the only solution
(bad penguin or bat penguin !?)

 

[Logethica]

@DardiM (Good Bat-Penguin) ..Hahaha
Yes,I agree...maybe "No Internet" is the only solution for some people.
I guess that the difference may be that we on this forum have taken an interest in cyber security...whereas many that I have spoken to outside of MT have no desire to research even the basics,as they are simply not interested in doing so..
My parents have no interest in this,and it is a constant battle to try to keep their systems infection free.
My Father is more open to suggestions/help than my Mother is.
They both have laptops with an AV, UAC at Max, MB Anti-Exploit,and uBlock Origin,..and If I was to install extra software to make them more secure then I can see them getting annoyed..
I would like to put Sandboxie on my Fathers laptop but I do not think that he would be happy with it.
I Intend to put Voodooshield on both of their systems when the auto-pilot has matured enough to create near zero prompts.

I suppose that if people are not interested in cyber security then that is their prerogative, but I do fear for the safety of their systems, bank accounts, & personal information...

 

[Deleted member 178]

Spending for an AV is useless? Yes
Spending for a security apps is useless? No

 

[Overkill]

Spending for an AV is useless? Yes
Spending for a security apps is useless? No

I agree...I would never buy an AV or Security Suite...when I decided to buy sandboxie for 50 bucks Lifetime License 3 PC's BTW it was well worth the money because it's that much better than any AV/Suite IMHO. I would also buy apps like ERP, VS or even AG (once I learn it enough lol) because they are the future of security and well worth the money.

 

[darko999]

It's not a waste of money if you play an AV solution as a bonus track, something that may save you from time to time, or at least help you, "If we accept we already know the basics of surfing the internet". In this case, the AV won't be the main shield, but a plus; blocking some old EXPLOIT there, blocking some nasty ADS here, cleaning some PuP there; etc. Just like I use ESET, it's there, just doing its job.

It's a waste of money if you think it will completely protect your computer, like being the main shield. Like it could protect you from real "Hackers", like if you could surf the darkest side of internet protected by a paid AV solution, and nothing should go wrong. Like thinking an AV solution will do all the hard work for you, and then you can just go balls deep on downloading torrents and suspicious content with a big smile and a shinning sight on that running AV solution that is supposed to erase all evil darkness from your computer. In this case it is for sure, a waste of money.

 

[DJ Panda]

It doesn't have to be a waste off money if you play ypour cards right. Kaspersky is probably one of best products I would buy. However, I find tweaking Avast Free can get me a lot of nice protection.

 

[Brahman]

Spending for an AV is useless? Yes
Spending for a security apps is useless? No

totally agree...paying for a good security app is good as it helps them develop the product even further. no money no development.

 

[conceptualclarity]

I've recently gone from free AV to paid. I find the case ESET makes for its very multifaceted product at http://cdn1.esetstatic.com/eset/US/...ti-layered-approach-and-its-effectiveness.pdf to be highly impressive.

 

[Cats-4_Owners-2]

My wife's ESET Smart Security expires in (3) days! Fortunately, we've a paid key standing by compliments of our illustrious site's (and Emsisoft's) generosity culminated in the form of Free Giveaways. So, I am grateful for paid security, and especially such resources of knowledge and the knowledgeable people from whose fonts of knowing and experience bestow upon us unseen (figurative) kevlar vests which protect us from the invisible bullets we'd be none the wiser if not for developers and all that is shared as a chain reaction of results. When we'd upgraded her Windows 7 to 10 it was a free giveaway for those whom qualified, and cared enough to claim it, a key that's free which someone, someday, may pay for; and when they do it might even be worth every penny by then...

@DardiM (Good Bat-Penguin) ..Hahaha
Yes,I agree...maybe "No Internet" is the only solution for some people.
I guess that the difference may be that we on this forum have taken an interest in cyber security...whereas many that I have spoken to outside of MT have no desire to research even the basics,as they are simply not interested in doing so..
My parents have no interest in this,and it is a constant battle to try to keep their systems infection free.
My Father is more open to suggestions/help than my Mother is.
They both have laptops with an AV, UAC at Max, MB Anti-Exploit,and uBlock Origin,..and If I was to install extra software to make them more secure then I can see them getting annoyed..
I would like to put Sandboxie on my Fathers laptop but I do not think that he would be happy with it.
I Intend to put Voodooshield on both of their systems when the auto-pilot has matured enough to create near zero prompts.

I suppose that if people are not interested in cyber security then that is their prerogative, but I do fear for the safety of their systems, bank accounts, & personal information...

@Logethica, your wondrous parents are a bit like many of us. Thankfully, you are a part of them; and by looking out for them they do know (on some deeper level than desire) how protected they are because of you! I'd never expected nor had I even but hoped my wife would come to adopt Sandboxie but, in addition to her rock solid fondness for ESET, she's developed the firm habit of browsing always immersed in it's virtual blanket that encompasses her Firefox, and now Palemoon, browsers! VoodooShield's almost never prompting shall, in turn, become the key by which both parents & spouses shall access the gates which open onto safety for which they will owe us (thanks we may not hear) and in addition to the reason we why we keep on them the way we do ..which is undoubtedly Love.

 

[monkeylove]

I use any free versions of various highly rated anti-malware and security programs.

 

[jogs]

Yeah, its a waste of money because you can always get a paid AV through numerous giveaways.

 

[Ink]

Spending for an AV is useless? Yes
Spending for a security apps is useless? No

What's the difference, it depends on the software you're buying. Are you getting a good deal, multi-device, support, compatibility, usuability etc.

 

[omidomi]

its dependant on which AV that you buy!
these softwares do't waste your money and protect you well: Emsisoft,Eset,Kaspersky
for me I go with Kaspersky