- Jan 29, 2017
- 1,201
Malwarebytes Premium -- Has it 'Jumped the Shark?'
- Thread starter Burrito
- Start date
Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
- Mar 29, 2018
- 7,698
! Valid points. I hated it when I used the Premium trial. I couldn't disable all those features fast enough and revert to Free. @Digmor Crusher really nailed it overall!
- Nov 19, 2012
- 1,121
Consistency is a very important factor for every product. Kaspersky is one of the most respected product because its performance has been consistent over the time. I hope MBAM will contemplate on their mistakes and again become a good product.
- Jul 13, 2014
- 766
Since it became Malwarebytes Prenium i've been using it (and the early days of MB anti-malware some years ago). Except the early performance and shields turning off issues, and a few bugs after some updates at the time, MB Prenium has always been performing well for me. The web shield is excellent, many many times blocking what other products don't block or miss. Performance has improved greatly, system remains light and functional. They already had a very good heuristic detection and now with some added behavioral detection to it, it's getting better. I've been using it as a stand alone security product or in combination with other security products, it had never let something get through. Well, that is my personal experience, but i think it is a very good security product and i'm waiting for more improvements.
True story. I think I first coined the term 'Failbam' somewhere else long ago. Good times. But it was easy to see the writing on the wall with their shenanigans. It was a hard pill to swallow, especially since I have 9 lifetime licenses I paid $5.99ea for through Chicalogic reseller. Remember that? Mbam tried to pull those licenses and we had words, and they put them back.
- May 19, 2016
- 1,581
Hello @spaceoctopusSince it became Malwarebytes Prenium i've been using it (and the early days of MB anti-malware some years ago). Except the early performance and shields turning off issues, and a few bugs after some updates at the time, MB Prenium has always been performing well for me. The web shield is excellent, many many times blocking what other products don't block or miss. Performance has improved greatly, system remains light and functional. They already had a very good heuristic detection and now with some added behavioral detection to it, it's getting better. I've been using it as a stand alone security product or in combination with other security products, it had never let something get through. Well, that is my personal experience, but i think it is a very good security product and i'm waiting for more improvements.
And do you think it is interesting to run MBAM premium alongside ESET ?
- May 16, 2018
- 1,363
Ok, since this thread was brought back to life...
More evidence that MBAM has jumped the shark...
This is a 'real-world' test.
This is what MBAM claims that they are good at -- current threats.
There are only three that scored the very bottom score of "5". (in 'Protection')
The bottom three tied for last place are eScan, K7, and Malwarebytes.
This is the Dec 18 Endpoint test from SE Labs.
And that's pretty embarrassing.... to be dead-last, behind woeful Webroot.
From the report:
================
I'm still using MBAM on multiple computers.
It is very good with PUPs. The new extension is very good.
And I'm still hopeful for an MBAM comeback.
Yep Umbra, I think you are right.
More evidence that MBAM has jumped the shark...
This is a 'real-world' test.
This is what MBAM claims that they are good at -- current threats.
There are only three that scored the very bottom score of "5". (in 'Protection')
The bottom three tied for last place are eScan, K7, and Malwarebytes.
This is the Dec 18 Endpoint test from SE Labs.
And that's pretty embarrassing.... to be dead-last, behind woeful Webroot.
From the report:
================
I'm still using MBAM on multiple computers.
It is very good with PUPs. The new extension is very good.
And I'm still hopeful for an MBAM comeback.
- Jul 3, 2017
- 626
I too have a Lifetime license but feel the latest version is too bloated and geared for marketing purposes now.
Last edited:
- Jul 29, 2017
- 296
Despite the initial issues of version 3 when it was introduced , it is now running smoothly on 3 of my machines.
Instead of biased opinions I would be very interested to see some fresh tests of Malwarebytes Premium + Windows Defender in action.
Perhaps testing in the Malware Hub?
Instead of biased opinions I would be very interested to see some fresh tests of Malwarebytes Premium + Windows Defender in action.
Perhaps testing in the Malware Hub?
- May 16, 2018
- 1,363
'Bias'is the key term.
The most recent tests for Malwarebytes were all pretty bad. Some are reflected above. They did finally have one decent test result -- but it was for Android cell phones where they got 100% along with 22 other vendors.
To some degree, there will not be a lot of testing of MBAM, as they don't elect to participate in most testing. The did finally elect to participate in AV-Test, and promptly did poorly. SE Labs tests products that they select, so vendor willingness to participate does not play into it. The horrible results of that test are in this thread. Generally, products who don't elect to be tested.... there is a reason for it. They don't do well. Webroot is a good example. Generally, products who don't do well in testing bitch and complain about test methodology. But typically they don't do well in most testing.... with different methodologies.
If MBAM is tested in Malware Hub -- this is exactly the type of testing that MBAM says is ineffective and unreliable and produces worthless results. They state that a static test like that does not evaluate the different protective layers of the product as malware is introduced to a system. You can read more about their thoughts on this at their website.
Back to 'bias.'
MBAM just doesn't have a few bad test results. They now have years of terrible test results. Even in tests of malware clean-up and remediation, they don't rank at the top anymore.
So why do so many people still use it?
Cognitive Bias.
Choice-supportive bias
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In cognitive science, choice-supportive bias or post-purchase rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to an option one has selected. It is a cognitive bias. For example, if a person chooses option A instead of option B, they are likely to ignore or downplay the faults of option A while amplifying those of option B. Conversely, they are also likely to notice and amplify the advantages of option A and not notice or de-emphasize those of option B.
This message board is full of cognitive bias ---- bias towards what they choose to use, what they choose to buy...
Post-Purchase Rationalisation
We tend to justify a purchase by overlooking any faults seen
We’re more likely to submit a positive review of a product purchased than a negative one, desiring our past choices as rational and well-made. Retailers could embrace this bias, reinforcing a user's correct choice post-purchase.
Cohen & Goldberg (1970). The Dissonance Model in Post-Decision Product Evaluation. Journal of Marketing Research.
The evidence over many years strongly indicates one thing. MBAM is not that good.
That stated...
I still use MBAM on multiple systems. It does very well with PUPs. But... Maybe the Malwarebytes Browser Extension Beta can handle that alone without the need for Malwarebytes... I dunno.
I've accumulated a number of MBAM Lifetime Licenses.... I use multiple licenses, I sometimes read their forums.... and again, I hope for a comeback...
Malwarebytes has not reached the "SpyBot (SND)" stage, so it's still a useful product for those who need it.
- May 16, 2018
- 1,363
- Jan 29, 2017
- 1,201
Regardless, MBAM's response has been, and will always be, that such testing does not reflect "real world" malware exposure, and consequently its results are valueless in determining the effectiveness of MBAM. Hence they decry all testing over which they do not have total control.
And what about this? Why Malwarebytes decided to participate in AV testing - Malwarebytes Labs
- Jul 29, 2017
- 296
Nobody is arguing that.
My point is that instead of testing Malwarebytes Premium as a standalone solution which is insufficient by itself, why not test it as a supplement to an AV?
The only reason I have it installed is to supplement Windows Defender in Windows 10 with Web , Ransomware & additional exploit protection.
Also you can get lifetime licences for as cheap as 2.5$ online..
Cause MBAM went full AV since 3.0, is no longer supposed to be run as suplement.
Plus running MBAM and Windows Defender in the same machine, I can't even imagine the performance impact, both of the heaviest AVs in the market running side by side.
Not to mention Windows Defender is disabled when MBAM is installed, exactly for that reason (MBAM is a full AV now, a bad one at that as shown and said by everyone here).
- Feb 24, 2019
- 408
It was a good second layer. Now they advertise it as both a primary and secondary layer, and it's so heavy it's suitable for neither. Still good for removing systems full of adware/PUP crap but unfortunately not much else. Shame.
- Jul 6, 2017
- 2,392
It's neither a worm nor a butterfly.
I think it's in a cocoon and doesn't know where to go.
Similar threads
