Muddy7

Level 1
One of the pros Webroot brought to the market was 'scan only when files change'. I remember 4-5 years ago, people thought this was crazy. They wanted to scan files (whether changed or not) ...over and over again. Webroot had to explain this methodology exhaustively. Finally, most AVs took this approach.
I might be wrong, but I think Kaspersky had this methodology way before Webroot.
You are correct. Kaspersky has it at least at 6.0, and Bitdefender also had it about 10 years ago. Probably others too..
Another misunderstanding.

Webroot from late 2011 onwards is, in fact, Prevx 4.0+ (Webroot entirely rebuilt its technology on Prevx, having acquired the company for that very purpose). When I started using Prevx in 2006, it was already following this approach—and presumably had been for quite a few years before then. So unless I am mistaken, Prevx/Webroot was very much the first.

I see so many misunderstandings about Webroot here that most of the time I don't bother. Plus I don't want to get into polemical arguments where it seems to be a hobby taunting and hounding, with pretty unpleasant language at that, any poster who dares to say anything other than Webroot is total ##!!$$**. Let's just say that's not my cup of tea and I've learnt my lesson... But this one is so blatant, and so elementary to explain, it just had to be said.
 

bjm_

Level 7
Verified
Last edited:

South Park

Level 1
I used Webroot for 3 yr. on my old Windows 7 laptop (which had only 3 GB of RAM) because it was the only AV light enough not to bog down the whole computer. It gave me a lot of FP's, including silently blocking and breaking PaleMoon and SeaMonkey. I dumped WR in favor of the somewhat heavier but more reliable WD for my newer Windows 10 laptop, which has a more generous 4 GB of RAM.
 

Nevi

Level 4
Verified
Another misunderstanding.

Webroot from late 2011 onwards is, in fact, Prevx 4.0+ (Webroot entirely rebuilt its technology on Prevx, having acquired the company for that very purpose). When I started using Prevx in 2006, it was already following this approach—and presumably had been for quite a few years before then. So unless I am mistaken, Prevx/Webroot was very much the first.

I see so many misunderstandings about Webroot here that most of the time I don't bother. Plus I don't want to get into polemical arguments where it seems to be a hobby taunting and hounding, with pretty unpleasant language at that, any poster who dares to say anything other than Webroot is total ##!!$$**. Let's just say that's not my cup of tea and I've learnt my lesson... But this one is so blatant, and so elementary to explain, it just had to be said.
Hi Muddy, good to see you. I have reached the same conclusion as you. I dont wanna argue about WSA.
I just think some love to hate Webroot, and luckily there are many other products they can use. :)
 
Last edited:

Muddy7

Level 1
Hi Muddy, good to see you. I have reached the same conclusion as you. I dont wanna argue about WSA.
I just think some love to hate Webroot, and luckily there are many other products they can use. :)
Good to see you too, Nevi. Yeah, I get the impression that some (not all) here "love to hate Webroot" just for sport, rather than wanting to have a proper rational discussion. They just want to bully, taunt, scorn, hound anyone who doesn't diss Webroot. Sad. I don't like bullies.

Webroot ... should probably be used with a more solid antivirus.
Have to disagree with you on that one. After nearly 13 years of using Prevx/Webroot (and comparing it to my pretty dire experience with several household name AVs I used before then), I think it's a great, and extremely solid, standalone AV! Never knowingly been infected yet since changing to it. Certainly couldn't say that for the others.
 

Nevi

Level 4
Verified
You are right. I wrote it because I am so used to that people dont believe WSA is enough. I have also used it so long with good results, but I'm tired of all the discussion. I have wrote my opinion about my experience with WSA long time ago, but it always ended up with back and forth discussions. But good you say it again.
 

alv222

Level 2
You are right. I wrote it because I am so used to that people dont believe WSA is enough. I have also used it so long with good results, but I'm tired of all the discussion. I have wrote my opinion about my experience with WSA long time ago, but it always ended up with back and forth discussions. But good you say it again.
I tried it out for over a year with an expired trial (it was still working :p) and it was pretty light and well it was ok. It didn't let any malware in the system so i would use it again if their prices go lower as i think it's not really worth that much

wait they did this: Antivirus for PC Games Without Performance Impact | Webroot
I'm gonna try the trial
 

Nevi

Level 4
Verified
I tried it out for over a year with an expired trial (it was still working :p) and it was pretty light and well it was ok. It didn't let any malware in the system so i would use it again if their prices go lower as i think it's not really worth that much

wait they did this: Antivirus for PC Games Without Performance Impact | Webroot
I'm gonna try the trial
Webroot has for me been a great antivirus. And as long it's being tested the normal way (like The PC Security channel do) it will not get the same good results as many others. Webroot need some more time before it catch the bad guys. Some dont mind, others will rather have it the normal way. So it's good there are a good selection of antivirus apps.
Do tell how your trial went .:)
 

alv222

Level 2
Webroot has for me been a great antivirus. And as long it's being tested the normal way (like The PC Security channel do) it will not get the same good results as many others. Webroot need some more time before it catch the bad guys. Some dont mind, others will rather have it the normal way. So it's good there are a good selection of antivirus apps.
Do tell how your trial went .:)
I'm trying "AntiVirus for gamers" and it's soo lightweight, i'm currently using it alone. I'll see if it works well with cylance. Its only 4mb
EDIT: VirusTotal, see the comments D:
 
Last edited:

Umbra

Level 14
Verified
Webroot has for me been a great antivirus. And as long it's being tested the normal way (like The PC Security channel do) it will not get the same good results as many others. Webroot need some more time before it catch the bad guys. Some dont mind, others will rather have it the normal way. So it's good there are a good selection of antivirus apps.
Do tell how your trial went .:)
Most tests labs have standard methodologies/practices: Home | AMTSO, which webroot is member.

amtso.jpg


All labs disclose their methodologies beforehands, and so cant be refuted.
If you only consider the labs that gives you good results then you are biased.
now if Webroot think those labs do it the wrong way for their product or any other reasons, they should withdraw and refuse to participate like Norton and Emsisoft did. Webroot still let them test their product, so they accept the conditions by default, so all the negative critics/bashing are legitimate. and it is surely not 3 diehard fans that will impose their opinion to a whole industry. LOL

you arent happy with the results and the way it is tested? no problem, it is your right so ask webroot to withdraw, if they don't , then just keep quiet.
 
Last edited:

oldschool

Level 38
Verified
That view, as we both know @Nevi, is not a popular one on this Forum, to put it extremely mildly
Please do not make generalizations about this forum based on assorted posts. This forum has a lot of members, most of whom may care less enough about Webroot either way, and certainly not enough to post about it.

Edit #1: I will add that when my sister-in-law's new laptop came with both McAfee and Webroot I got rid of them ASAP because I consider pre-loaded apps like this bloatware and scareware. Sayonara!

Edit #2: in italics.
 
Last edited:

Cortex

Level 12
I used Prevx for time time & I think it was developed originally near Derby UK near me (may be wrong) which is why I started using Webroot, & used it for some time as did many people whose PC's I looked after.

My main issue was the huge monitoring files that built in Program Data - The responses from support were delete it & reinstall which sort of negated the monitoring in the first place, of course you had the option of scanning & submitting the scan to support to have files white-listed - Neither myself or anyone else felt this was reasonable as no other AV's required such intervention, so as my licences expired they weren't renewed - At this time I as many did believed that Webroot was great it just wasn't being tested correctly, no axe to grind no point to make other than real like experiences.
 

Umbra

Level 14
Verified
That WRdata folder is a shame, try install a low reputation software, Webroot will journal its activity to death, the folder will reach like 2gb in less than an hour and keep growing, you may say expected behavior from Journaling but problem, no options to even turn it off or at least exclude that particular journaling.
Only way is, as said above manually delete the folder (which render WSA journaling feature totally useless) or report the application to Webroot and wait them to whitelist it which may never happen...
 

Slyguy

Level 43
It might actually and literally be just that -- based on professional testing and now extensive testing here in Malware Hub.
Not that I agree entirely with the HUB illustrating actual conditions, but rather worse case scenarios, Webroot nevertheless has failed miserably in the hub, consistently and I don't think it has ever successfully protected from any HUB pack, has it?

The good news is, I haven't run into anyone that has it installed anymore, much less anyone that recommends it, or any MSP actively utilizing it. I'm quite shocked the product even exists at this point.