Recommend Me Security Software..

[faith]

Well ive just buitl my first pc and i want to protect it before i hit the web with it. Have used AVG in the past but it always caused me problems at some point so im willing to take the plunge and purchase soem proper Security software.

The one i have been reading about mostly is 'Kaspersky Internet Security 2010' - i believe it also includes their 'Anti Virus Software' too which is a bonus.

Now the only thing confusing me is there is a 'OEM' version and a 'Retail' version...the OEM version is cheaper but what one do i go for?? Are there any differences?

Kind Regards,

Ady

[snakedoc]

Just grab MS security, its free and does the job.

[faith]

MS? - Microsoft?

[snakedoc]

MS? - Microsoft?

Indeed. Microsoft Security essentials (http://www.microsoft.com/Security_Essentials/)

[chrisjb]

Kaspersky, very good.

[rampageturke]

Indeed. Microsoft Security essentials (http://www.microsoft.com/Security_Essentials/)
Yup, totally recommend MS essentials.. also snakedoc was the one that recommended it to me :D :thumbs: also use spybot search and destroy:trophy:

[mrgoose]

@ OP.

Do you actually have to use Windows? If you do, then the M$ Security Essentials suggested by other posters has received good reviews and should address many of your security concerns, certainly for the time being.

If you don't have to use Windows, then you might do better to consider one of the many free Unix-like operating systems instead. The problem for Micro$oft operating systems is that security is essentially an afterthought. Whereas Unix has enjoyed advanced security features for many years, such as its system of rigidly-enforced file-access permissions.

My personal favourite is Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntu.com/GetUbuntu/download) because it is so easy to install and use - heck even my mum can use it! And the support community is fantastic. But there are many others, eg Mint (http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php), OpenSUSE (http://en.opensuse.org/Download), Fedora (http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora). They all offer "LiveCD's", which means you can boot from the CD and try them out before you install them. Whichever one you choose, you'll find your virus issues simply disappear. You'll also have fewer crashes, greater speed and much, much longer uptimes. And not merely are they free but almost all the software you need is also free.

FWIW, my little company dumped Windows in May 2007, largely due to the dismal performance of Micro$oft's Vista. I was fed up with continually shelling out my hard-earned cash to a highly unethical American corporation, whose products consistently failed to deliver the performance or security it promised. Today, we run 6 Ubuntu machines & 2 Debian ones, pretty much 24/7 permanently connected to the internet. Care to guess how many viruses, worms, trojans, spies, keyloggers etc. we suffered in that time?

Same as our software expenditure:- Zero!

Best wishes, G

NB:- if you do try a Live CD then please bear in mind that running an OS off a CD ROM is much slower than running from a hard disk.You'll need to install it in order to assess its true speed.

[snakedoc]

Dont you just hate it when a Linux fan boy pops his head and spouts the "M$" rubbish. Just makes then look a fool tbh.

[mrgoose]

Dont you just hate it when a Linux fan boy pops his head and spouts the "M$" rubbish. Just makes then look a fool tbh.

Perhaps you should re-read what I actually said, rather making deeply insulting remarks based upon what you think I said? I agreed that Security Essentials is a good product.

I was merely offering the OP some cheap, safe and secure alternatives. However, if you believe I have said something that is technically incorrect, then perhaps you would care to explain where?

Best wishes, G.

[snakedoc]

Perhaps you should re-read what I actually said, rather making deeply insulting remarks based upon what you think I said? I agreed that the Essentials Security is a good product.

I was merely offering the OP some cheap, safe and secure alternatives. However, if you believe I have said something that is technically incorrect, then perhaps you would care to explain where?

Best wishes, G.

It was all fine until the point where you wrote "Micro$oft" which is pathetic. It makes my hackles rise as it's pointless and ruined a perfectly good post.

Although I disagree that linux is easy to use. It can be a complete nightmare and you have to trawl through a book the size of a house or endless forums just to find out how to install a sound driver.

I found the rewards for using linux were out weighed by its complexity.

[Superewza]

So... when was the last time you used Linux? I burned Mint to a CD, ran it then within minutes i was in the Live CD playing music and browsing. That said i did plug in an Ethernet cable, but it's still easy enough to find and install drivers nowadays. All you have to do is download it, usually has a graphical installer. Terminal is still there for the advanced users who want to use it.

[snakedoc]

So... when was the last time you used Linux? I burned Mint to a CD, ran it then within minutes i was in the Live CD playing music and browsing. That said i did plug in an Ethernet cable, but it's still easy enough to find and install drivers nowadays. All you have to do is download it, usually has a graphical installer. Terminal is still there for the advanced users who want to use it.

A few weeks ago. Tried to install a driver for sound and graphics, but could not locate a driver for S3 trio or the sound card which I forget which it was now. This was on Ubuntu 9.04. I do like Mint 7's interface a little more, but it still very dry and boring to look at.

[mrgoose]

Although I disagree that linux is easy to use. It can be a complete nightmare and you have to trawl through a book the size of a house or endless forums just to find out how to install a sound driver.

That may have been true at one time - but not any more. Today, the majority of contemporary hardware works "out of the box". Moreover modern Linuxes have far better support for older hardware that proprietary Windows driver writers have long since forgotten.

FWIW the biggest problem I have confronted in recent times with a sound driver was installing Windows XP on a Lenovo 3000C200 laptop for yet another unhappy Vista user. Needless to say, Ubuntu on the same machine worked perfectly, "out of the box".

Finally, with all due respect, a person who gets offended by a "$" sign in his favourite corporation's name is not in much of a position to call other people "fan boys". Pots & kettles and all that, lol!

Best wishes, G.

[snakedoc]

I personally do not have a "favorite corporation" however I find Windows serves me well. MS have been good to me, giving me many many hours of entertainment through my PC. It has also ensured I have a desktop support job and can make money from fixing people's PCs. It is a pet hate to see "M$" though, just because it's not in the least bit nessasary and looks and sounds childish.

Every company out there is there to make money. Apple more so. Buy a mac and before you have got it out of the shop, there is a new version of it out and "Throw away your "old" one is a piece of ****" in the words of The Onion.

MS have given me free Beta OS' and RC since Vista, 5 copies of Vista Ultimate free and has given me two free copies of Windows 7 Ultimate. So yes, I am rather pleased with them.

[Superewza]

Just because you managed to get their OSes for free doesn't mean anybody else can. There's a difference between recommending and slashing.

[snakedoc]

Just because you managed to get their OSes for free doesn't mean anybody else can. There's a difference between recommending and slashing.

That is only a small part of the reason.

[mrgoose]

Every company out there is there to make money. Apple more so. Buy a mac and before you have got it out of the shop, there is a new version of it out and "Throw away your "old" one is a piece of ****" in the words of The Onion.


You and I (not to mention the US Department of Justice (http://www.activewin.com/articles/general/1/article_66.shtml) and the US Supreme Court (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft) and the European Competition Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/cases/microsoft/)) will have to agree to disagree regarding Microsoft. However, as Superewza (http://forum.novatech.co.uk/member.php?u=14059) has already observed, please don't let the fact that you have received lots of freebies colour your vision. Microsoft is a highly unethical foreign corporation that has systematically used its wealth and dominant market position to stifle its competition and make its owners some of the richest people on the planet.

Moreover not every company is out there to make money. There are still some organisations for whom turning a quick buck is of secondary importance. Quite a few of these are also actively involved with the open source community.

However you'll find no argument from me regarding Apple Corporation. Whilst I do like its OSX operating system and its hardware does have pleasant look and feel, its shameless promotion of what amounts to rampant consumerism is deeply distateful, IMHO.

Best wishes, G.

[snakedoc]

please don't let the fact that you have received lots of freebies colour your vision


That is only a small part of the reason.

Oddly, I like using and supporting Windows. It helps me make money to feed myself and my habbits.

CBA with any more Linux VS Microsoft.

[mrgoose]

Oddly, I like using and supporting Windows. It helps me make money to feed myself and my habbits.

Well that kinda hits the proverbial nail on the head, doesn't it? That's the real reason why certain MS devotees get so rattled on the forums when anyone dares to suggest alternatives.

These are the "IT professionals" who actively promote Microsoft products because they can make a great deal of money out of fixing Windows when it goes wrong. If more reliable and secure operating systems become widespread, then a major source of their income would dry-up.

Sure Macs, Linux & BSD boxes also need fixing too from time to time. But they don't suffer the constant plethora of worms, trojans, viruses, keyloggers, spies etc. etc. that MS boxes do.

And think of all those XP boxes that will need complete re-installs in order to "upgrade" to Win 7.

"L o a d s a m o n e y!"

You know what? I CBA either!

Best wishes, G.
PS. Apologies to the original poster for causing your thread to become hijacked.

[Superewza]

I can't really be bothered, but i like the market the way it is actually. Imagine it's like the solar system. Windows would be Jupiter, large and bloated but protecting the other planets from comets (or viruses). Most people go there because they're pulled in by it's gravity. Linux would be Mars, it can work if you want it to. Small so those who are sensible enough to go there can do and respect each other for that. OSX would be Earth, copied from Mars in the begining but is destroying itself and is obsessed with the capitalist lifestyle and polutants.

How's that for a metaphor? :p

[Storm3y]

I've been using Microsoft Security Essentials for the last couple of weeks and it's pretty good. If your looking for something paid I'd look at BullGuard.

[Naphta]

I've been using Microsoft Security Essentials for the last couple of weeks and it's pretty good. If your looking for something paid I'd look at BullGuard.
^ this been using MS' try and its going really well I like it.

[mithrandir]

Indeed. Microsoft Security essentials (http://www.microsoft.com/Security_Essentials/)

+1.
A great bit of software.

[riemann01]

+1 nice piece of software ;D

[Hayling Laser Sailor]

Kapersky and Symantec are very good.

[A Ginger Sheep]

Kapersky and Symantec are very good.

no there not. far too bloated and generally rubbish at protecting you. +1 for ms security essentials

[DocJohn]

Well ive just buitl my first pc and i want to protect it before i hit the web with it. Have used AVG in the past but it always caused me problems at some point so im willing to take the plunge and purchase soem proper Security software.

The one i have been reading about mostly is 'Kaspersky Internet Security 2010' - i believe it also includes their 'Anti Virus Software' too which is a bonus.

Now the only thing confusing me is there is a 'OEM' version and a 'Retail' version...the OEM version is cheaper but what one do i go for?? Are there any differences?

Kind Regards,

Ady


I have tried MS Essentials and it works fine

Does anyone think this thread went a bit off topic - previous page...

[iGoD ReleNtLeS]

i have both Comodo and MS Essentials. both are very good for a free piece of kit, but i prefer comodo. although it is VERY secure and somewhat annoying, it seems to do its job very well.

[cje]

Symantec Norton ground my old P4 system to a halt. Kaspersky was miles better.

I have used both Kaspersky and mcafee and found them to be quite good. Although I am using them on two systems running quad cores, so I guess that isnt quite a good comparison.

[iGoD ReleNtLeS]

Symantec Norton ground my old P4 system to a halt

+1 it come pre installed on my laptop, so i thought ok, i'l see that its like. it came with a family license (3 uses) and immediately the minute i installed it on both PCs they run like a brick in a square hole.

[Robear]

I used AVG, ESET NOD 32, ZoneAlarm on a XP Machine i had which worked fine.