Windows 8 /Anti-Virus

[Sean Troy]

Hey all, we have a Windows 8 computer that came with Norton and from what I understand, Windows 8 systems come with Windows Defender. Do I need both? Thanks, Sean

[Jerome Stanek]

I hate Norton slows the system down

[George Bokros]

Put your trust in Norton. Windows XP SVC Pk 3 had Defender and I would not trust it. I am running both XP and Windows 7 and use nothing but Norton, trust the best.

George

[Jerome Stanek]

I have been running defender for a few years now and it works very well. Norton is bloatware anymore and is almost as bad as a virus. My daughter and her boy friend are both IT techs for large companies and will not ever recommend Norton.

[Larry Browning]

As you probably found out from previous posts, opinions about AV software is all over the place! Here is mine:
Norton has in the past had the deserved reputation of being a resource hog. I think they have addressed that pretty well. There are however several free or low cost alternatives that work just as well or even better than Norton. Windows defender does work but is really provides a minimum level of protection. For the average user I believe Norton is a bit of overkill while Windows Defender is "underkill". Have a look at AVG or AVAST antivirus. Both get very high ratings, both have a very complete free version as well as a reasonably priced paid version. I would suggest one of those. (I have used AVAST for years)
Here is a link to a review of several free AV programs which include both AVG and AVAST as well as others.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-anti-virus-software.htm

BTW: You should run only one AV program because they tend to work against each other and can cause all sorts of problems.
One more thing, If you decide to not go with Norton, uninstall it before you register it with Norton. Otherwise it will be much more difficult to uninstall.

[Sean Troy]

As you probably found out from previous posts, opinions about AV software is all over the place! Here is mine:
Norton has in the past had the deserved reputation of being a resource hog. I think they have addressed that pretty well. There are however several free or low cost alternatives that work just as well or even better than Norton. Windows defender does work but is really provides a minimum level of protection. For the average user I believe Norton is a bit of overkill while Windows Defender is "underkill". Have a look at AVG or AVAST antivirus. Both get very high ratings, both have a very complete free version as well as a reasonably priced paid version. I would suggest one of those. (I have used AVAST for years)
Here is a link to a review of several free AV programs which include both AVG and AVAST as well as others.
http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-anti-virus-software.htm

BTW: You should run only one AV program because they tend to work against each other and can cause all sorts of problems.
One more thing, If you decide to not go with Norton, uninstall it before you register it with Norton. Otherwise it will be much more difficult to uninstall.
I have also always been under the assumption that two AV programs on the same computer is not good. I wonder why they ship them that way?

[David Weaver]

I've been using avg for a very long time, the free version, but it's now bloatware, too, and not efficient (bordering on adware and slog ware the amount of times it asks you if you want to buy the pay version and the amount of times it wants to update).

Thanks for bringing this topic up, it reminds me to go out and look for the virus software that is 99% as capable as the bloatware, but that is new and streamlined. There is no reason so far as I can tell that a non-commercial user should pay for antivirus or malware monitor/removal stuff. Most of it is free license or at least has enough features free that you're in good shape to use it. I always remove their nasty toolbars, though, that try to direct traffic through proprietary "safe searches". There's a lot of money in getting people to click through you to pretty much anywhere you could buy things.

(looking through pcmag's listing of software, bitdefender free is described well for my use - unobtrusive and unnoticeable in the background. And Free. Perfect).

[Larry Browning]

I've been using avg for a very long time, the free version, but it's now bloatware, too, and not efficient (bordering on adware and slog ware the amount of times it asks you if you want to buy the pay version and the amount of times it wants to update).

Thanks for bringing this topic up, it reminds me to go out and look for the virus software that is 99% as capable as the bloatware, but that is new and streamlined. There is no reason so far as I can tell that a non-commercial user should pay for antivirus or malware monitor/removal stuff. Most of it is free license or at least has enough features free that you're in good shape to use it. I always remove their nasty toolbars, though, that try to direct traffic through proprietary "safe searches". There's a lot of money in getting people to click through you to pretty much anywhere you could buy things.

(looking through pcmag's listing of software, bitdefender free is described well for my use - unobtrusive and unnoticeable in the background. And Free. Perfect).

I believe that AVAST come pretty close to meeting your requirements. Also, I always try to find free or open source software whenever I can, but AV software is one thing I don't mind paying for if it keeps can keep my PC healthy.

[Dan Hintz]

This kind of stuff (virii) is very near and dear to my field of work... I use Avast!, if that tells you anything...

[Larry Browning]

I have also always been under the assumption that two AV programs on the same computer is not good. I wonder why they ship them that way? I haven't a clue, but here is an article that sort of explains why more than one is a bad idea. http://www.security-faqs.com/why-shouldnt-i-install-more-than-one-antivirus-program-at-a-time.html

[Sean Troy]

I haven't a clue, but here is an article that sort of explains why more than one is a bad idea. http://www.security-faqs.com/why-shouldnt-i-install-more-than-one-antivirus-program-at-a-time.html
Thanks, seems to confirm that two are not good.

[Jim Becker]

Computer manufacturers often bundle their own choice of AV with their offerings. My daughter's new Dell Win8 desktop (similar to my iMac but with a touch screen) came with a McAfee product pre-installed. I'll replace it with the Microsoft product at the appropriate time.

Specific to your question, it's not always the best idea to run more than one AV system concurrently. It's likely that the Norton product is primary and the native Windows product is either not active or only being used minimally from the computer manufacturer.

[Sean Troy]

Computer manufacturers often bundle their own choice of AV with their offerings. My daughter's new Dell Win8 desktop (similar to my iMac but with a touch screen) came with a McAfee product pre-installed. I'll replace it with the Microsoft product at the appropriate time.

Specific to your question, it's not always the best idea to run more than one AV system concurrently. It's likely that the Norton product is primary and the native Windows product is either not active or only being used minimally from the computer manufacturer.
I may just as well get rid of both and go with one of the better free ones. The norton is a 60 freebie.

[Jim Becker]

Sean, Microsoft's Windows Essentials, now called "Defender" for Win8 does an excellent job, is free and certainly is designed to work "swimmingly" with Windows. :D

[Dan Hintz]

Sean, Microsoft's Windows Essentials, now called "Defender" for Win8 does an excellent job, is free and certainly is designed to work "swimmingly" with Windows. :D

Oh, it works quite well with Windows... but I thought we were concerned about true security here ;)

[David Weaver]

Computer manufacturers often bundle their own choice of AV with their offerings. My daughter's new Dell Win8 desktop (similar to my iMac but with a touch screen) came with a McAfee product pre-installed. I'll replace it with the Microsoft product at the appropriate time.


I'd imagine there is money changing hands for the rights to put trial versions of software on new PCs. My first step in my once-every-few-years purchase of a new PC is to get rid of all of the trial stuff that comes with, and go back to the low or no dollar stuff that was working well on the last one.

[David C. Roseman]

Put your trust in Norton. Windows XP SVC Pk 3 had Defender and I would not trust it. I am running both XP and Windows 7 and use nothing but Norton, trust the best.

George

Well, YMMV. Malware got through Norton's premium product twice on a desktop running XP four years ago. It actually tricked Norton into showing full protection while going about its mischief. After a couple of hrs. on the phone with several of their techs in Mumbai, a senior supervisor finally confided that I should take the pc to a local repair shop. Why would they be able to clear the virus if Norton couldn't, I asked. "Because they can use third party tools that we aren't allowed to." Took my local guy just a few minutes to find and remove the malware, using non-Symantec products. Anecdotal, sure. But we're all victims of our own experience.

For anti-virus, he recommended Avira. Used the freeware version happily on several pcs for a year. What a difference, and didn't hog resources. Went to the paid, Premium version the next and subsequent years, and have no problems on XP and Windows 7 OS. They say they're fully compatible with Windows 8.

David

[Dan Hintz]

Let me say this, before everyone throws their own two cents into the rings with the quote "Mine works best!"...

There is not a single AV product available that catches all of the viruses/malware out there. The best ones catch about 80% (the worst are lucky to get 20%). When you see a particular product touted as catching 100% of virii in a test, these are standardized tests with known groups of virii. If the test group was modified with different virii, the winner would likely fall back to 90% or 80%, and one of the losers would jump up to 100%.

That said, most of them catch the majority of the most common virii. Unless you are pushing the boundaries of searches (as I do), the better packages will save you from days of doom on the majority of occasions. I stay far away from Norton (and related products) because they're resource hogs... but they will still save you. I personally chose Avast! because it was a good tradeoff of speed, resource control, and security. But I also don't go looking for trouble on the machines running it.

YMMV...

[Michael Weber]

this thread is a riot:)