Ask HN: Recommend a good antivirus for Windows

webstartupper · 2015-07-31T01:48:39.000Z

I've used Nortons, AVG and more recently Avast in the past. Each antivirus seems to work well for a year or two and then gets compromised.Do you have an antivirus recommendation for a Windows machine that has worked well for a number of years?

andrewchambers 10 years ago |

I only trust Windows Defender from Microsoft. 1 - They know the internals of their own system. 2 - They have strong interest in keeping your OS running well. 3 - it is free.

forgotpasswd3x 10 years ago |

Avira always seems to be at the top of the charts on http://www.av-comparatives.org/. I have used it for years without issue.

usermac 10 years ago |

You could create a "Standard" account for your day-to-day. Then no need for virus protection. ^_^ To install software, you'll have an extra step of typing in the admin user name and password. Nice.

Maascamp 10 years ago |

Just use Windows Defender. It's built in. You're already done.

webstartupper 10 years ago | |

I believe Windows Defender only protects you against malware. You need a separate anti-virus solution along with it.

andrewchambers 10 years ago | | |

That is wrong, they are the same thing.

webstartupper 10 years ago | | |

Interesting - Windows Defender is an antivirus product for Windows 8+. However, for Windows 7 and older, it is only an anti-malware product.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Defender

0942v8653 10 years ago | | |

What's the difference between the two? Wouldn't all viruses be considered malware? Is there some standard that the software has to live up to to be labeled antivirus?

insoluble 10 years ago | | |

Viruses infect executable files (or other files that can potentially contain executable code) while non-virus malware infects machines, browsers, or other types of "hosts".

sarciszewski 10 years ago |

Avast free, but NOT for the antivirus. It has a really convenient software updating utility which will make you far more secure than any antivirus feature ever could.

technion 10 years ago |

Nearly every piece of malware I see rates 0/51 on virustotal. I would recommend picking one of those that has a high detection ratio, but you see...

insoluble 10 years ago | |

Some of those with high detection ratios either (a) use excessive heuristics or (b) detect things that could be considered "riskware" or a "hacker tool", even if the software runs in the foreground and does not cause any problems for the user. Then again, if you never use "hacker tools", then it may not matter much to you.

KNoureen 10 years ago |

Try ESET Smart Security, they have a 30 days free trial period.

lxue 10 years ago |

Use Mac OSX

paulftw 10 years ago |

After I stopped using Windows I've revisited my definition of "works well". Not trying to troll or bash Microsoft here and perhaps you have strong reasons to stay on it, but sometimes people try to treat symptom not the problem.

insoluble 10 years ago | |

Could it be that the "problem" in this case is that Windows has been so popular over such a long period? The popularity not only makes it a desirable target for malware but also makes it a desirable platform for cookie-cutter anti-malware programs, many of which are not worth the bits they are printed on. Another part of the problem is that many people are still running old versions of Windows (some even before User Account Control was implemented), which Microsoft is clearly trying to resolve here with the gratis Windows 10 upgrades.