Which is the lightest antivirus
by Magic-wand - 3/28/13 1:35 PM
Which one consumes less system resources??
by: Magic-wand March 28, 2013 1:35 PM PDT
0 people like this thread
Total posts: 22 (Showing page 1 of 1)
Most think that's NOD32.
But some want a free one but that's not in your list. So NOD32 gets the nod.
NOD32 used to be light....
I'm now on Version 5 of NOD32 on several Windows XP machines and, while early versions used to operate unnoticed, it now often hogs the machine's resources making it impossible to do anything with the foreground task. I suspect if you have a multi-core CPU it is not an issue, but my poor old single core 1.6GHz machines are often all but unusable during the startup scan.
I'm also looking for a light anti-virus product for when my current NOD32 licence expires.
NOD still wins light in my opinion.What's not light today is
As there is some many thousand (millions now?) virus and more to detect how can we avoid loading down any antivirus with the needed lists of bad things?
-> Why are you performing a startup scan?
Most turned that off years ago unless they are doing dangerous things such as torrents and the like.
Definitely Would be MS Security Essentials. Use with Windows defender.... Light on system resources and your wallet (it's free!) Stay away from Norton even if it's provided by your ISP.
MSE killed my single core laptop - Switched to Avast and hardly know it's there - except when it verbally announces it's updated the signatures! I use Avast on my Android phone also, again, no noticeable overhead. Y.M.M.V.
If you don;t know.
there's no viruses on phones thats why phone protections free
No phone viruses??? THINK AGAIN!
Check this out:
Now, go ahead and tell people they don't exist. You just prove yourself quit ignorant.
I looked and didn't find any. Even with your search.
Maybe you are re-defining what a virus is? Here's the current definition.
"A computer virus is a computer program that can replicate itself and spread from one computer to another. The term "virus" is also commonly, but erroneously, used to refer to other types of malware, including but not limited to adware and spyware programs that do not have a reproductive ability."
It would be erroneous to include the usual other types of infections. So back to you. Are you calling those trojans and such a virus?
PS. From your own search -> "Hoax"
by R. Proffitt - 6/16/13 11:37 AM
In Reply to: I looked and didn't find any. Even with your search. by R. Proffitt
"There is no such threat. No mobile phone viruses capable of infecting cell phones and erasing SIM cards have yet been discovered."
No. I am NOT trying to "re-define what a virus is." But a person could say that one sort of mal-ware IS a virus. I apologize for the confusion caused by my misnomer.
The particular link that you provide is about something that started a decade ago and in fact was a particular spam message that was being sent out at that time that was in fact a hoax. That article has absolutely nothing to do with cell phone mal-ware in general. That particular article is about the ACE-? Mobile Phone Hoax. Please see: http://home.mcafee.com/VirusInfo/VirusProfile.aspx?key=99320
My main point is that it is a FACT is that cell phone "mal-wares" (so to speak), in general, DO exist. period.
"A cell phone virus is a computer virus that infects a cell phone. Initially considered to be a hoax, cell phone viruses have become real as many smartphones and other modern cell phones feature internet capability and contain storage space."
"A mobile virus is a piece of malicious software that targets mobile phones or wireless-enabled PDAs.
As wireless phone and PDA networks become more commonly used and more
complex, it has become increasingly difficult to secure them against electronic attacks in the form of viruses or other malware."
More generalities can be read by following the Reference and other links at Wikipedia under "Cell Phone Virus" and "Mobile Virus".
Much better searches than the one I initially provided are:
I hope this clears the mud.
*P.S.: You may want to add FactCheck (http://www.factcheck.org/) and TruthOrFiction (http://www.truthorfiction.com/) to your list of debunking sites if you don't already have them.
I have or should have never written there is
Sorry but you called out "virus" and as such we need to be very clear about what we are calling out.
There is plenty of malware, trojans and such so there is no dispute there. It's like the elusive Mac OS X virus.
Good to see you know the difference from a virus to those other things.
To be specific...
There is some very good information on this subject at F-Secure:
The links there are to download PDFs, but the info in them is very concise.
Hydrahead is the one who called "viruse". I just took that an ran... .... .... because I do know about such things and also the difference. I was merely using his terminology to try to make my point.
I find those that sell AntiVirus for android
Are the most vocal. http://www.howtogeek.com/129896/htg-explains-does-your-android-phone-need-an-antivirus/ duplicates a lot of what's been said but why not start a new discussion where we can ask if Plan B and even more fun at
So is the Android platform even a consideration for folk that worry about security?
I'd like you to ask such a question.
I view phone OSes similarly to computer OSes. ANYthing written in code can and will [eventually] have exploits at one time or another. Therefore, why would one want to take the chance of being just another statistic? Really?
I was simply refuting Hydrahead's assertion that "there's no viruses on phones". That's all. As I have shown, malwarez of several types do exist that affect cell phone platforms. I never stated how prevalent they are. That is the next 64 Thousand Dollar Question that has mixed reviews, but it's a general consensus that an ounce of prevention could very well be worth a ton of cure. Please refer to: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Does+Your+Smart+Phone+Need+an+Antivirus%3F
As for your "android commercial", while it's interesting, I fail to see the relevance.
Can't reply to you.
Start a new discussion but as long as folk can't find the virus (let's use our definitions of that here? OK?) Will we need an antivirus? What would it do?
As to the other issues, I'd like to hear your thoughts about security if Plan B and that other item works, and we know that Google can recall an app, replace an app apparently without our consent.
Are you OK with that?
I use AVG free, and Malwarebytes. Both work great, cause zero conflicts both seem to be very light, easy to use, and doesn't mess with the rest of my system. As others have said, stay away from Norton, and I would add, stay away from McAfee also.
Webroot is tiny but effective
The full download is less than a megabyte, but it consistently turns in top scores. Webroot's definitions reside in the cloud, so it's constantly up to date.
Norton Internet Security 2013 also has a very light footprint, compared to what it was several years ago. I used to run NOD32, but its ability to block malware has declined.
Of the freeware antivirus programs, I have found Panda Cloud to have the lightest footprint and slow down older, less powerful computers the least. It's noticeably lighter than Avast, Avira or AVG. I have not tried NOD32, but my computers have never been slowed by Norton Antivirus versions 2010 and above, although I don't put it on anything running less than a Core 2 Duo chip with 4GB of RAM.
What AV Comparatives says:
The last time AV Comparatives ran Performance tests was October of 2012. You can check out their results by downloading the PDF file ( av-comparatives.org/images/docs/avc_per_201210_en.pdf ) that they provide.
Total posts: 22 (Showing page 1 of 1)
You are posting a reply to: Post Subject
You are requesting a clarification of the question: Post Subject
You are posting an answer to the question: Post Subject
Would you like to resolve this question? close