Which Internet Security Suite to get included with new computer?

I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
purchase price.

I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.

I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.

I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.

--

I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
That's what everybody calls me.

> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.

I should have mentioned, I have no problem with recommendations for
individual programs to make a 'suite'.

--

I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
That's what everybody calls me.

Aaron wrote:
> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
>


You'll get nearly as many differing opinions as you will responses.

I'll start by saying that I don't think any security "suite" is a
good choice. It'd be better to use smaller, less-resource-draining
stand-alone products.

I had used, and recommended, Norton Antivirus and then Norton
Internet Security, for many years, on Win98, WinNT, Win2K, and WinXP,
all without any significant problems. I had used McAfee prior to that.
But it's been several years since I've been tempted to try McAfee
products. Their quality seemed to take a steep nose-dive after they were
acquired by Network Associates.

However, when my subscription to Symantec's updates for Norton
Internet Security came up for renewal (at a cost substantially higher
than the preceding year's subscription), I decided to try less expensive
solutions. I downloaded and installed the free version of GriSoft's AVG
(http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php ). It proved to be easily
installed, easy to use, and quite effective. Additionally, I was
pleasantly surprised to see a small but very noticeable improvement in
my PC's performance, once I'd replaced the Symantec product. Another
free (for personal use) anti-virus product is AVAST! 4 Home Edition
(http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html), which is what I've used
without problems on both WinXP Pro and Vista Business.

For a recent comparison of anti-virus products:

Retrospective / ProActive Test
http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Stick with the Kaspersky, which is superior to any of the suites being
offered, and which you already own.

Vista's built-in Windows Firewall is adequate for most users, but
not particularly easy to configure. Vista's built-in firewall, although
superior to that of WinXP, is of a rudimentary nature, intended to meet
the simpler needs of most home consumers (or business/enterprise clients
already ensconced behind more advanced perimeter defenses).

One 3rd-party add-on (Sphinx's Vista Firewall Control
http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/) might make the Vista Firewall a bit more
useful to you, but nothing but a completely independent product will be
able to provide the detailed control you want.

There are two interfaces for Vistas built-in firewall:

1) A simplified one accessed through the Control Panel that is the only
one most people see.

2) And the more advanced "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security
(WF.msc)," accessed via the Start Menu's Administrative Tools folder,
for the experienced user who wants better control.

Having said that, it's important to remember that firewalls and
anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should always
be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot, and should
not be expected to, protect the computer user from him/herself.
Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every computer user to learn
how to secure his/her own computer.



--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot

Trend-Micro. Because I know they used to be good, I like their
write-ups, and I hear so few complaints about them.

"Aaron" <> wrote in message
news:...
>> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers
>> an Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
>> purchase price.
>>
>> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>>
>> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they
>> all are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one
>> easiest to remove without hosing the system before installing a
>> different suite.
>>
>> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
>> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
>> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
>
> I should have mentioned, I have no problem with recommendations for
> individual programs to make a 'suite'.
>
> --
>
> I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
> That's what everybody calls me.

Aaron wrote:
> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
>
> --
>
> I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
> That's what everybody calls me.

Kaspersky, go with what you know works for you. Norton / Symantec and
MacAfee are a waste of space. And you know what, the fact that you were
sensible enough to ask means you already have the best protection you
can get - which is common sense.

On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:40:56 -0400, Aaron <> wrote:

> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.


Three points:

1. I think using *any* security suite is a very poor practice. It's
far better to choose each individual piece of software based on its
qualities as compared to the competing products. The company that
makes the best anti-virus program doesn't necessarily also make the
best anti-spyware program, so I recommend staying away from suites
that force you into making such an assumption

In fact, I think the same thing about almost any kind of suite of
software, including an Office suite. I, for example, use WordPerfect
in preference to Microsoft Word, but Excel in preference to Quattro
Pro.

2. Norton and McAfee are the two *worst* vendors of security software,
in my view. I would stay far away from all their products.

3. Trend Micro is much better than either of the other two, but I
would still recommend that you use the following:

a. The built-in Windows Vista firewall

b. NOD32 anti-virus

c. AT least *two* anti spyware programs. The best is Malwarebytes, but
also add as many as you want from this list:

SuperAntiSpyware
Adaware
Spybot Search and Destroy.

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

"Ken Blake, MVP" <> skrev i meddelelsen
news:...
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:40:56 -0400, Aaron <> wrote:
>
> 2. Norton and McAfee are the two *worst* vendors of security software,
> in my view. I would stay far away from all their products.
>
> 3. Trend Micro is much better than either of the other two, but I
> would still recommend that you use the following:
>
> a. The built-in Windows Vista firewall
>
> b. NOD32 anti-virus
>
> c. AT least *two* anti spyware programs. The best is Malwarebytes, but
> also add as many as you want from this list:
>
> SuperAntiSpyware
> Adaware
> Spybot Search and Destroy.

Why not start by recomminding the user to run as a non admin (LUA)?
Shall we stop trying to put all our trust in fear driven products and start
using our common sense?

None of the below. Stick with an antivirus program you trust, add an
anti-spyware/adware package, and turn on and use the Windows firewall. I
don't like, use or recommend suites because of the system impact they carry.

"Aaron" <> wrote in message
news:...
> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is running
> fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
>
> --
>
> I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
> That's what everybody calls me.

A Security Suite ends up being a bloated, resource-hungry hog, that tries to
be everything to everybody, and fails in all departments.

I even disable Defender, as is not prime time Anti spyware.

I recommend the combination below:

http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html

Avast Anti-Virus is XP and Vista compatible (32bit and 64bit Versions),
FREE, auto-updating, and a low resources user of your computer.
And, only have 1(one) Anti-Virus installed / running on your computer at any
one time.
Conflicts may occur if you have more than 1(one).

http://www.spybot.info/en/index.html

Spybot Search & Destroy 1.6.2 is a very good, FREE Anti-Spyware Program.
Download, install, update, and immunize your System with it.
Then SCAN with it.
Update it, and scan your System once a fortnight.

http://www.javacoolsoftware.com/spywareblaster.html

SpywareBlaster 4.2 is a non-intrusive, FREE Anti-Spyware Program (no
scanning by you!).
SpywareBlaster prevents the installation of many so-called spyware, adware
and malware programs by disabling the CLSIDs of popular spyware ActiveX
controls, and also prevents the installation of any of them via a webpage
Update it once a fortnight.

http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam.php

Malwarebytes is as the name says, a Malware Remover!
For the Free version scroll down their page to either download from
Download.com, or Major Geeks.com

Download, install, update and scan once a fortnight..

--
Mad Mike


"Aaron" wrote:

> I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
> Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
> purchase price.
>
> I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
>
> I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
> are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
> remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
>
> I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
> installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
> running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
>
> --
>
> I'm glad my Mom named me Aaron,
> That's what everybody calls me.
>

Are we advocating sales here? Nice marketing plug.......

"rive0108" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> *Do not get Trend Micro it is subpar. Norton is the best out of these
> three-Trend is by far the worst. *
> For recent Certified lab test results
> see:'_http://www.vistax64.com/system-security/172321-vista-sp1-antivirus-performance.html_'
> (http://www.vistax64.com/system-secur...rformance.html)
>
> '_http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?vendor=VE3_'
> (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archiv...lts?vendor=VE3)
> '_http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=summary_'
> (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archiv...isplay=summary)
> '_http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/report20.pdf_'
> (http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...e/report20.pdf)
> '_http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_report21.pdf_'
> (http://www.av-comparatives.org/image...c_report21.pdf)
> '_http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archive/results?display=summary_'
> (http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archiv...isplay=summary)
>
> Trend Micro is bottom of the barrel Antivirus/Antimlaware program and
> will at best provide subpar protection.
>
> No Lab certification from either AV-Comparatives, or Virus Bulletin.
> There is only the west coast labs certification, which shows a missed
> Trojan, and ICSA (which doesn’t even test for polymorphic
> threats-i.e., self replicating/potentially catastrophic malware
> threats). AV-Comparatives is top notch, and is the best, followed
> closely by Virus Bulletin’s VB100. Trend Micro failed the last
> VB100, and has no recent entries at all with AV-Comparatives. It is
> usually a fair indicator that a Vendor’s product is subpar, when
> it is not entered into either AV-Comparatives, or the VB100, and/or
> consistently fails the VB100 whereas NOD32 and Symantec consistently
> pass year after year.
>
> '_http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/produ..._pro_2009.html_'
> (http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/produ..._pro_2009.html)
>
> *--*“Trend Micro Internet Security Pro 2009 Review*--*
> -*-*Jan 22, 2009 by Erik Larkin, PC World*-*-
> -*-*::TREND MICRO'S SUITE FAILS AT THE MOST BASIC TASK OF DETECTING AND
> BLOCKING MALICIOUS SOFTWARE. NOT RECOMMENDED.::*-*-
>
> -*-*Trend Micro Internet Security Pro 2009 ($70 for three users as of
> 12/24/08 ) fails badly at any security suite's most important task:
> Identifying malware before it can attack your PC. In tests for "Paying
> for Protection," our 2009 roundup of nine security suites, Trend Micro's
> newest offering didn't just come in last place in that crucial
> category--its dismal 69.3 percent detection rate was a full 20
> percentage points behind the next worst competitor. In AV-Test.org's
> tests, which put each suite up against a huge array of bots, password
> stealers, and other malware, top performers tagged about 99 percent of
> the 654,914 samples--but Trend Micro's package let three out of every
> ten pieces of malicious software go by untouched. That just doesn't cut
> it for security software.*-*-
> -*-*Trend Micro likewise fell flat in heuristic tests using
> two-week-old signature files to simulate dealing with unknown threats,
> and at catching annoying adware. It was dead last in both
> categories.*-*-
> -*-*The company says that it emphasizes proactive protection that
> attempts to block threats before they can try installing malware (and
> before the suite would have to recognize it). Trend Micro uses its own
> Web crawlers, download tests, and user reports to maintain a database of
> malicious Web sites, and will block those sites from loading on your PC.
> It's a valid approach--one that could well supplement scanning for
> malware on your PC--but it can't yet replace that core detection
> task.*-*-
> -*-*Trend Micro's package did shine when tasked with cleaning up an
> existing infection. It removed all the files from nine out of ten
> malware infections, a performance that only BitDefender matched. It was
> almost as good in dealing with Registry changes, placing second in that
> test.*-*-
> -*-*The suite offers a few interesting features, such as a scan for
> missing Windows patches that assigns a risk level for each one. You'll
> also get a useful Wi-Fi advisor button in a browser toolbar that can
> warn you if your wireless network lacks encryption--a smart tool placed
> in a good location.*-*-
> -*-*Trend Micro also did well with its user interface, and clearly took
> time to provide good descriptions for features and options. Right away
> we noticed the use of plain English throughout the program.*-*-
> -*-*But the company went too far with its desire to simplify, as we saw
> no pop-ups or warnings when it blocked our attempted Zango-adware
> download. We had to dig into the program logs to find out what was going
> on. It's good to help people make informed decisions to protect their
> computer, but it's also important to at least give users an idea that
> something we just tried to do was potentially harmful. Without an alert,
> a user might think that their browser simply had a problem, and they
> might then try installing the dangerous software through another
> browser--or even worse, on another PC. You can change the default
> setting to display warnings when your PC encounters viruses or spyware,
> but you shouldn't have to.*-*-
> -*-*Trend Micro's suite has some good points, but there's no getting
> around the fact that Internet Security Pro 2009 fails at detecting
> malicious software, and therefore fails as a security program. We cannot
> recommend buying it.”*-*-
>
>
> --
> rive0108
>
> '::_-Win_$500_With_Vista_Forums-_::'
> (http://www.vistax64.com/competitions..._more_info-_::