MSE is as effective as Symantec's offering!

[Concerned User]

http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenber...mepagechannels

.....The Symantec guys made a huge noise when MSE came to the AV market and claimed that it was worthless. Maybe now they'll keep quiet?

[bo.elam]

In the past 2 year I used Avira, Avast, Tried Bit Defender and for the last
2 months I am using MSE. I can honestly say that I feel better protected
by MSE than by any of the AV mentioned. I also feel that with MSE the
chances of rendering my PC useless because of a bad false pòsitib¡ve
are 0 and that is not the case with the way some of the mentioned AV
works now.
I strongly recommend using MSE to people having original copies of
Windows. As of this moment I would not switch MSE or even try any
other AV and that includes Symantecs.

Bo

[Concerned User]

@ bo.elam: I also have a pretty similar experience. I started out with an old bloated version of Norton, moved over to AVG, tried bitdefender...then an IT friend of mine offered me a copy of McAfee enterprise...I began having problems with it and then heard that Microsoft was offering their own AV solution...Installed it and haven't looked back.

[Terarus]

Totally agree!

[Taurus]

Hi-
Is the next generation of MSE out of beta yet? Are there any performance improvements over version 1? I'm on XP SP3 and version 1 always ran heavy on my system.

Thanks,
Taurus

[Ghost]

I think this is very interesting. When Microsoft brought out MSE and got it pretty well right, I thought that it might shake up the security industry because users (particularly if they had a deal of money) who wouldn't use a free antivirus program such as Avast or Avira would decide to give Microsoft a go (granting that it had not received the hammering from critics that Vista got).

I suspect that in a few years from now practically all internet security on Windows computers will be supplied by Microsoft or by a user's internet service provider. In the case of the latter, for a time the ISP will proclaim 'Security provided by Symantec/Kaspersky/Whatever' but that will be a transitional phase (for as far as I can see, the only reason anyone now cares about who provides the security is simply that the security is not always satisfactory).

Of course, in a sense we'll always pay for security, and this is fair enough, but it will cease to be the you'd-better-renew-your-subscription protection racket it seems often to be.

[bo.elam]

Originally Posted by Taurus

Hi-
Is the next generation of MSE out of beta yet? Are there any performance improvements over version 1? I'm on XP SP3 and version 1 always ran heavy on my system.

Thanks,
Taurus

Its still on Beta. My system is same as yours and even though Version1 uses
more RAM than all the anti virus that I have used this past 2 years, it surely
does not feel like it. MSE s two processes uses about 70 MB but my PC feels
and responds fast. It feels lite not heavy like other applications that might
seem lite because of low RAM but in reality are heavy as they make the PC
crawl.
Taurus this app is a winner and I see it getting better and better as time
passes by, try it again.

Bo

[eyeb]

only problem with mse i have is i cant customize options or see whats going on as easy as avira :S

[bo.elam]

Originally Posted by eyeb

only problem with mse i have is i cant customize options or see whats going on as easy as avira :S

Very true, MSE don't have many options but I can tell you that
this little, simple application for some reason gets me excited.
A feeling that I did not have about Avast, even though Avast
has about 100 options. MSE does not have options that on other
Anti virus applications I would not accept but on MSE, I just don't
mind it at all.
I guess it boils down to how you/I feel about the application and
if we trust it. About MSE, I am learning to trust it more and more
every day so I don't mind the lack of options.

Bo

[eyeb]

yeah but do you dont write programs that trigger false positives?
being able to set execptions is nice for this