What is the best 100% free Anti-Virus?

[php111]

Hey all,

What is the best Anti-Virus that is 100% free? The new AVG is a piece of crap. I get fake positives where as I know for sure my computer is clean. I have nod32 and I like it but it's not free and my trial is almost up. I have to find a free program that is good and no fake positives. Can anyone help me find one? Take care everyone.

 

[turbo]

Avast!

 

[php111]

Avast!

Thank you for your reply. I will check it out now!

 

[binzing]

I say AVG, but I've heard great stuff about both Avast and Avira as well.

 

[Defennder]

Hey all,

What is the best Anti-Virus that is 100% free? The new AVG is a piece of crap. I get fake positives where as I know for sure my computer is clean. I have nod32 and I like it but it's not free and my trial is almost up. I have to find a free program that is good and no fake positives. Can anyone help me find one? Take care everyone.

Is there an option to turn off heuristics? That would reduce the number of false positives.

 

[php111]

Is there an option to turn off heuristics? That would reduce the number of false positives.

I am not sure but is there? If there is, I would bet I go back to AVG. I miss 7.5 there was no false at all with that version. It became with 8.0 and 8.5 and so on.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

AVG is still the best. I've had no problems with the new version.

 

[binzing]

I know, they tried to make it look fancy and all it does is piss me off. I don't get any false positives, but I've got dialup so I'm naturally slightly less prone. Especially the updater makes me mad, where as on the last version it would just update when I got on the net.

 

[php111]

Really? No false positives guys? nod32 scans my computer with no threats but AVG gives me threats.

 

[php111]

Alright, I found something but NOT sure how to do it:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080511134332AAEl2fO

The part I am not sure about is: You need to go to Tools > Advanced Settings, and then under Resident Shield go to Exceptions and add the path that ePSXe is in.

Where do I find the path? ePSXe? Never heard of it.

 

[binzing]

If anything, a false positive is GOOD, cause its saying something that your other scanner can't.

 

[turbo]

Be aware that if you use an AV program that quarantines suspicious files, it ignores the files that it has locked away, but other AV programs might "see" those suspicious files within the quarantine and give you a positive. In this case, you are not getting a false positive from the second scanner. It truly does "see" the string of suspicious code, but does not recognize that the first scanner has quarantined the file containing that code.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I use AVG Free and like it just fine; it's worth way more than what I paid for it.

 

[g33kski11z]

I've used AVG for years, never had a problem...

.. side note, where I work I get McAfee for free but I still use AVG.

 

[Crosson]

There are no free anti-virus software packages. This is mostly due to two reasons:

1) Computer security evolves so quickly that any general scanner must have a constantly updated database of known threats.

2) The demand for anti-virus comes from users of MS Windows, who presumably do not care about software freedom.

Where do I find the path? ePSXe? Never heard of it.

ePSXe is an emulator for the original playstation game console.

 

[binzing]

Ok...

 

[turbo]

There are no free anti-virus software packages. This is mostly due to two reasons:

1) Computer security evolves so quickly that any general scanner must have a constantly updated database of known threats.

Avast! is free and the virus definitions are updated daily - much more responsive and up-to-date than Norton.

 

[binzing]

Ha ha, yeah, I think Crosson didn't even bother to read the OP or any of the posts...

 

[g33kski11z]

There are no free anti-virus software packages.

AVG is free, I'm sure there are others as well.

The demand for anti-virus comes from users of MS Windows, who presumably do not care about software freedom.

What? The demand for virus protection has nothing to do with being a Windows user, Mac has virus' also. And how does a MS user not care about "software freedom"? {software freedom...? I assume your referencing open source apps ?} Do you not care about "automobile freedom" because you paid for your car?? That was a dumb comment.

 

[binzing]

Macs have fewer viruses though...

I LOVE open source! I love the feeling of finding a fully functional, cool, useful program for FREE.

 

[Crosson]

Free != no cost

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html"

Avast! is free and the virus definitions are updated daily - much more responsive and up-to-date than Norton.

Avast is not free! It is provided at no cost for non-commercial use.

Ha ha, yeah, I think Crosson didn't even bother to read the OP or any of the posts...

I read the other posts, and I was blown away that other folks think things like AVG and Avast provide freedom to users.

AVG is free, I'm sure there are others as well.

AVG is provided at no cost for non-commercial use, it does not grant freedom to the user in any significant way.

What? The demand for virus protection has nothing to do with being a Windows user, Mac has virus' also.

Neither MS Windows or OSX are free software, so the point of my comparison is still valid: users of these operating systems do not care about their freedom, and so there are no free anti-virus products.

Besides, security packages on a UNIX system bear little to no resemblance with anti-virus scanners for windows, and most 'anti-virus' products sold on the Mac on marketing scams, very ineffective in real world use (exploits are rare, and an exploit being caught by one of these is rarer still).

And how does a MS user not care about "software freedom"?

You have no way of knowing what MS Windows is doing to your hardware! You gave them complete control of your machine :(

{software freedom...? I assume your referencing open source apps ?}

No, open source apps can be released with unlimited restrictions.

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-software-for-freedom.html"

Do you not care about "automobile freedom" because you paid for your car?? That was a dumb comment.

This is ironic, because the old joke on Usenet was that any comment about computers that involves a car analogy is automatically a dumb comment.

To anyone who thinks I am being pedantic, or arguing semantics, you should know the history behind the free software movement and decide whether you support corporations or individuals.

 

[binzing]

Whoa man, calm down, there's nothing to get all worked up about here.

Most people consider "at no cost" to be "free".

 

[turbo]

Whoa man, calm down, there's nothing to get all worked up about here.

Most people consider "at no cost" to be "free".

True, and the company that wrote and maintains Avast has a right to expect that people who use it in a business setting (to make money, duh!) should pay for their copy. It's nice of them to distribute it free for personal use, and it helps keep the overall level of virus attacks suppressed so they are not fighting fires all the time. I have used NAV and the timeliness of their responses to new threats was disappointing.

 

[binzing]

I really HATE people that make viruses, cause its so cowardly. I have high respect for hackers (some of them, mainly grayhats), especially when you read the Hacker's Manifesto.

 

[Crosson]

Whoa man, calm down, there's nothing to get all worked up about here.

Physicsforums is a very smart place, so I was surprised to see that AVG and Avast were being called free software. This conflicts with the usage of the term by the free software movement, which is a social and intellectual movement that has brought us the GNU/Linux operating system, the Mozilla firefox internet browser, openOffice, VLC Media Player, etc.

In general, freedom is something that people get very 'worked up' about. I am 'worked up' because I want you all to learn about the free software movement so that you can be free.

Here is a dystopian short story:

http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html

Most people consider "at no cost" to be "free".

I agree that this is normal usage, but the free software movement is very important and they encourage us only to use the term 'free software' in reference to freedom.

 

[binzing]

Yeah, well as long as I'm using Windows (I am making a FREE Ubuntu computer...BTW) I need virus protection, and I'm going to use a free one (I use free, deal with it...).

Believe me, I do use Firefox, openOffice, etc.

 

[Crosson]

(I use free, deal with it...)

Why would you do this? Don't you understand the purpose of the free software movement, and don't you want to help it to achieve this purpose?

 

[binzing]

I understand the movement, but unfortunately free programs don't yet have everything I need, and as I am not a programmer, its not like I can actually edit these open source programs to better fit my needs and likes.

I use it because it's how I speak, and it makes sense to do so. Most people, (even diehard Open Sourcers) wouldn't get in such a huff over symantics. Calling only true blue Open Source programs "free" isn't going to further the movement, neither will correcting people every time they say something is free, when, according to you, they should say "available at no cost for non-commercial purposes".

 

[turbo]

Why would you do this? Don't you understand the purpose of the free software movement, and don't you want to help it to achieve this purpose?

Let's support the people who supply alternatives (free for personal use) instead of blindly demanding that all software be free and insist that we should boycott software that doesn't meet your standards for "openness". That's ridiculous, and it's not going to happen. Programmers have to eat, too. I made my living for over a year writing custom application software for business that needed applications that were not available commercially. Believe me, I would not have wasted my time writing and giving away free software, and I am grateful for the people who make software available free for personal use while deriving their income from businesses.

 

[Crosson]

I understand the movement, but unfortunately free programs don't yet have everything I need

So use a non-free program like AVG, or Avast Anti-Virus. These are available for personal use at no cost.

and as I am not a programmer, its not like I can actually edit these open source programs to better fit my needs and likes.

But someone else could, and so you get software that is much better suited to users needs.

I use it because it's how I speak, and it makes sense to do so.

Even when you are given a good reason to change?

Most people, (even diehard Open Sourcers) wouldn't get in such a huff over symantics.

That just shows how little you know about the free software movement.

Also, I have already said that open source is only one of the requirements for software to be free, not all open source software respects the freedom of the user.

Calling only true blue Open Source programs "free" isn't going to further the movement, neither will correcting people every time they say something is free, when, according to you, they should say "available at no cost for non-commercial purposes".

Well then I guess you understand how to further the movement better then the man who founded it, which would be great for the community considering the progress that he has already made.

Let's support the people who supply alternatives (free for personal use) instead of blindly demanding that all software be free and insist that we should boycott software that doesn't meet your standards for "openness".

That's fine, if you use MS Windows and you want a anti-virus scanner (which I recommend against) then I recommend Avast AV first, and AVG second. I don't think the expensive alternatives do a better job.

I just object to calling AVG and Avast '100% free' when they do not respect the freedom of the user!

I made my living for over a year writing custom application software for business that needed applications that were not available commercially.

Imagine if everyone who did this released there code as free software. There is no argument that this would hurt sales, since the software you wrote is not availible commercially, but it very well could save 9-12 months of effort for someone else doing a similar task across the world.

Believe me, I would not have wasted my time writing and giving away free software

I hope that now you see that time would have been saved, if not for you then for other people, if the software that you wasted your time writing had been released for free once and for all. Very ironic.

and I am grateful for the people who make software available free for personal use while deriving their income from businesses.

That's fine, but wouldn't it be even better if they released in a way that respected your freedom?

 

[turbo]

I hope that now you see that time would have been saved, if not for you then for other people, if the software that you wasted your time writing had been released for free once and for all. Very ironic.

You find it ironic that I needed to be paid to spend weeks developing custom software for clients that needed apps that were not commercially available? I should have devoted weeks at a time to help make their businesses more efficient and profitable for free? That's ridiculous. You should try writing software full-time and giving it away for free to see how that works for you. Unless you are sponging off someone else who has a paying job, you aren't going to be in business very long.

 

[Crosson]

You find it ironic that I needed to be paid to spend weeks developing custom software for clients that needed apps that were not commercially available?

That you did this without seeing the value of free software, is what had struck me as ironic. By being open source and free, you get collaborators all over the world who are using the software for their purpose but also contributing their improvements to the core packages back upstream, for everyone else to benefit from, including you.

I should have devoted weeks at a time to help make their businesses more efficient and profitable for free?

I am by no means saying you should work without pay, that is absurd. You are mistakenly assuming that people who write free software do not get paid, but this is false.

You should try writing software full-time and giving it away for free to see how that works for you. Unless you are sponging off someone else who has a paying job, you aren't going to be in business very long.

I understand your pragmatic argument, but I am not asking you 'to write software and give it away free.' I am saying that if you support the goal of the free software movement, which has brought us firefox, linux, etc, then you should respect their guidelines for the term 'free software.'

 

[binzing]

So use a non-free program like AVG, or Avast Anti-Virus. These are available for personal use at no cost.

I do...

But someone else could, and so you get software that is much better suited to users needs.

Hmm, give me the phone number, email address etc. of one of these guys!

Even when you are given a good reason to change?

Yeah, cause I'm not so literal. (OCD/borderline autistic if you ask me...)

That just shows how little you know about the free software movement.

No not really...I'm sure there's plenty of open sourcers (the one's who actually do this stuff) who aren't as literal...

Also, I have already said that open source is only one of the requirements for software to be free, not all open source software respects the freedom of the user.

Since when does software, or the people that make it, give a damn about the "freedom" of the user?

Well then I guess you understand how to further the movement better then the man who founded it, which would be great for the community considering the progress that he has already made.

And this man is? Yourself?

That's fine, if you use MS Windows and you want a anti-virus scanner (which I recommend against) then I recommend Avast AV first, and AVG second. I don't think the expensive alternatives do a better job.

You recommend against preventing viruses, therefore you want people to get viruses? Cause, unlike human lives, neither virus programmers, nor AV companies care about how many computers get "killed"...

I just object to calling AVG and Avast '100% free' when they do not respect the freedom of the user!

Who here called them "100% Free"? Its in the title, we didn't use it once. Technically, yes, they ARE 100% Free...Maybe not for the whole program, but enough to satisfy most users...

Imagine if everyone who did this released there code as free software. There is no argument that this would hurt sales, since the software you wrote is not availible commercially, but it very well could save 9-12 months of effort for someone else doing a similar task across the world.

As turbo said, there are PEOPLE who RELY on this for INCOME, it is they're LIVELIHOOD. Now, if you have the money to pay all of the programmers better than they're closed source, corporate employer, do it! By all means.

I hope that now you see that time would have been saved, if not for you then for other people, if the software that you wasted your time writing had been released for free once and for all. Very ironic.

Who says turbo didn't do that? He never said that he kept it to himself, or charged people for it.

That's fine, but wouldn't it be even better if they released in a way that respected your freedom?

Explain this whole notion of how software, open source, closed source, what have you, violates your "freedom" to begin with...

 

[turbo]

Crosson, I was writing software in the mid '80's. There was no Internet and no pool of collaborators. If you can find a way for me to get paid for writing code for free software, please steer me to it. I'd be thrilled to get paid to write free software. There is no free lunch.

 

[binzing]

That's what I was guessing too Turbo, and back then everyone had to write software (no doubt yours was more complex to get paid for it), like teachers, they had to learn how to program software for the Apple IIes and such.