Re-upping with ESET

[raymac46]

It's time to renew my security suite licence for my 2 Windows PCs so I'm going with ESET again. ESET has protected me well, stays out of the way, is relatively light on resources, and does not interfere with driver installation. I know Windows Defender has come a long way but I don't mind paying a little extra for ESET.

[xrobwx71]

Windows Defender is now a very robust and full-featured product. It is integrated into the system and uses very few resources.

That being said, ESET is also a good choice.
If you ever have any questions reach out to Aryeh Goretsky, he is on various sites and works for ESET. He's very helpful and knowledgeable.

https://www.welivesecurity.com/author/goretsky/
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/u/542369/goretsky/

[Corrine]

Actually, Rob, he knows Aryeh from Scot's.  He has been a long-time member there.

[raymac46]

Yes, Aryeh is another good reason to choose ESET.

[Digerati]

IMO, (1) having a decent antimalware solution, (2) keeping it and our OS current and perhaps most importantly, (3) don't be "click-happy" on every unsolicited link we see are the key steps to keeping our computers safe and secure.

You are doing step 1 and I will assume you do steps 2 and 3 too. So clearly, you are good to go in my book.

But I note those are the same necessary steps to take regardless your antimalware solution of source. Do note that Aryeh's "golden rule" for cyber space is "Avoid the impulse to click on things." (Also note your 2nd link doesn't work unless you have an account and are signed in at BC).

My point is, your points for ESET (protects well, stays out of the way, is relatively light on resources, and does not interfere with driver installation) applies to Microsoft Defender (formally Windows Defender) too. But of course, it is free and it is already in there so does not consume extra drive resources.

I personally do not like recurring fees. I already have too many bills, including an outrageous monthly Internet bill. I personally see no reason to spend $60/year ($90 for 2 years) to protect 2 computers when I can protect all my personal computers (currently have 5 here) and up to 10 business computers for free!

If you like ESET, that's great. There's no argument - it is a good program. And if those recurring fees bring you peace of mind, that's also great! Peace of mind is important too.

I am NOT trying to talk you out of anything! I just think it is important folks choose their security solution for the right (and truthful) reasons rather than summarily dismissing Microsoft Defender for the wrong (not true) reasons.

And for the record, "I like [fill in the blank] better" is a valid reason.

I always have to wonder, what incentive do ESET, Norton, McAfee, BitDefender, Avast, Kaspersky and the other 3rd party solutions  have to rid the world of malware? The answer is, none! Rid the world of malware and those companies go out of business. They need malware to thrive so consumers will keep paying and paying and paying, so they can keep turning those great profits.

Now what incentive does Microsoft have for malware to go away? A really big one!

They will stop getting relentlessly blamed for the lousy security mess the bad guys have put us in. The mess Norton, McAfee, and the others have failed to stop! And I think that constant, relentless undeserved bad publicity is pretty good incentive to make a good product - since for sure, if Microsoft Defender failed to protect us, the IT press, bloggers, and Microsoft bashers would be all over that.

Unless you have already renewed, I recommend you give Microsoft Defender a fair shake. I am confident you will find it protects you well, is light on resources, stays out of the way, and does not interfere with driver (or other application) installations. If you find you don't like it, you can always go back to ESET.

Now of course, regardless our primary solution of choice, we all should have a secondary scanner for on-demand scanning, just to make sure we (the users and ALWAYS weakest link in security) or our primary security solution did not let something slip by. I generally recommend Malwarebytes for that. And for the record, on my systems Malwarebytes has never, not once found that Microsoft Defender let anything malicious through. Worse case was Malwarebytes tagged a couple wanted PUPs.

And for your own curiosity (and amusement) next time someone claims Microsoft Defender is unsafe, worthless, etc. ask them, "Did you stop getting infected after switching to away from Defender?"

No doubt you will get:

[v_v]

Bill,

You did not say "IMHO!"  (Smile)

[Digerati]

Well, at the very beginning of my post, I did say, IMO. And I did say ESET was a good program. The rest is pretty much just plain fact.

[raymac46]

I have not and never would say there is anything wrong with Microsoft's in house security. In fact for folks I help out who cannot afford to pay for a security suite I advise them to use Defender and at the very least install Malwarebytes Free and run scans at least weekly. I personally have both Malwarebytes and ESET running and they work great together. Obviously I keep Windows updated and don't visit dodgy sites or respond to phishing.
I have had trouble with McAfee in the past letting malware through. Norton worked OK on a computer I used to maintain for an older lady who wouldn't use anything else. Bitdefender gave me problems with video driver updates. So far ESET has worked great for me. At the end of the day it costs me about $.50 a week for 2 PCs.

[xrobwx71]

Actually, Rob, he knows Aryeh from Scot's.  He has been a long-time member there.

Thanks Corrine! Sorry, I'm new and still creeping around Scott's and wasn't aware.

[Digerati]

I have not and never would say there is anything wrong with Microsoft's in house security.

I know you didn't and for sure, I was not implying you did. I am sorry if it seemed that way.

I am just not sure why you found it necessary to even bring up Windows Defender in your first post if your decision to go again with ESET did not, at least in part, involve a conscious decision to not go with Defender.  ???

You could have simply announced you were renewing your ESET subscription because you like ESET, and left it that. Instead, you chose to, in effect, announce too you were not going with Windows Defender. That is NOT a criticism - just an observation that I found confusing - hence my post.

***

My biggest problem with both Norton and McAfee (besides bloat) is how insidious they are when it comes to renewing them and when it comes to totally uninstalling them from our computers.

They often have made deals with computer makers to pre-install trial versions on new computers. Then, when the trial periods near their end, the user is bombarded with intimidating >:( warnings about how insecure their systems will be should they let that trial period end without paying to renew. :(

Then, should the user decide to go with another solution, you almost have to be a master computer/Windows expert to totally remove their programs from the computer.

I fully understand removing such programs should not be so easy that a bad guy can do it from under the user's nose. But it shouldn't be so difficult for the authorized user to uninstall it either. These security companies are supposed to be the good guys. And good guys should not, IMO, be using intimidating scare tactics to get the less experienced user to renew.

[Corrine]

Although I'm using Windows Defender and licensed MBAM, ESET is the only paid antivirus software I recommend.

[Digerati]

Yeah, I really like Malwarebytes Premium, I am not sure I would buy it today. I only have it now because I took advantage of the "Lifetime" license offer they made years ago before they went to the recurring plan they have today.

That said, even now, I consider Malwarebytes more a "secondary" or "second opinion" solution rather than a primary solution.

[winchester73]

ESET is the only paid antivirus software I recommend.

+1