it's ok to brag about your shiny records of zero encounter of the nasty stuff, but please also share how you achieve that to help others. not all users reading this have the same computing habits, or know how to prevent and deal with computer virus/malware/etc.

for them, rather than letting the os running naked without any protection, it's no harm to run at least the one that comes with the os. at the bare minimum, don't turn windows defender off.

at the bare minimum, imo there should be at least one running in background. i run windows defender + emet mainly.

all these av + anti-exploits are not bullet proof. the more sustainable measure is still to educate yourself as a computer user to be more cautious.

i have more than one av engines. i just don't run them for default real-time protection, because i find wd interferes the least when i work.

for home users, yes i think it's better to use other free av for real-time protection. (i don't really call it free, since subscribing to these free av usually means you contributing by submissions of so-called suspected files, urls, etc. to them. 'm just saying)

Haha true not many care about privacy yes i use bitdefender free on one machine. It's not bad in terms of system resources.

I thought all av will interfere when you use cracks, but that's not my main concern.

This post has been edited by horns: Sep 3 2015, 06:22 PM

a better way to avoid all risks related to such codes/apps imo is just don't use them. tbh there are plenty of free alternatives out there.

as long as users don't change their mindsets, nothing will change. however i don't agree that av is useless. it's a part of an effective system protection measure, in which as a whole, will help minimize associated risks more effectively. it's a bare minimum for a computer protection.