Security is "priority number 20 or 30 for Microsoft"

Bulked out...

... is exactly the reason I stopped using Kaspersky!

The security companies are their own worst enemies.

They have to create a product which deliberately slows down the PC, it has no choice, that is how such software works. To that end, they should be striving to make it as light as possible and to have as little impact on the user as possible, not "bulk it out" to make it look like it is value for money!

I have valid licences for GData, Kaspersky and Symantec and I have installed MS Security Essentials on all of my private machines, because they still work normally with MSSE installed and don't crawl along.

By big_D on 12 Mar 2010

And Microsoft's No 1 priority? "Protect the Dandelion Club; Guard the Project." What is the project? Monopoly.

By SwissMac on 12 Mar 2010

They must be feeling something

he is most likely seeing their market share drop and therefore starting to launch hostile attack towards microsoft who are open and honest about there security venrabilities in their OS as an example.

How about make a lightweight good antivirus that people will want to buy and stop saying your competitor is competing and beating you.

By Deathtaker27 on 12 Mar 2010

Bulked out or necessary?

I have been using AVG Free and MSSE personally, for commercial then it's McAfee. But the slowdown is incredible in comparison. What is really needed in a security suite for most people?
Even with the best security software, numpties always get caught. So are the all the bits truly necessary?
I should probably read your labs test to find out more, but if the MSSE was so truly shocking and didn't work then people would say so.

By Japester247 on 12 Mar 2010

I had...

Norton and Kaspersky on my girlfriend's laptop, with Kaspersky, it would take nearly 8 minutes to get to a usable desktop, with Norton closer to 10...

With MSSE, it was under 4.

Okay, it isn't the newest of machines (1.6Ghz Pentium M & 512MB RAM), but that is still twice the memory of the machines I have to look after at work.

There, bloatware like Kaspersky is a non-starter.

By big_D on 12 Mar 2010

I have Kaspersky internet security 2010 and find it light on resources - far lighter than previous versions. It all depends on the setup of the computer, mine handles Kaspersky with no problems. Kaspersky has some of the best malware detection rates of any security software. Norton is a major resource hog on my PC, even the latest version.

As for MSSE, it does not detect keyloggers, or rootkits, or drive-by downloads, and it does not filter e-mails from malware. It is a BASIC security software hence the name "Security ESSENTIALS". Fine it may protect against viruses and spyware, but you could have numerous rootkits swimming around your system and you wouldn't even know it!

By KlingonBatleth on 12 Mar 2010

I have Kaspersky internet security 2010 and find it light on resources - far lighter than previous versions. It all depends on the setup of the computer, mine handles Kaspersky with no problems. Kaspersky has some of the best malware detection rates of any security software. Norton is a major resource hog on my PC, even the latest version.

As for MSSE, it does not detect keyloggers, or rootkits, or drive-by downloads, and it does not filter e-mails from malware. It is a BASIC security software hence the name "Security ESSENTIALS". Fine it may protect against viruses and spyware, but you could have numerous rootkits swimming around your system and you wouldn't even know it!

By KlingonBatleth on 12 Mar 2010

I have Kaspersky internet security 2010 and find it light on resources - far lighter than previous versions. It all depends on the setup of the computer, mine handles Kaspersky with no problems. Kaspersky has some of the best malware detection rates of any security software. Norton is a major resource hog on my PC, even the latest version.

As for MSSE, it does not detect keyloggers, or rootkits, or drive-by downloads, and it does not filter e-mails from malware. It is a BASIC security software hence the name "Security ESSENTIALS". Fine it may protect against viruses and spyware, but you could have numerous rootkits swimming around your system and you wouldn't even know it!

By KlingonBatleth on 12 Mar 2010

I have Kaspersky internet security 2010 and find it light on resources - far lighter than previous versions. It all depends on the setup of the computer, mine handles Kaspersky with no problems. Kaspersky has some of the best malware detection rates of any security software. Norton is a major resource hog on my PC, even the latest version.

As for MSSE, it does not detect keyloggers, or rootkits, or drive-by downloads, and it does not filter e-mails from malware. It is a BASIC security software hence the name "Security ESSENTIALS". Fine it may protect against viruses and spyware, but you could have numerous rootkits swimming around your system and you wouldn't even know it!

By KlingonBatleth on 12 Mar 2010

@ big_D

@ big_D:

2 years ago I had a 1.73 GHz Pentium M laptop with 512 MB of RAM (a Dell Latitude D610). Even with Symantec’s older Internet Security 2008 installed it would start it 90 to 100 seconds. It had XP Pro SP3, 32 bit installed.

My hard disk was a 60 GB Fujitsu 2.5 inch Ultra ATA 100, 5400 RPM with 2 MB of cache (in other words, a standard laptop hard disk).

I would suggest following the cleaning tips shown in the following PC Pro feature and at the end of the PC Tuning tools reviews, since I performed them on the above laptop when I bought it and the difference is substantial. The only programs I have running at Windows start-up are the ones I use, nothing more.

Pc Pro Feature:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/352933/the-verdict
-the-crapware-con

PC Tuning tools reviews by Pc Pro:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/features/352930/crapware-cl
eaners


Try running defragmenting the hard disk too.

That laptop now has 2 GB of RAM, a new Western Digital Scorpio 160 GB hard disk (5400RPM with 8 MB cache) and has Internet Security 2010 installed. It still uses the same version of Windows and it boots in 55 seconds! I have 1.6 GB of usable RAM when it has booted.

You might also want to give Symantec Internet Security 2010 a try; it is on the Pc Pro A List for very good reasons. It is certainly not bloatware anymore. It was the overall winner against all the other popular security software.

Here is the Pc Pro Review:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/reviews/software/351781/nor
ton-internet-security-2010

And the A List link:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/alist/internet-security

My point being is that security software contributes to slow down but can’t be blamed totally on slow boot times. More modern security software is much more efficient and has far less effect on boot up times and RAM usage than it used to.

I hope the above info is useful.

By Jimbo762 on 12 Mar 2010

I agree

@ KlingonBatleth:

I agree with your opinion on Security Essentials. It isn’t the greatest security software around.

I agree, you need better security software than Security Essentials to stay secure (rootkits are very nasty).

Sorry to hear that Norton’s latest version of software is slow, I find it brilliant and really fast. See my comment above for more on this. I have it loaded on all my machines (2 desktops, 1 laptop).

By Jimbo762 on 12 Mar 2010

Anti virus and anti virus

Not all AV programmes are the same. I used to use Nortons blissfully unaware how inaffective it was until I had serious problems with my computer and had to resinstall the operating system. After installing with rescan with other AV software I had thousand of infections av and malware which Nortons had missed out. WIll not retrun back to Nortons. Kaspersky is the best paid for programme, but even free ones are better than Nortons.

By Manuel on 12 Mar 2010

Well I recently moved to Norton 2010 from Kaspersky 2010 after PC Pro's positive review. It cut the time to a usable desktop from 5 minutes to 2 1/2 minutes on Vista (a hog anyway). Kaspersky is now officially a resource hog (of a different breed), and I think Mr Kaspersky's comments are just sour-grapes.

By c6ten on 12 Mar 2010

@c6ten

Well said! I totally agree.

By Jimbo762 on 12 Mar 2010

K getting too clever...

Dunno about Kaspersky being a resource hog - but I do know that I've got it set to ask me, rather than make its own decisions, and even with my IT background, I can't say I'm making informed decisions in my responses. I even managed to stop my machine talking to the internet because I took what was the "safe" option once without bothering to think it through. Then I took an age (a) working the problem out and (b) finding the right setting to fix.
Could a numpty have fixed it? Doubt it.
Who needs security most of all? - said numpty.
Agree with all 4 KlingonBatleths that MSSE doesn't do a lot but surely it's better than nothing?

By AdrianB on 12 Mar 2010

Don't know why my 1 comment appeared 4 times above - and no I'm not trying to spam my opinions around the web!!!

I think it all comes down to personal perference and which software works best on each PC. And yes MSSE is better than nothing, although I think there are better free options around.

Now lets hope this comment does not appear 4 times!!! :)

By KlingonBatleth on 12 Mar 2010

MSSE

Is very basic, but it does enough for me.

On my Q6600, I had GData 2010 installed and it took over 12 hours to extract a 4GB archive. Well, I gave up after 4 hours and de-installed it and installed MSSE and it extracted it in under 2 minutes!

Extrapolate that to our users, who have 1.2Ghz Athlon processors and 256MB RAM and AV software is an unwanted burden!

Yes, Kaspersky and the rest do more, but on a well maintained computer and with sensible browsing, it does enough.

As to the laptop, it has Windows XP SP3, Firefox and MS Office 2007, otherwise it doesn't have anything extra installed (clean install last summer)

By big_D on 12 Mar 2010

@KlingonBatleth - stop pressing refresh!

I notice some posters appear to be using more than one security suite. This is not a good idea, and will slow your PC down hugely.

Kaspersky and others are bad-mouthing Microsoft because they are providing a free product. It's even more annoying when it's a good product!

By Stiggy on 12 Mar 2010

I actually can't remember ever agreeing with anything that Eugene Kaspersky has ever said. He just seems to come out with these comments every so often and each time I seem to remember shaking my head and going "pfft, that's transparently self serving."

By steviesteveo on 12 Mar 2010

I've found that windows needs more than one AV/MW checker to feel fairly safe. Usually one detects something that the other doesn't. Incidentally how do you know your machine is well protected? Most virus checkers churn away and most of the time there's no visible result. Is that success, or should it raise doubts as to whether it's working?

By pictonic on 13 Mar 2010

"Most virus checkers churn away and most of the time there's no visible result. Is that success, or should it raise doubts as to whether it's working?"How many viruses are you expecting to find?

By chapelgarth on 13 Mar 2010

chapelgarth: I would hope for no viruses, but if the result is 'none' for every run of the virus checker for months you might question whether the virus checker is actually doing anything. You also get a result of none when you run a program that is incapable of finding viruses. Why do you trust the anti-virus program when it doesn't provide any feedback? It seems to me that they should do verification of virus interception (by relevant, intentional seeding) now and again to show they are still working.

By pictonic on 13 Mar 2010

As a final thought - even if the virus checker IS working properly, if it doesn't find anything over a long period of time why do you need it? I would certainly question the idea of paying for a virus checker.

By pictonic on 14 Mar 2010

Philosopher's have been pondering that question for millenia. Good luck, you're in good company.

By c6ten on 14 Mar 2010

Back up your spare box, make sure your email app is properly filtered to deal with spam and other junk then remove your antivirus software, go about your normal life on the internet, don't ramble off to sites you don't normally use. Make sure your browser has the appropriate extension to warn you of the sites such as WOT for firefox - I swear you'd be stunned I've not seen a virus in over 12 months - I'm sure I haven't seen one for 5 years. Though I do a rootkit scan every 6 months and a virus check then -but nothing - this probably explains itself clearly to those of us who know the meaning of bloat, but then again some people need your money.

By nicomo on 14 Mar 2010

Of course ordinary mortals should ignore the above advice and install AV software. We can't all be genius's.

By c6ten on 14 Mar 2010

@pictonic

I've been using AV software since 1987 and I've never had a virus warning on any of my machines...

The machines at work, on the other hand, are riddled with viruses, but the users don't know anything about security and the machines were still running XP SP1 when I joined in the summer!

By big_D on 15 Mar 2010