Avast...5 years...free...never had an infection: Avast download

I will also add that I used various versions of McAfee and Norton/Symantec for years. Sometimes they worked fine, and sometimes they hogged resources in the background and made my computer crawl. Sometimes it seemed like they would make big changes to the software and the interface almost every year and I had to spend time figuring out how to use and configure it again. I finally got tired of shopping for a deal for my three computers each year and hoping the new flavor antivirus I was installing would work ok. I switched to free Avast and won't go back. It works quietly in the background, is light on resources, and the easy-to-understand interface has only changed slightly in the years I've used it.

McAfee, comes free from my Internet provider.

I use three on different machines.

Webroot . Free through our bank, Ally.

McAfee on recreation laptop, Free through Spectrum.

On a Mac for business use, we have Norton Security with WiFi protection. It's our first 3 months with this package and it's rock solid. If you work from home or from a mobile device, iPad, etc., the Norton combination is one of the ultimate protections for home and mobile use.

On the Win 10 desktop...free Avast. On the Vista desktop...free Avira. No problems with either one.

Could be a spam post from a new participant or maybe not. Watch to see if another new user comes along with a link to a solution.

I can tell you that I recently purchased a new, very good, nearly state-of-the art laptop with McAfee. The thing runs so slowly, one would think it is a computer from ten years ago. I plan to remove the McAfee even thought it is free for a whole year. Personally, I don't like Norton either, because of the slow down issues.

I use the Wndows 10 Defender which is free and Malwarebytes Premium, which I have to pay for, on my desktop. I have previously never paid for any kind of security app, but after being hit with a Russian ransomware, decided it was time to do so.

WalnutCreek-

When removing McAfee, make sure you get instructions from their website for removal. When I've done that in the past, there was a "removal tool" that you can download and run that helps you do a better uninstall. Just doing program removal the regular way through the Control Panel isn't as thorough and can leave scattered remnants of McAfee still on your computer and causing problems.

Oh, thank you so much for that info, kudzu. I had no idea.

If you have Norton or McAfee software, the removal tool is included in "tools" sub-directory.

I have Norton installed and running, I've used it for many years. There is no Tools subdirectory related to Norton nor is the removal tool on my PC. Maybe you're thinking of something else.

I agree there's a Norton Removal tool that's best used for an uninstall. It can be downloaded from the Norton site.

Perhaps it's not the same tool.

I don't have it on Windows, but in the past it was listed under Programs, Norton Security, Uninstall Norton Security. May be just the windows uninstaller.

Seconding kudzu9 regarding removing McAfee. It's a complete pain. I'm pretty computer savvy and I'm still not sure how I finally got rid of it. It took several tries. McAfee was a resource hog and entirely too intrusive for an antivirus program. It actually inserted results into my Google searches. I didn't download or install it voluntarily; it came bundled with some kind of Flash player I needed to view a website of a kennel in Germany.

One thing that finally blasted the final remnants from my system was running CCleaner.

I use the free version of Avast antivirus. I also have Malwarebytes running. Both need to be updated at the appropriate time. HijackThis is definitely worth getting to know; they say it's not so straightforward but I find the user interface pretty clear and the instructions and recommendations easy to follow. And it's not antivirus or anti-malware but CCleaner can make your computer run so much better/faster.

I've always heard great things about Windows Defender but obviously I've never relied on it. Can someone explain why I need other software if Defender is running and adequate? I'm assuming it updates itself, too.

Panda Free Anti Virus (Laptop Windows 7.0 Professional) and Avira Free (Desktop Windows 10) . . . . . no problem !!!! Also have Free CCleaner and Free Malwarebytes. uBlock Origin .........

Linux :)

I agree with your comment 100%.... Elmer J. Fudd....

Elmer ... I bailed from Windows a long time ago - in 2003 perhaps - not from the perceived virus risk, but mostly because of the demands from Microsoft about registering the system.

Ubuntu is pointy-clicky enough for me, WINE runs almost everything I need to run that is not native Linux, and I use virtual machines for a couple of pieces of software that I must use that will not run any other way. Using them is no harder than launching any other software.

I do video editing, photoediting, writing, internet and graphics design.

I don't fiddle with it ... my SO does, but he compiles his own build of something esoteric because he's an engineer doing weird and technical stuff involving engineering calculations.

"because of the demands from Microsoft about registering the system"

All licensed, non-free software is registered because the EULA needs to be agreed to and it's one of many measures to combat stolen/pirated licenses. You can't go through life as an anonymous gust of wind. I'm not sure what reluctance you have. I've never experienced a single issue or inconvenience because of it.

I live in an engineer/techie dense area (Silicon Valley) and I still remember the excitement among that group of people in the 1990s as Linux started to gather some momentum. All were convinced it would replace other operating systems as the desktop standard.

They were wrong. Even today, its percentage "market share" of PC users is in the low single digits, not more and not growing. The market lead in technology and usability is set by Apple, whose products (as I'm sure you know) configure themselves, essentially run on autopilot, work right out of the box and have very limited configuration options. Windows has far more users than Apple and has leaned in that direction without following the path completely. Linux is at the opposite end of the spectrum and I think has more than proven itself to be unattractive to most users.

Greater security with Linux? Not really, remember that most commercial and institutional IT "systems" that are hacked and invaded, when massive amounts of private data are stolen, are servers running Linux.

The “security” with Linux is really because if the limited market share. People dont care to waste their efforts on targeting so few linux machines in the world, especially the average joe like us that would have little on the machine. Also, if someone is savvy enough to use linux at home, they’re likely savvy enough to keep their data protected and backed up so they dont care much if they do lose something.

And I don’t think lazy_gardens was necessarily advocating that we all switch over. In fact, they’re likely better off if we don’t.

There are more high value intrusions/break-ins into Linux systems than any other. If you're talking about developing malware, fine. Otherwise, I don't buy your reverse logic.

Is it safer to go to Europe in a rowboat than in an airplane because fewer people use a rowboat?

I as referring to a linux pc that the “average joe” like us might have, not a server with high value data. And again, more linux high value servers are broken into because that is what the majority of high value data is stored.

And that rowboat may be safer for some if planes are being targeted more often. And they REALLY like the water.

"a linux pc that the “average joe” like us might have"

Do you think that situation exists? I don't.

Well, in your case, no, obviously. But just because you or none of your Apple loving friends don't use Linux, doesn't mean that nobody else does. I used to have an linux pc that I used for close to 8 years that served me well. Not as my main machine, but I used it as a light touch file server. I rather enjoyed playing around with it, and it proved quite useful for me now that manage a few linux servers at work. I don't have one at home anymore just because I need to manage another pc like I need another hole in my head.

Haha, my Apple loving friends? I didn't say that. I would say that Apple's market share is probably higher with more affluent families, perhaps lower with less. Maybe slightly higher here than elsewhere because Apple is here. But among all the tech industry-involved people I know, engineers and others, I'm aware of only one guy (who writes firmware for NICs and routers) who uses Linux at home. His family revolted and he had to give up and get them a Windows PC. No one else.

My location and the people I know are probably more likely than others to lead one to expect Linux home use. But it's really nowhere to be found.

You and anyone else should figit with it if it interests you. Doing so tends to attract fix-it and engineer types looking for something to play with. But in this discussion you're extending your own preferences and actions to a wider population, that's invalid reasoning.

My apologies, was not aware that we weren't allowed to extend our own preferences here in a forum where the OP was asking for our own preferences.

I use ESET.

Sorry, you misunderstood. I said "you're extending your own preferences and actions to a wider population, that's invalid reasoning". Said another way, don't assume that what you do or think is indicative of what others do or think, because I think on this subject it's not.

With my fair sized sampling in a techie-dense area, an interest like yours for home use of Linux is rare. That suggests it's broadly very uncommon and not as you said.

Just as you misunderstood me. I never advocated for people to switch to Linux. I just disagreed with your point of the linux security posture to a point.

When you said "I as referring to a linux pc that the “average joe” like us might have", my thought was "no, no average joe I know has a Linux PC". That's all there is, and is why the security discussion is pointless. It applies to very, very few.