Does Windows need an anti-virus?

[learninmypc]

Let me clarify my post. Installing more than one AM (Anti-Malware) is not a right work in effect. Thanks anyway.

I'll let somebody with more knowledge respond to that. I know factually one should not run more than one AV, but other than that, I'll let the others reply.

 

[Cobalt006]

Let me clarify my post. Installing more than one AM (Anti-Malware) is not a right work in effect. Thanks anyway.

Now why is that?

 

[captaincranky]

I'll let somebody with more knowledge respond to that. I know factually one should not run more than one AV, but other than that, I'll let the others reply.

Now why is that?

You could always try it and then get back to us about it.....

 

[abbasi]

Now why is that?

It's very simple. Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine.
PS: My thread was/is not about comparing the AMs. If anyone has forgot my issue. please goes to up and reads the title again.

 

[captaincranky]

It's very simple. Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine.
PS: My thread was/is not about comparing the AMs. If anyone has forgot my issue. please goes to up and reads the title again.

Before you start admonishing people to:

"goes up to and reads the title again"

,please consider wording the title, and your "command" in a manner that makes sense.

However, since you're from Iran, I suppose that English is your second language, and you're doing the best you can.

First of all, no discussion about Windows needing an anti-virus, is ever going to slide through this forum without an argument about which is best. That's a given, period.

In certain very limited circumstances Windows does not need to have an AV product installed. If you never go on the internet, and scan every file, program, flash drive, whatever, with a good anti virus program BEFORE you put it on the machine without the AV, then no, you don't need an anti-virus.

If the machine is going to be used in an everyday computing environment such as going on the internet, downloading files, plugging USB drives from outside sources into the machine, then you should have an AV "solution" installed. If only for the peace of mind.

Since you seem to know quite a bit about the topic:

It's very simple. Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine.

It gives one pause to wonder why you're asking the question in the first place.

See if you get this, I've told you an AV product is likely needed. Many others have told you you should have it as well. Now, how many God damned answers do you think you need, or feel you're entitled to, before you either install an AV, tell us

"no thanks, it's not for me"

, or simply bow out of the thread?

An AV product isn't going to cost you any money, or cause a drastic performance drop.

I have an AV program on every machine I go on the web with.

And I have another policy, I will never, ever, go to the "malware removal" forum, and ask for help disinfecting a computer. If I screw up, I'll reformat the machine.

Now, I come to this forum for the social aspect of being with a group of people with similar intellects and interests.

But, at the end of the day, I don't care about you, or your computer, one bit.

I don't care if your computer gets infected, and I certainly have no intention of becoming a "malware helper", to a bunch of fools that think they can download whatever they feel like, go to any website they feel like, while not running any security software. Who, after they've hosed their machines by virtue of carelessness or stupidity, wind up begging somebody to bail them out.

And please don't tell me to,

"goes and reads the title again"

. It didn't make much sense the first time, and English done that poorly just pisses me off.

 

[bobcat]

It is surprising how a simple and common linguistic weakness can cause so much misunderstanding. Enough to get me interested in stepping in to try and clarify matters.

So, making due allowance for the OP’s mother language not being English, I have always understood his question as being, “Does Windows need t(w)o antivirus?”

The replacement of “two” by “to” is common practice on the web, even by native English speakers, if not especially by them. Furthermore, he has clarified the meaning by the statements:
“Installing more than one AV is not right work in effect” (posted twice) and
“Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine”

Hence my first reply addressed this point and apparently he has got his answer, judging by his statement, “Thank you guys. I found what I was looking for.”

So far so good, as regards the original question. The technical, as opposed to the linguistic, confusion started when Anti-Malware (AM) was substituted for Anti-Virus (AV), as they’re not the same thing. And while you can’t have two AVs, you usually can have several AMs quite happily, provided they don’t include anti-virus.

 

[abbasi]

Thanks bobcat.
Although there are many cases in the comments of that person that I can spot them well, but I think it's time wasting. It's better to close this thread.

 

[captaincranky]

It's very simple. Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine.
PS: My thread was/is not about comparing the AMs. If anyone has forgot my issue. please goes to up and reads the title again.

Well then, we need to work on ""TWO (the number "2"), TOO (also, in addition, as well, along with), & TO (a preposition, as in, to the next paragraph, to the store, to the bank), don't we?

And to clarify a bit further, modern AV programs aren't directed at virus only detection and disinfection.

Just for reference, AVG Free, has a root kit detector, heuristic detection, and all sort of malware, (trojans, worms, yadda, yadda, etc). this is not to say other free products don't have these also, I simply can't speak from experience.

Many members here still think they are "running" several free >malware< programs , but are not. MBAM & SAS are passive scanners in the free versions. Something to consider when deciding to install the paid upgrades, which will cause a drain on the system.

In any case, AV and AM programs have been intermingled by the publishers due to marketing considerations. If a computer gets a "trojan", when "XXX" AV is installed, it still comes back to haunt them, even if the program was never intended to stop those types of attacks.

If this was indeed a valid question, then some simple research would have told TS, that even with free program variants, virus detection is approaching 100%. Why would you need "to"?

And also, every thread of this nature needs to have some sort of efficacy discussion regarding different types of protection. "NoScript" in Firefox isn't considered an "anti malware solution", but if an attacker can't get his script running to infect you, then it becomes one.

 

[Cobalt006]

It's very simple. Installing (that is, of course for running) more than one AM cause to tension between them for protecting the machine.
PS: My thread was/is not about comparing the AMs. If anyone has forgot my issue. please goes to up and reads the title again.

First of all I was just curious to why running two AM programs were bad. But as far as your Question. I think you already knew the answer. Just bye the way you have replied.

 

[learninmypc]

Well, if one is unsure of how a word is spelled, they could either Google it or use a dictionary http://www.merriam-webster.com/ so they don't mis spell it.

 

[abbasi]

Hey guys. You forced me to response. So look.

1- My question in right state was "Does Windows need anti-virus?", the mistake was in using of the verb "need". I should used "need" not "need to". But that mistake was not deliberately. I didn't think it causes such a huge misunderstanding! I'm sorry about that.

2- You say to me about my English language mistakes and pride about your English. Are you such persons really!? The English is not my second language, it's my third one. And whatever I know about English I learned by my own trying (without any teacher). How about you, you pride to the English which is your mother tongue!? Wrong work.

3- Why you don't want to find out what I'm saying? It's not hard. This thread is my 42th thread (only on this website) and everyone who wants to understand, he/she can. Although I accept if I sometimes make mistakes in my posts but of course my English is not such bad. In this case I should thank *bobcat* for his technical posts that help me.

4- I appreciate your comments but when you read a thread subject, don't try to expand the issue to related issues, but try only answer the problem, if you can. For example my issue was not about Computer Networks security, but many posts were about it. I think I have a great knowledge about that topic and don't need any other info in this case. The answer of my problem was that, "Microsoft recommends you do not rely on Windows Defender as a full fledged AV. Windows Defender is meant only to be the most basic protection.", not others.

5- I can spot your technical mistakes but it's not my intention and also don't have that time. I try to use your right comments (of course I think many of your comments are good).

6- At the end, I wold like to thank you all you nice guys . But you dear "captaincranky", I don't want you answer any of my future problems from now on. Please never answer my problems anymore.

 

[captaincranky]

6- At the end, I wold like to thank you all you nice guys . But you dear "captaincranky", I don't want you answer any of my future problems from now on. Please never answer my problems anymore.

Yeah well, a lot of people don't want to hear what I have to say.

Not to worry though, I have no intention of ever answering any of your questions, ever again.

Buts justs to makes sures thoughs, puts me on your "ignores" lists.

BTW, a "thread" is an entire topic. A "post" ia a single entry into a topic So, you haven't made "43 threads", you've made, "43 posts".

Did I see you start a thread about having an infection, and then ask afterwards, "Does Windows Needs to Anti Virus"? Oh wait, I did: https://www.techspot.com/community/topics/remove-malware-by-formatting.192950/

How about if I concede that these English faux pas are, "sooo cute", (for the time being), but the novelty will wear off rather quickly. Sadly, in my case, it already has.

 

[paul jose]

Hello,
The idea that antivirus software is only necessary for irresponsible Windows users is a myth, and a dangerous one to spread.
Antivirus is necessary to protect your computer because "an Antivirus is your final layer of protection". If a website uses a security flaw in your browser or a plug-in like Flash to compromise your computer, it will often attempt to install malware:– key-loggers, Trojans, root-kits, and all sorts of other bad things. So, an Antivirus is must.

 

[cliffordcooley]

[FONT=Verdana]The idea that antivirus software is only necessary for irresponsible Windows users is a myth <snip> [/FONT][FONT=Verdana]So, an Antivirus is must.[/FONT]

It's not a myth, I could go back to not using an active Anti-virus.

I know what I was doing to catch a virus, each and every time I was infected. I know my system and can tell when it has been infected. So no; anti-virus is not a must, but it is a good idea and I will recommend using one. Even if it is only for an early warning system, which is by the way how I use mine. Any sign of a virus that appear to be stubborn about removal, I will use a system recovery image.

 

[abbasi]

I disagree with the

So no; anti-virus is not a must,

, but anyway I think I can use of those good comments.

 

[learninmypc]

I disagree with the
, but anyway I think I can use of those good comments.

You've taken that OUT of context in my opinion. "So no; anti-virus is not a must, but it is a good idea and I will recommend using one."
I would NEVER go online without an AV, preferable Avast

 

[cliffordcooley]

I disagree with the

So no; anti-virus is not a must

If I stick to my daily habits as they have been for more than three months, I wouldn't need an anti-virus period much less an active scanner. Having an active scanner gives me more courage to adventure.

I do have MSSE installed but it sits there day in and day out, never finding anything. That is unless I get an urge to find a desktop wallpaper, screen saver, or try out some new application. I wasn't lying when I said, I know what I was doing each and every time I caught a virus. Let me re-phrase, I knew each and every time I was likely to get a virus when I caught them. I have learned how to avoid getting a virus, and yes it does relate to habitual browsing. The only reason I even have MSSE installed is because it is light on resources. Since MSSE is light on resources and there is nothing really to loose, I will recommend using it at the very least. Especially if your habitual browsing takes you to virus infested waters. And if you say there is no place on the Internet safe from infestation, I will disagree with you.

I've never caught a virus by:

• using search engines (clicking the results are a different story)
• using Wikipedia (great place to find information, even if the details may be slightly inaccurate)
• visiting TechSpot or other forums (no I've not been to all of them, but will vouch for the ones I have been to)
• purchasing from Newegg, TigerDirect, Amazon, or eBay.
• downloading applications from authors website or posted mirrors on their site. (File sharing sites have always been virus infested and you never know which download to trust, even with downloader comments)

 

[abbasi]

I assume that you can catch the malware you see/sense it at the time it is in your system and can clean it. But it's not all the thing. Your knowledge about the computer security world is not high. There are numerous malware which don't have any sensible effect. They work hiddenly.
All of the Microsoft products have numerous leaks and all of those sites you mentioned can be infected without any difference in appearance and performance.

 

[cliffordcooley]

Whatever! I told you my story. I didn't think you would believe me. And until it happens to me, I won't have a reason to believe you.

 

[abbasi]

Exactly like you, I'm confidence about my opinion. But thank you for your try.

 

[MrBlkfx1]

Your knowledge about the computer security world is not high. There are numerous malware which don't have any sensible effect.

Lol, and I assume your knowlegde on the subject is superior to cliffordcooley's? Yet you made this thread inquiring about the necessity of an A/V. It just doesn't add up. Although, my stance on the subject is similar to cliffordcooley's. Safe / conscious browsing is the best way to avoid any infections. If more people adopted better browsing practices the need for an A/V would significantly decrease.

 

[Cobalt006]

I assume that you can catch the malware you see/sense it at the time it is in your system and can clean it. But it's not all the thing. Your knowledge about the computer security world is not high. There are numerous malware which don't have any sensible effect. They work hiddenly.
All of the Microsoft products have numerous leaks and all of those sites you mentioned can be infected without any difference in appearance and performance.

Well if this is the case maybe you had better rethink your Title (Dose Windows need an Antivirus) Or make your self more clear on this subject.

 

[abbasi]

I have some information about the computer world and in some cases I can recognize what content is more correct and which one is not. My purpose to creating this thread was to find more info about the issue and also collect the ones I'm not aware of.

 

[ET3D]

Ask yourself how many time your AV software has warned you of a real threat in the past few years, something which would have resulted an infection if it hadn't been there. If the number of cases is zero, you're reasonably safe not using an AV. If there's been a case, it shows that it was useful, so keep using it.

 

[MrBlkfx1]

My purpose to creating this thread was to find more info about the issue and also collect the ones I'm not aware of.

Why would you want to collect A/V programs? Running more than 1 is counter productive as it usually causes problems rather then provide "increased" protection.