Panda now offers free antivirus

Locking it down to 32-bit Windows is a pretty big fail. I'm not sure what the current numbers are but it feels like we're at a tipping point now with the majority of new computers being sold with 4GB+ of RAM and 64-bit Windows. To not support 64-bit is very quickly becoming a bad business practice. By the way, I also tried to install Panda on 32-bit Windows 7 and it wouldn't let me. So it's 32-bit XP and Vista only. I hope these guys get their act together soon because they only have 6 month's or so before most new computers come pre-installed with Windows 7 64-bit. Also, I have dual monitors and the Panda installer kept trying to straddle in the center of the monitors with half the installer displaying on one screen and half on the other. Weird, and a very bad first impression. I don't think I'll be entrusting the health of my machine to Panda in the future.

If the 64-bit kernel won't let you intrude the way you need to intrude,, and the APIs MS provides to the AV crowd aren't sufficient, you can't do 64 bit. I doubt 32-bit only was a voluntary decision. So the business model implicitly or explicitly includes "we won't be doing this for long".

planetarian: exactly.

Confession Time: I don't use anti-virus software either. I do keep UAC running, use pop-up blockers, keep Windows Defender up-to-date, and watch (very closely) where I browse. I'll use a web-based scanner to check for viruses from time to time, but literally haven't had a virus in years.

yipcanjo: Personally, I use Avast 4.8 and notice absolutely no negative impact on my system's performance. To be fair, it's a quad-core machine with 8GB of RAM so it has a lot of resources. I've actually spent a fair amount of time testing out various AV products in the past year and based on low-system impact and AV performance I would recommend the following in order of preference: Avast, NOD32, BitDefender, Anti-Vir and AVG. I also highly recommend the AV Comparitives website, http://www.av-comparatives.org, if you want to get a detailed comparison of all the AV products. This is from an anti-virus perspective only and doesn't discuss how resource-intensive they are.

Thanks, Ken. I'm still not sure that I want to install an anti-virus app on my box again, but I'm always getting asked for recommendations! :)

@kenmcnamee Perhaps you should try Comodo Internet Security. I have the same specs as you mentioned above and this anti-malware and firewall has kept me relatively safe. I, too, have tried many AVs but they are either not very satisfactory or have one or two features for paid users only. I hate that.

" To not support 64-bit is very quickly becoming a bad business practice" It also means it won't be Certified for Windows Vista. FAIL! "it's best to use one that is effective and low-impact, like Avast or NOD32." If you actually look at AV-Comparatives (the site that rated OneCare badly), OneCare has moved up while NOD32 has moved down. NOD32 has not been as good at detecting new virus samples as it was when the news about OneCare was released. Avast is usually higher ranked than AVG though, but it's surprising that people would choose AVG over it. "If the 64-bit kernel won't let you intrude the way you need to intrude,, and the APIs MS provides to the AV crowd aren't sufficient, you can't do 64 bit." Kernel PatchGuard was eliminated in Vista SP1, so it's a non issue. Panda still = EPIC FAIL! "I hear good things about Norton AntiVirus 2009 Gamer Edition" The regular Norton Antivirus 2009 product is quite good also. All of the 2009 products are a huge improvement over their predecessors, although with the exception of Norton 360 3.0 (that's the "2009" version of 360) running on XP or possibly Vista, I'd have to say that looking forward, Windows 7 has the Action Center but no AV software. All you'd need is either Morro or a basic AV software (I would say that Norton AV 2009 isn't bad). The non-security features are handled by Windows 7, and to a less-convenient degree, so does Windows Vista (it's not centrally manageable though). XP still needs auto-defrag, backup, and tune-up capabilities, but there are a lot of features that Norton 360 & Internet Security offers that can be fairly annoying and unnecessary. First, you have the anti-phishing toolbar - just what everybody needs: another browser toolbar. :p Then you have a firewall which isn't necessary now that Windows XP SP2 included a two-way firewall. You also have anti-spam features, which aren't necessary since most email programs already do that. OneCare got it right though (Thanks Mike!): Don't overlap functionality that Windows or Microsoft software already provides. Norton 360 does cover the non-security stuff that OneCare also did though. Windows Vista users will find the auto-defrag, backup, and tuneup functionality centralized in Norton 360 too, even if 360 has the above unrequired components. All of the added functionality in Norton Internet Security over the regular AV 2009 is completely unnecessary though, since Microsoft already provides it in Windows, or in the case of Parental Controls, free online with WL Family Safety. So to summarize: Morro: will be very welcome here on Windows 7 and for advanced users on Vista Norton AV 2009: a good alternative that's easy to use and fast, both on Windows 7 and for advanced users on Vista Norton AV 2009 Gamer: for gamers on Vista or 7 Norton 360 3.0: for most users on XP that want the same kind of easy auto-maintenance that Vista and 7 provide in-box, OR for Vista users that want centralized management of those features (as long as they don't mind the extra annoyances as described above) Norton Internet Security: not worth the money

@Waethorn I will try to stay away from Norton. It is notoriously infamous for leaving a load of registry behind after you uninstall. And it cannot be easily remove unless you use their remover. @kenmcnamee Comodo Internet Security will be a bit annoying initially but once it learns your habit, it will be very quiet.

Ken - save your cash for 1 year, and then check your PC after that year for viruses (if you rebuild throughout the year, then do that too, just act like normal but without the AV)... unless you are a newbie (which you're obviously not) then i bet you won't have a virus after the 365 days... surely you HAVE to do this as part of your 'testing' - you need a control, eh?

"It is notoriously infamous for leaving a load of registry behind after you uninstall." That was older versions. 2006 was brutal for that. That's no longer the case though, just like with the performance. Until I actually tried 2009, I wouldn't have recommended it either. @ken: Tip: don't run 2 antiviruses at the same time. When your on-demand scanner picks up something that your on-access scanner didn't, the on-access scanner will likely kick into overdrive and interfere with the on-demand scanners attempt to clean it. Use safe online habits first, then pick one and only use it. Norton will tell you that there are conflicting programs anyway, just like OneCare does.

stimshady: "save your cash for 1 year, and then check your PC after that year for viruses" Maybe you're willing to take that chance with your personal information and files but I'm not. In any case, I don't need to wait a year to see if I've gotten infected since I've already received virus-infected files a number of times over the years which could have comprimised my system. Waethorn: "don't run 2 antiviruses at the same time" I've been using various 2-AV combinations of Avast, AVG, AntiVir, NOD32 and BitDefender for the past several years and never had a problem using one always-on AV and one on-demand scanner. In my opinion, one aspect of the "low system impact" requirement for an AV product is that it plays nice with other security products. If Norton is not able to handle that scenario then that crosses it off my list since I don't believe in relying on only one method of security. I practice good security behavior and use multiple AVs so that I can get a "second opinion" on risky files which gives me better virus coverage. No AV product can protect you against all viruses but multiple AVs can come pretty close.

@ken: Why not just use an online web scanner as your on-demand one? That way you don't have the requirement of actually installing a second AV? Every major AV company has a web-based scanner. Many even do cleanups (some don't).

Waethorn: "OneCare got it right though (Thanks Mike!): " On behalf of the team, you're welcome. .

robertsjoe: you are a cock.

gorath: You're right about AVG. It used to be decent back in the 6.x and 7.x days but I haven't been too impressed with 8.0. As far as free AV, AntiVir is the best option I think. The only problem I have with it is a single annoying window that it pops up once per day when it does an update.