There's a really decent assortment of free anti-virus software available on the Internet these days. Why are they free? It's a form of advertising, a way to "get in the door". Do something well, get positive reviews for it, then entice people to pay for additional features. Some free anti-virus is more obnoxious than others. Some will give you pop-up reports of the last scan results, tacking on offers to upgrade to a paid version. Others will just pop up offers at random, not in connection to any scanning activities.



OK, so if you're on a budget you've got free anti-virus installed. But if you don't need the added features offered in the paid versions, are you just as well protected for the installed functionality? The effectiveness of these programs relies on the breadth and frequency of comprehensive virus definitions, plus periodic updates to the engines for how they perform their scans. The software must know what to look for. If the free and paid versions get the same subscription updates, then they should be equally effective, right? Or... has anyone learned something to the contrary? If you can afford it, is it really best to buy your anti-virus software?

The primary difference between the paid and the free is features. All have basic Anti Virus and automatic updates. The paid versions have other features such as firewalls, email protection, spam protection etc. If you scan with the free Malwarebytes and use a quality free anti virus, you have all the protection that you need. Bottom line, I do not think that any intelligent computer owner really needs the paid version if he or she uses common sense.
In some ways the paid versions are better, since they are not overloaded with features they may be faster
Free vs. Fee: Free and Paid Antivirus Programs Compared | PCWorld

From our Seven Forums
http://www.sevenforums.com/system-se...nti-virus.html

^ Yeah, that's kind of what I've been thinking. The other advantage with a paid version is the lack of offers to upgrade. Your link is from 2010, so things have changed since then. I think as of 2012 PC Mag prefers AVG over Avast now, but only marginally so. I think you can't go wrong with either. But I have to say that I'm on Avast now (It was #1 in the Top 5 for 2011), because I find it more aggressive on blocking bad sites. Sometimes it blocks a site that isn't malicious, but is borderline. I don't mind that.

I have always used and suggested MSE, but I am now using Avast and think that it is marginally better.

^ Yeah, I like the Avast interface and it seems to run pretty fast. As long as it's in the Top 3, I'll keep using it. And once I'm doing better financially, I'm going to upgrade to a full license to help support them.

Regarding MSE, can you use only a portion of it and use a different anti-virus product for on-demand live file scanning?

It is suggested that you use Malwarebytes and Eset online for the circumstances that you suggest.
Eset gives a quality scan and it is not downloaded it is a browser add on.
ESET :: Get a FREE Online Virus Scan
Be careful not to agree to the toolbar or Messenger, unless you want the additional software.