[mbslrm (Unverified) Posted Sep 29th 2009 1:32PM]

This is going to be interesting... I wonder how it'll stack up to its competitors, today and in the future.

[Bender Posted Sep 29th 2009 1:42PM]

amen - my biggest question is what will the impact on system resources (compared to an AVG) be?

[Vidikron Posted Sep 29th 2009 1:45PM]

@Paul

AVG isn't really considered all that good anymore. It's already more bloated than it used to be and the detection rates have declined.

[Jimbojones Posted Sep 29th 2009 1:49PM]

totally agree, AVG was great 6 years ago. I started using AVAST last year and it works pretty dam good even with 512MB ram

[10minutehobo (Unverified) Posted Sep 29th 2009 2:43PM]

Yep, Avast! or Avira for me.

If at all.

[Bender Posted Sep 29th 2009 3:18PM]

thanks guys - this is great info

i have noticed in the past year or two that it seems to be bloated compared to the old days.

[Kit Posted Sep 29th 2009 3:21PM]

@Paul

Just look at the installation file size...

AVG = 30 MB
MSE = 5 MB

[kingbirdfivezero Posted Sep 29th 2009 4:02PM]

@Paul, I was using AVG on a Win Vista and 7 machine. On the Vista machine, it would boot fast but run slowly at desktop for a for a few minutes because of a AVG background process. On the Win 7 machine, it would take a long time to boot (up to 70 secs) but run relatively fast when it got to desktop. I removed AVG from both machines and installed MS Security Essentials -- and the the performance problems disappeared on both machines. For instance, Win 7 boot-up time is now 20 secs. I like AVG, but over the years, it's become a bloated resource hog.

[domopod Posted Sep 29th 2009 6:38PM]

I've been using this since it was on beta, doesn't use up your system resources, runs well on my grandmas 1.8ghz 512ram computer.