Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: bob3160 on May 21, 2014, 04:40:47 PM
-
Malwarebytes 2.0.2.1012 stable release, "note" if you were already running 2.0.2.1012 beta there is no need to update. https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?s=84137aeece61e58f8a77640685f055ad&showtopic=149022 (https://forums.malwarebytes.org/index.php?s=84137aeece61e58f8a77640685f055ad&showtopic=149022)
I'll continue to use version 1.75. I hate version 2.0. UI is horrible,scan is too slow.Obviously beta testers were fanboys.I am looking for alternatives.
That's your opinion ::) it's far superior in every aspect imo :) Please complain elsewhere as this isn't a discussion thread, and your Softpedia review is several versions outdated.
I own the paid version and have to agree with abruptum about not being all that thrilled with version 2.
Version 2 of Malwarebytes isn't as convenient to use v1.75. Seems much slower and more bloated.
Although I paid for the product, I still have my eyes open for an alternative to Malwarebytes.
All this despite the fact that at this time, it's still one of the programs I recommend to all those attending
the presentations I do for avast!. :)
-
Like Bob I am also a bit skeptical about MBAM 2.
It is spending more resources in my system and mbam.exe does not unload memory after updates.
It is not as easy as before to copy the scan result txt to attach to a forum.
I can also see an empty window when turnning off the computer ( seems this is fixed in the new version )
The scan are a bit tricky. If you choose to scan from the big green box in UI " Scan NOW ", it scan for rootkits, but if you run Threat Scan it dos not look for rootkits.
The alerts go crazy when detecting something. I got it set it out for 5 sec, but the same alert can pop-up even 10 times in a row.
Time schedule for running scans is not as accurate as before.
Well these are all glitches that bother me and since I am still running XP so not big deal. I just hope it protects me better than 1.75.
-
I have used MBAM v2.0 since beta testing. There seem to be a few glitches to be worked out.
In fact MBAM is currently beta testing again. I'm not beta testing this time around.
Rootkit scan can be disabled via the GUI.
Scan run times are different than on v1.75 due to fact that MBAM seems to do more thorough scans.
Personally I prefer v2.0 over v1.75 because the detection rate appears to be higher (my experience).
If you pay attention successive pop-ups are due to different detections on a webpage.
I haven't had any issues saving the scan results to a "text file" which can be opened in a word processor
like LibreOffice or Kingsoft Office Free. High CPU usage was present in the beta but was fixed in the final release.
Bottom line, I'd go with MBAM v2.0. :)
edit: Real time detection in MBAM Premium v2.0 is more sensitive than before.
-
Not impressed with MBAM 2.0 on my win7 netbook as I have had to stop the scheduled scan as the window for scan settings isn't expandable. Nor does it have scroll bars, focus on buttons or hot buttons. I can't change any of the Advanced settings because once expanded, you can't access the OK button to confirm changes.
I have never been particularly about looks, but this UI is less about aesthetics and more about functionality/intuitive. This UI is a pain to find things, yes it has some wrinkles, changing the scan names confuses the issue further as the equivalent Quick scan, is much slower.
Its really is work in progress, but I'm in no rush.
-
Besides the early beta versions I've not had an issue with any of the later builds, resource usage was reduced by 2/3rd's on win8 and I find the UI much more visually appealing ( not that it matters ) and for me I think the UI is easily navigated.
Scan times have also been reduced since the last 2 beta versions and my Threat scans are only seconds apart from what I was achieving with 1.75 and this is with Rootkit scanning enabled, Maybe my more favourable experience concerning performance is due to better system spec's than some others but in saying that I also run MBAM 2 on two other average to low spec win8 and win7 systems as well with no problems.
-
I have only ever used the free version and am doing the same with v2. The UI took a bit of getting used to and I don't like how quick scan has been replaced by Threat Scan which is much slower. However, since I only use it when I think there may be a need or to do occasional checkups, I can live with it.
There is one thing that I'm sure most people already know of but I'll say it anyway. The MBAM on demand scan will go much faster if you temporarily disable your primary AV scanner. If you leave it on, everything gets scanned by both programs and slows down the process.
-
I don't like how quick scan has been replaced by Threat Scan which is much slower.
Actually Quick Scan was replaced by Hyper scan but free users don't have access to that option.
-
I don't like how quick scan has been replaced by Threat Scan which is much slower.
Actually Quick Scan was replaced by Hyper scan but free users don't have access to that option.
Not really since if you read what Hyperscan does, it's not nearly as much as the old Quick Scan.
I just checked for updates and didn't get the new version yet. It will probably come within the next day or two.
-
I found the "threat scan" is more thorough than the old "quick scan".
David I'm not sure as to what you mean by "scan settings" not being expandable? ???
I have no problem with any screen on my laptop.
-
See image1 when you try to edit the Scan settings for a Scheduled scan the window that opens, hasn't got any Minimise, Maximise options, nor can the window be dragged to reduce or expand that window.
See image2 when you use the Advanced button it expands the window, but again there are still no user control over the size.
Having clicked the Advanced button in my win7 netbook it exceeds the screen size and there is no bloody way to resize it to bring it into view to be able to OK any changes made.
-
I see what you mean. The advanced settings (screenshot #2) barely fits in my laptop.
That's not a big deal for me since I never schedule MBAM scans. Out of habit I run
an MBAM scan soon after my weekly scheduled avast quick scan is finished.
-
David have you mentioned this on the MBAM forums? that's clearly an issue that requires fixing and adding some options for those with smaller screens.
I have it installed on a friends Surface Pro which has no issues with screen size but being it's 1920 x 1080 resolution the UI is much smaller and accessible.
-
I see what you mean. The advanced settings (screenshot #2) barely fits in my laptop.
That's not a big deal for me since I never schedule MBAM scans. Out of habit I run
an MBAM scan soon after my weekly scheduled avast quick scan is finished.
It doesn't fit in mine (1024x600), that's the problem, I don't want to scan archives (total waste of time). I can't change the defaults (includes scanning archives), so no option but to abandon the scheduled scan.
-
David have you mentioned this on the MBAM forums? that's clearly an issue that requires fixing and adding some options for those with smaller screens.
I have it installed on a friends Surface Pro which has no issues with screen size but being it's 1920 x 1080 resolution the UI is much smaller and accessible.
No I haven't bothered. Outside of reporting FPs in their forum I haven't had a great deal of joy on other issues.
-
quote. CraigB
David have you mentioned this on the MBAM forums? that's clearly an issue that requires fixing and adding some options for those with smaller screens.
i posted a link to this topic in mbam forum so guess it will be seen. ;)
-
Thanks Pondus
Added my 2 cents worth as well :)
-
David,
Have you tried changing the screen resolution ???
-
quote. CraigB
David have you mentioned this on the MBAM forums? that's clearly an issue that requires fixing and adding some options for those with smaller screens.
i posted a link to this topic in mbam forum so guess it will be seen. ;)
Thanks, generally I don't like posting other forum links as they have to leave their forum to get the information. Though in this case there are a few different issues collated, not to mention we do recommend MBAM as an addition to avast.
-
David,
Have you tried changing the screen resolution ???
I don't believe you can in the win7 starter edition, it is heavily restricted, can't even change wallpaper. 1024x600 is the native resolution and I think I'm stuck with it. It is using the bog standard Intel graphics (I think it is 3150) on an Intel Atom processor.
-
I was able to accomplish it on my 10.1 Dell.
It may not work for you but I was also told it couldn't be done by Dell:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM0SQyuk7_4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM0SQyuk7_4)
-
I will have a look, but remember this is win7 starter edition not windows 8.
Now searching the registry, this might take a while, not much grunt in a 1.5GHz Atom dual core CPU.
Back in a while.
-
I had tried one of the later betas of v2 and didn't like the feel of it. I uninstalled and went back to 1.75. All was well 'til yesterday when MBAM sent the program update along with the database update. I was notified and agreed to the update, but it was a mistake on my part. The UI is still just as clumsy, and settings are difficult to find and understand. I spent a good five minutes looking for a scan log file link in the UI, gave up, and manually found the log in the MBAM folder. I was never able to get the context menu scanner to work properly: sometimes, MBAM opened but just layed there; other times MBAM never even opened. Shellex and Ccleaner verified MBAM's context menu existence, but it still didn't work.
V2 is still a beta with many bugs to be worked out, IMHO. I just ask that MBAM continues support for v1.75 until these problems are resolved, and doesn't force the upgrade on it's users.
I am currently using SAS and EEK to supplement Avast on my personal XP32 SP3 system.
-
I spent a good five minutes looking for a scan log file link in the UI, gave up,
did you click the log/history tab at top right ;)
essexboy have some screenshots here. http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=53253.0
-
I was able to accomplish it on my 10.1 Dell.
It may not work for you but I was also told it couldn't be done by Dell:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM0SQyuk7_4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yM0SQyuk7_4)
Update:
Well it took some time to find the first registry entry, but that went OK as did the second entry.
A reboot and check the screen resolution options, it also had 1024x768 as you mentioned and also 1152x864. The 1024x768 made things very stretched. But I was able to access all of the MBAM scheduled scans advanced settings.
Thanks for the video, very handy reference guide.
I also tried the 1152x864 resolution whilst that was more like the normal screen layout, it isn't something you wouldn't want to use outside of emergencies. Once you step away from the native resolution of an LCD/LED screen you loose clarity.
-
Glad to hear that it worked.
I did it out of necessity since Windows 8 would not work on the default max settings
available on my Dell Mini and mainly because Dell said it can't be done. :)
-
With the newest update, most my problems with earlier versions are gone.
The only problem I find now is that MBAM starts automatically at random times. I have been told it happens when it automatically updates.
-
I spent a good five minutes looking for a scan log file link in the UI, gave up,
did you click the log/history tab at top right ;)
essexboy have some screenshots here. http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=53253.0
Thanks, Pondus. I would have if I could have found it. My scan only alerted on one registry item which I ignored. There was no log-link I could find at that point. If there was a link to History, I would probably not have associated it with scan logs.
-
I found the "threat scan" is more thorough than the old "quick scan".
Yes it is. It's almost a full scan. The Hyper Scan however is much less thorough than Quick was. I was always satisfied with Quick and even the MBAM staff said it was sufficient in most cases. I wish they would have kept it in the free version.
-
I'm sticking with MBAM v1.75 at the moment. I've tried every new version since 1.75 and none of them haave worked smoothly on my machine. The problem always seems to be that the MBAM driver causes a BSOD during scans. Rather than try to fix the problem I started looking at other similar products and have been impressed with Emsisoft Emergency Kit:
https://www.emsisoft.com/en/software/eek/
I'd suggest trying it as it's free.
Scans are configurable and can be set to exclude files, folders or drives. Can also scan for PUP's.
The only downside is that the update process isn't quite as fast as MBAM's.
-
MBAM 2 has surely had initial bugs and problems.Over the past weeks their detection rates dropped suddenly.
Luckily a few program updates and the dedication of the developers has fixed everything.Still I think it could have been better program.There is still some issues I have had with it with other AV;s.
-
I'm sticking with MBAM v1.75 at the moment. I've tried every new version since 1.75 and none of them haave worked smoothly on my machine. The problem always seems to be that the MBAM driver causes a BSOD during scans. Rather than try to fix the problem I started looking at other similar products and have been impressed with Emsisoft Emergency Kit:
https://www.emsisoft.com/en/software/eek/
I'd suggest trying it as it's free.
Scans are configurable and can be set to exclude files, folders or drives. Can also scan for PUP's.
The only downside is that the update process isn't quite as fast as MBAM's.
Update: I've just installed the latest stable release of MBAM and it works correctly with no BSOD's. They must have fixed the driver issue!
-
My feeling being a user is Mbam Version 2 has taken some getting used too, as it seems (in some respects) fundamentally heavier/awkward compared to v.1.75
-
My feeling being a user is Mbam Version 2 has taken some getting used too, as it seems (in some respects) fundamentally heavier/awkward compared to v.1.75
It took some time to be able to change the scan settings in my win7 netbook as the scan settings window was larger than my screen size (until a hack to increase screen res above the native res), so I couldn't uncheck the scan archive option in the Hyper scan.
Once that was removed/unchecked the scan was more like the Quick scan of old.
-
The pro version of Malwarebytes 2.1.4.1018 using too much resources.
(http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/screenshots/u/Lh/1427032829538-83275.png)
I complained about it quite some time ago.
Is it ever going to change ???
Folks complain about Avast, maybe they need to look deeper.
-
The pro version of Malwarebytes 2.1.4.1018 using too much resources.
<snip image>
I complained about it quite some time ago.
Is it ever going to change ???
Folks complain about Avast, maybe they need to look deeper.
From the first version of 2.0 MBAM Pro became a resource hog, so much so I had to disable the resident function on my win7 netbook. Kind of defeats the point of buying the MBAM Pro version.
I don't know which services it uses in win8.1 or win10 - but in this XP system it uses 3 services, so you might find it uses even more.
EDIT: Currently I haven't updated to the latest version 2.1.4.1018 still using 2.0.4.1028 and that has been a resource hog.
-
I only use the free version and it seems fine except that I wish it still had the old quick scan that went twice as fast as the new Threat scan. I also unchecked the box for scanning within archives. It does scan somewhat faster if you temporarily disable your resident AV. If you scan with the AV active, you can see the scan happening in both products. That's not necessarily a bad thing . It just slows things down a little.
-
Frankly, I don't think we can correctly compare MBam v.1.75 to the newer versions (v.2.1.4.1018) Premium due to different/improved technology/Engine etc which to achieve better security, takes more resources
** Just as I don't believe we can correctly compare Older versions of Avast (say version Seven or Eight) to version 10 (2015) for the same reasons; different/improved technology/NG etc which to achieve better security "also" takes more resources.
I have used the Paid versions of both MBam and Avast for years and they have changed. As they have developed, it can be stated They 'both' have gotten better at providing more security and on my OS's they both consume more resources and seem heavier then earlier versions I've mentioned. :)
-
(http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/screenshots/u/Lh/1427039987568-34296.png)
(http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/screenshots/u/Lh/1427039931639-48438.png)
(http://www.screencast-o-matic.com/screenshots/u/Lh/1427039866436-4833.png)
In this comparison, Malwarebytes is still the largest system hog.
I agree that for better protection, more resources need to be used but there also needs to be a trade off at some point.
I don't want to go back to the old days when the protection used so much of the system resources that it was impossible
to enjoy your computer.
-
The new version of Malwarebytes runs very smooth here on 8.1 64x, I don't notice any lagging or anything else.
-
I am testing it and no weighing too heavy on the old Vista cycles for me.
Stumbled upon it for I could not update SAS free this week,
the protection on demand I normally have installed.
polonus