Software

[mtrump]

"MSE has similar anti-spyware capabilities compared to Norton anti-virus or Kaspersky anti-virus, but not as good as the Internet Security packages from the same companies."

Take a look at the feature chart from Norton:

http://www.symantec.com/norton/antivirus -> Compare Related Products

You will find that there are no features differences between Norton Internet Security and Norton Antivirus when it comes to antispyware.  Therefore looking strictly in terms of antispyware capabilities, there is no gains going from NA to NIS.  (You may be interested in other features of NIS that is not in NA, but that's beyond the scope of this discusion.)

Take another example:  Avast.

http://www.avast.com/en-ca/free-antivirus-download#tab3

Again, there is no gain going from Avast Antivirus (free) vs. Avast Internet Security when it comes to antispyware protection, other than faster (they probably means more frequent) updates of signatures. 

I have been using Avast Free for years, unti MSE comes to the scene.

[roparadi]

Looking at the Norton table, NIS does have many features above NAV that provides protection against Malware and Spyware.  Specifically the firewall, network security features, email filter, and identity protection features.  Avast doesn't list them as thoroughly, but is similar.  MSE does not contain most of these features and is thus less 'comprehensive'.  I am not saying it's a lesser quality security product by any means, just that it does not have as many features, and does not qualify by itself as a malware protection tool.  So if you do choose MSE, I recommend combining it with other programs that complement it, and there are many options for those.

[mtrump]

Let gets what we have agreed on first - and that the original poster wanted "the most comprehensive" protection.  Both of us agree that a "security suite" is the way to go [I've even named a few] - that's a given.

What I do not agree with you are the following statements that you gave:  [emphasis added]

"But if you have an anti-virus program, you will also want an anti-spyware program...  Microsoft Security Essentials is mainly an anti-virus, so anyone who uses it should also have an anti-spyware program."

To say that MSE does not perform anti-spyware is absolutely false; MSE performs antispyware functions without any additional software.  To quote from Microsoft:  "Microsoft Security Essentials provides real-time protection for your home PC that guards against viruses, spyware, and other malicious software."

You then go on to say:

"However, anti-spyware programs focus on malware that does not exhibit virus-like behaviour , and by doing so will be much more effective than MSE or any other anti-virus that does not have a separate anti-spyware component"

If it is 2006 I would probably agree with you; many antivirus softwares then were incapable of scanning non-virus-like malwares, such that you will need a separate antispyware software like Lavasoft Adware.  However, this is 2010, and that statement is no longer valid.  A quick, non-scientific check of a number of common entry-level "antivirus" software that are available in the market: 

McAfee Antivirus Plus:

• #1 in Malware Detection
• Detects more threats (viruses, spyware, and other malware) than ever before

Norton Antivirus 2010:

• Blocks viruses, spyware, Trojan horses, worms, bots, and rootkits

Avast Free Antivirus:

• Antivirus and anti-spyware engine
• Real time anti-rootkit protection
• File System / Mail Shield

Panda Antivirus Pro 2010:

• Anti-Malware Engine detects and eliminates viruses, worms, Trojans, spyware, keyloggers, rootkits, bots, etc.

Nowadays, antivirus software does more than just viruses, but have expanded to other unwanted software as well.  As a result, it is no longer needed to have a separate antispyware product, because current versions of "antivirus" software is able to detect spyware and other unwanted software as well.  Therefore, these software are "antivirus" by name only; in fact that can probably change their product names to "antimalware" and still be valid (if that makes you more comfortable). I guess the name "antivirus" has been stuck for so long and the marketing departments of these companies decide to keep the name.

In your last message:

"MSE does not contain most of these features and is thus less 'comprehensive'"

MSE is not "comprehensive" - that I can agree on, but:

"I am not saying [MSE is] a lesser quality security product by any means, just that it does not have as many features, and does not qualify by itself as a malware protection tool."

That I cannot agree on - see above.  Features such as "firewall, network security features, email filter, and identity protection features" - that you quoted - are not specifically antimalware, but for other aspects towards the overall security of the PC.  And not all of these functions will add value to the user depending on the specific setup.  For example, if you are mostly a webmail user (eg. Hotmail, Gmail, etc.) then email filter won't do anything for you, as spam filtering is done at the vendor's end.

I hope that clears up my position.

[roparadi]

A great post mtrump, well worded and informative, I'm just going to respond to two bits in there and then maybe it's best to agree to disagree on this one.

First:

---

mtrump wrote:
Features such as "firewall, network security features, email filter, and identity protection features" - that you quoted - are not specifically antimalware

---

This statement is pedantic.  All of these features will protect, against many malware attacks, especially spyware.  Just because this is not what they were originally designed for doesn't matter.

---

mtrump wrote:
Nowadays, antivirus software does more than just viruses, but have expanded to other unwanted software as well.  As a result, it is no longer needed to have a separate antispyware product, because current versions of "antivirus" software is able to detect spyware and other unwanted software as well.  Therefore, these software are "antivirus" by name only; in fact that can probably change their product names to "antimalware" and still be valid (if that makes you more comfortable). I guess the name "antivirus" has been stuck for so long and the marketing departments of these companies decide to keep the name.

---

It is true that antivirus will check for non-virus threats and sometimes even fix them, I don't dispute this in the least.  It is not true, however, that they will do it as well as a program designed to do just that, such as Lavasoft's AdAware, Spybot S&D, or Spyware Doctor.  Having these in addition to an antivirus is many times more effective than just having your antivirus software.  Also, a security suite that includes the features mentioned above will be much more effective than just an antivirus program.

As a closing statement, you can safely use any anti-spyware program, including those I mentioned, along-side any of these antivirus or security products.  They do not conflict with each other, as is usually the case with using more than one antivirus or security suite.

[mtrump]

Yup - I say we agree to disagree.   For my personal PCs, I have been using Avast Home, ESET NOD32 and MSE and I have yet to encounter a situation where I need to use a separete antispyware products such as Lavasoft.  It's only at work when they are still using an old version of McAfee Enterprise (I have no say regarding which antivirus software to use at work) when my PC got infected and had to resort to Trend Micro Housecall.