Battling our contracted IT guys about forcing ESET antivirus onto all of our machines. Just looked at Task Manager to find that it was using 1.6+ GB of RAM on my machine! grrrr !!!!!

I quite like Eset on Android since Avast went to hell and Eset is fast there, but to install it on Windows, weeeell... after Nod32 rather hack me, I don't need two Chromes running at the same time.

This is great. I'm sorry but developers do not care enough about security, when your company gets owned because you downloaded something you thought wasn't malicious but turned out to be a cryptolocker, which stops people from working for x number of hours because it hit file shares, you'll be wishing you had AV software that stopped it. The real solution is to agree an exclusion folder with your IT guys where devs can do dev work without the AV interfering. A small sacrifice is better than letting devs have completely free reign of their computers.

"But it stops us from working!" you say. I'll tell you what will stop you from working longer, the closure of your company.

TL;DR - Agree an exclusion folder with your IT people. Get more RAM.

@drRoss I agree with averything except the RAM. Just because an application is built the way it eats RAM for breakfast, it doesn't mean a user should tolerate it. There are other AVs.

Except if you try to run some big application on a toaster, then definitely get more RAM.

ESET? First of all, is that thing still available in 2016? Second, that antivirus has more non-detection holes than Norton and even windows own antivirus is better than that (and free!). If you need an external antivirus, just choose among Avira, Avast or Kaspersky. Those are the ones which do their job good. Otherwise stick to MSE (on windows versions less than windows 8), and you already have it integrated in w8 and later in Windows Defender.

@drRoss or let them install Linux if possible. It's not 100% safe of course, no system is, but it's certainly safer than slapping some snake oil solution on windows and hoping nothing goes wrong. There's a reason why companies like Google don't allow their employees to run Windows

@brukernavn32 Is that actually true? They don't run ANY Windows?

@drRoss I don't know if it affects all employees but: http://telegraph.co.uk/technology/...