malwarebytes manual scanner better than auto

I have yet to benchmark and compare the program's memory usage before and after the new Malwarebytes 3.1 update.

The Malwarebytes 3.1 program starts up faster, and is more responsive in the user interface.

Third-party applications load faster and are more responsive.Improved the performance of the Web Protection module.Memory usage is reduced thanks to improvements in this area.From a performance perspective, things have improved in several ways: The new version of Malwarebytes addresses some of these issues. and if people let their virus get in a computer, I am sure windows defender offline wouldn't really be useful if next time they will do the same and infect it once again.Ever since Malwarebytes published Malwarebytes 3, a unified program that combines the company's anti-malware, anti-ransomware and anti-exploit products, users have been complaining about various issues such as high memory usage or the automatic turning off of protective modules with the program. The best way to avoid virus is by not clicking on every. but it's stupid when people from other OSs say you must use an antivirus on windows like if that made their OSs safer or Windows immune to virus.

something like Virustotal or jotti can make the job, manually but without hitting people's performace, it's not like AV packages slow computers too much, but sometimes they do, on certain things. or run any file that they download even if it's an obvious 'getyourprize.exe'.Īnyway I usually deactive antivirus because they are a waste of resources most of the time, if you are not downloading a file, a virus shouldn't just 'worm' in a computer. yeah it still sucks regardless of how it got there but it doesn't mean an antivirus can save someone if they turn off their AV, or just don't care to get one. I am sorry but virus just dont 'worm' into a system, people have to download it and run it for it to happen.

Malwarebytes manual scanner better than auto