Fred Fell, sounds like it should STILL be in pre-release beta versioning and they declared 1.0 stable release too soon! Thanks for the report.

Fred Fell, thank you for your feedback. We replied to you by email, the problem is you have installed a number of other antivirus programs on your PC. It's not recommended to use more than one antivirus program as it can slow down PC and produce other problems.

big kahuna, You failed to mention Panda -- very light on resources and works from the cloud. I use Avast Pro (paid) and rarely get ads. . . certainly NOT adware.

I don't see why we would consider what is just trialware like this Nano offering.

big kahuna,

"Windows Defender is just too heavy and slow on a lot of systems."

FWIW, politely disagree... I use it with win10 VMs & on a very low powered win10 tablet [with an Intel Atom CPU]. That said, it's also really hard to completely disable in win10 unless you install 3rd party security software. So I use McAfee on 3 other very low powered devices [with Intel Atom, Celeron, & i3 mobile CPUs], where it's not too bad at all when it comes to slowing the system down.

"There is free and paid decent options out there just do a little research ."

av-test[.]org isn't a bad place to start. Also FWIW, there are people that see false positives as a good sign that security software is working great & is properly aggressive, so keep your eye out for that sort of thing if you read user reviews at retailers like Amazon & Newegg.

Nonya, Avast PRO is probably ad-free, but Avast FREE can be very annoying with all the ads. AVG Free used to be better, but "big kahuna" is right--it has gotten annoying with ads too.

big kahuna, IF windows defender is too big and heavy for some systems I'd bet real money that you will not find an objectively equivilent or better 3rd party product that is smaller in memory/cpu resources and scaremongering and storage footprint. Including this apparently 1 gig installation just the allegation of that much consumption almost makes me want to download it on a test setup just to see what this company is doing so wrong that it needs that much storage to just exist in!... Imagine trying to install that on one of those low cost sub 64G emmc storage with 2G ram and 64bit windows 10... Windows Defenders footprint is so small that there are no cries about how do I uninstall WIndows Defender as I use a 3rd party anti-malware and I need the 100MBytes or so it takes up back for my 1Gig antivirus product! Do a little research into what you are criticising... there are reasons to choose 3rd party solutions but footprint and resource usage certainly is not one of them!

hotdog, VB100 is the oldest trusted testing laboratory in the antimalware industry. Our antivirus takes part in its tests and has 11 awards from this laboratory. You can see the latest test result here https://www.virusbulletin.com/virusbulletin/2019/06/vb100-comparative-review/

John Doe, Absolutely correct. And many free anti-virus perform as good if not better than the paid ones.

"... not to forget the Win10-pre-installed Microsoft Defender which in the meantime is also very good."

FWIW, it's got good ratings at av-test[.]org, but it's part of Microsoft's win10 stuff, and they've gotten a bit sloppy, especially when it comes to anything win10. [Firing the 1/2 of your coders that does QA kinda has that effect IMHO.] And because it is an integral part of win10, I think that a win10 vulnerability stands a better chance of compromising Defender that it does 3rd party security software, though I could of course be wrong.

"And many free anti-virus perform as good if not better than the paid ones."

IMHO, maybe. But there's something to be said for liking the GUI & working with whatever software too. We like & use McAfee & BitDefender in that regard [depending on how powerful the device is], but we also watch the sales, so McAfee unlimited devices has cost us $10 a year, & BitDefender never more that $20. Now there's nothing at all wrong with free, but it's worth that small amount for something we like much better.

John Doe, you can see the latest VB100 test result here https://www.virusbulletin.com/virusbulletin/2019/06/vb100-comparative-review/

amayzingone, we have a free version of our product, you can find it on our website.

TK, WHY DON'T YOU JUST INSTALL IT!!!

Terry, Probably because he read this from another member who already installed it, and decided to research for the rest of us!
"Installed a few months ago, the program takes up to 1 gigabyte of process! "
1GB???? I've had/tried many many anti-virus, never seen 1 that large.

TK, Thanks TK...think @ almost 1GB install size, and your review, gonna pass on this unknown. Don't like being a guinea pig for some softwares, especially anti-virus!

Terry, is that a question or a demand? Because I have found from years of experience that one must be very prudent about what anti-malware software one puts on any machine since in order for it to be effective at restraining malicious software that can hide in the inner workings of the operating system that it too has to have a very intimate arrangment with the operating system to function and a side effect of that is that it will have continuous access to every piece of data you have and have to be aware of every thing you want to do on your computer and in doing so will likely interfere with the day to day usage of that computer the more paranoid the software is designed to be...

So after a little research and experience and maybe a touch of prejudice against big claims which are not backed up by evidence and conflicting information I think er no thanks not even if you PAY ME to install it let alone a measly free 100 days... Or, to put it simply, because I am not an idiot that sees oh something is free so I just have to install it without researching it and its history! Even more so when the developer does not publish a full development history too and one finds that most of its life its been in beta test!

TK, Thank you for your comment. In fact, you looked through the additional site which was under construction and needed a lot of enhancements and really has some inaccuracy, we apologize for that and would make efforts to fix it asap.
Let me comment on some points. Our antivirus is integrated into Windows Security Center. Since Microsoft provides with their API only trusted antiviruses, thу very fact of the integration confirmes that any integrated antivirus is trusted so no need to link it.
Our antivirus is tested by the well known oldest test laboratory VB100, the result of the latest test can be found here https://www.virusbulletin.com/virusbulletin/2019/06/vb100-comparative-review/. At the moment we obtained eleven VB100 awards,
The installer is quite big because the virus base is included and no need to download it additionally.

NANO AV, I presume your AV patterns are updated at least once daily so that means the installer if it contains patterns, so they don't have to be downloaded, that the installer has to be rebuilt very frequently... even including virus patterns 681MByte download and 1Gbyte installed is still VERY large, one can download the entire windows defender definitions database in less than 100MBytes!

Just about every anti-virus product integrates into windows security center so that is not a qualitive endorsement by Microsoft of the current product. The wikipedia article should have a "citation needed" on the claim of an aproval of this product by Microsoft over other AV products that intigrates into windows security center. The wikipedia article reads more like a vendors advert or marketers review.

And looking at that page you link to the products listed there claim at worst 0.003% false positive detection rate, Most claim 0.000% and I know for a fact that many of them false positive detect many quite legitimate 100% clean 3rd party administrative and technicians programs so much so as I have to use a hardware write protected USB thumb drive when working on customers computers with many of those products in order to stop them deleting my toolkit before I have a chance to de-paranoid the default heuristics and anti- PUP blocking! None of those third party programs are worth the damage they will do my software collection and time wasted teaching them to ignore certain programs and folders which then unprotects those legitimate files from infection.

TK, our product uses incremental update's mode, so no need to rebuilt the installer. As for the disk space, if you check system requirements of modern antiviruses you will find that most of them require not less than 1 Gb of disk space or even more.
As for the WSC integration, none of the antiviruses can get Microsoft API just because it wants to be integrated. It's just impossible. Microsoft company provides with API personally each company only if it meets Microsoft's requirements which are quite strong. It includes the special testing of antivirus product by Microsoft.
As for Wikipedia and any inaccuracy in articles you need to address to the article editor as it's not our official channel of information.

Experimento, yes, it's absolutely abnormally. So it would be appreciated if you send logs before uninstall. The normal RAM usage is much less. I have our antivirus on my work PC, right now there are 2 processes which take about 45 Mb for each.

peter,

Security software sends its roots deep into Windows, because malware often tries to disable or circumvent it. Most decent security software companies are aware of the difficulty of removing those roots, so they provide special tools just for that, including Avast.

avast[.]com/en-us/uninstall-utility

mike, Avast is always trying to sneek itself onto your computer. Its often bundled with other software. You have to decline it or uncheck a box to stop it installing. This is not ethical behaviour.

Brandon, Correct!

teo chris, Along with what Brandon said it is FULL of bloatware. I would never install anything from Norton ever again.

Brandon, you can get a 3-seat license of Norton off of eBay for less than 20 bucks! Is that what you consider expensive ?? No offense..

Mike, you must be thinking of very old editions of Norton Security products: the current line of Norton products are streamlined; very quick and easy to install (and remove); not bloatware at all. You are simply misinformed, sad to say, and none offense intended..

Randy, Oh my. I usually don't reply to people after I make comment but I must in your case. This review is first one I found when I google Norton Security products review.

Heavy system-performance impact.

Many years ago, Norton antivirus products would slow your system to a crawl while they scanned your hard drive. But Norton subsequently made great strides on that front, and most of its products we tested in the past few years had only a moderate system impact. We're sad to report that the bad old days may be back.

Reducing system resources sends out red flags that something else is going on, bloatware.

Don't take my word for it, I am sure you are smart person, go google and find out for yourself.

You're welcome, have a great day.

Bob,
Microsoft Defender

Bob,

"Trust, No One" .... Don't you remember to X-Files??

:-)

Bob, I trust Malwarebytes Pro.

Terry,
I’ve been using AVG free version since the early 90’s, and yes I won’t deny having a few issues and a few virus slip through the system protectors.....
AVG really stepped up its game, got its awards like any other good AV prog.... Though there is other security detailed programs that accidentally step on AVG’s toes.

Become AT savvy, learn a few tricks and if NANO still does it for you, then employ it.

Regards, Vinny.