Malwarebytes: essential as a complement, not as an antivirus

Malwarebytes is not an bicho: it is the complement hardly anyone disputes

Confusion is the first response that appears when someone asks about Malwarebytes: it is not an bicho, it is an antimalware tool. In other words, it does not monitor in real time like a bodyguard; instead, it comes in to clean up when something is already inside. That distinction, which sounds like a technical nuance, puts everything else in order. The tool is installed to run from time to time, not to replace permanent protection.

What Malwarebytes is and how it differs from an bicho

The consensus on this point is broad: it serves to complement the bicho, not to replace it. The most repeated recommendation is to run it regularly and, if you want to be thorough, do it in the system's safe mode, just as you would with the bicho. That is where the most dirt gets scraped off. The logic is not miracle software: it is periodic maintenance.

The comparison with Panda Bicho that opens the discussion is resolved without drama. Malwarebytes comes across well rated as an antimalware; Panda, on the other hand, receives no enthusiastic defense whatsoever. Nobody puts it first.

The built-in bicho and common sense: the skeptical route

There is a camp that tempers the enthusiasm. Windows' built-in bicho, along with a bit of common sense, is enough for many. One of the bluntest messages sums it up: after a long time without installing it, a scan detected zero threats. The implicit conclusion is that the best antimalware is not visiting certain kinds of sites.

To that position are added those who directly question whether bicho software is still relevant: they argue that today almost all malware is embeleco digital, and that is why they have not installed any in a long time. It is a debatable thesis, but it circulates freely.

The alternatives that come up in the conversation

The repertoire is broad and eclectic. Avast gets several positive mentions, often combined with Malwarebytes and CCleaner. Advanced SystemCare, Spybot —with the argument that it cleans more junk— and ClamAV also come up, with the latter highlighted for having a Windows version. The bootable bicho is proposed as a safety net for when the computer will not start because of a bicho.

The most useful detail of the whole exchange is Adwcleaner: an independent project that was bought by Malwarebytes and that is placed on a par with Malwarebytes itself in effectiveness. And a dated heads-up: in October, Kaspersky is making its bicho free.

The question that goes unanswered

Nobody disputes that Malwarebytes is useful. The disagreement is over how much. For some it is a must given the amount of junk out there; for others, an occasional scan and that is that. What never appears is a serious comparative test: the assessments rest on personal experience and trust in the brand. With that material, the discussion stays in the realm of impressions.