Originally Posted by
AOD_Mokona512
For inbound protection, zone alarm is not really any better than the windows firewall, as it defaults to closed on ports you are not using. Zone alarm's main security feature is the more in depth outbound protection in that it offers more control over which applications have access to the internet, and essentially uses a white list method. If you head to a site that gets you infected, zone alarm will not protect you, but depending on if the infection is aware of zone alarm, it bar stop the infection from connecting too any outside servers (which can be useful if you get infected with something like a key logger). with many benchmarks, the paid virus scanners really do not do better than the free ones, as when ever they do a review, basically you will have avast, avg, and nortons trading spots when scanning a giant pack of the latest samples of malware. (though nortons is consistently in the first or second place trading blows with avast) The issue is that when new malware comes out, it is rarely ever first found by an antivirus company, instead it is found by various online communities and security researchers, which then causes the AV companies to run out an update for their scanners, thus they all end up more or less detecting the same things and the main differences seem to stem from which company has their developers running on extra caffeine that day.
AVG also has decent detection but they are slower to update (not much of an issue if you never download anything new, but if you do, then they take longer to get their stuff updated (they may have a smaller development team that is also overextended as they keep adding more stuff to AVG, which is more to maintain)
The main reason for the free scanners that companies like avast offer, is because a large user base allows them to collect suspicious file samples and monitor the spread of said files and also monitor some application behaviors, which in turn goes to improving the zero day protection.