So SAS is not yet relegated to the poor mans scanner and it HAS the capability to pick up serious infections just like the others. Popularity is not always a criterion of quality and superiority by a long chalk.
Never said it didn't, but the detection rate is lower than most of the other security programs. I believe SAS is better at detecting PUPs and spywares rather than bigger infections (although I believe it has the capability to deal with rootkits and those bigger threats, not sure on how well it does since even MBAM and most AV have trouble on some of these).
Oh, certainly not. Of the three biggest AV companies (McAfee, Norton and AVG), I would not recommend their programs to an average user even if I was being paid. They all can and have had big problems with false positives and not playing well with systems (McAfee mostly, AVG and Norton less but it still happens), and so I would recommend a less well known AV instead.
By the way, I have already defined the matter of tracking cookies quite clearly and if anybody feels they are unimportant and accepts that some Nosey-Parker watches everything you do on the web, then have a nice day. Not to my liking or that of every AV scanning program I know where you can select to ban tracking cookies in the configuration and settings or delete them on closure.
The only problem is that is very hard to not be tracked online these days. Even some AV collect information about you and what you do on your computer. They are not dangerous though, that is the big difference on why I say not to bother scanning for them (just set your settings to delete them or not allow them). Do I care that somebody watches me browse BleepingComputer and Youtube all day? - Not really, I'm rather boring
Just a small deviation from the perfection image of those so called "professional" AV favourites. I personally have had many experiences of these perfect programs failing to locate an infection and coming up with false positives. So have hundreds of other users on the web, it appears that I am not alone.
Until SAS has proven to be a really 1st Class program, my initial conclusion is that its only crime is that it is not publicised like our regular well known AV`s. Having said that, according to the website 30 million users have found out about it and given it a swing. Wherever has it been all my life ?
No program is perfect, and will detect everything. That's common to every program which relies on heuristics, which is pretty much every security program ever created (AV, AM, AS, e.c.t).
SAS is pretty well known actually, as you can see by the 30 millions users, you just have to look around a bit to find it (Grinler does recommend it, and there is a guide from about 4 years back which shows how to use SAS to remove infections). It's a good program to keep on hand in any case.
When performing a complete system scan, SAS does a better job of detection in safe mode than in normal mode. This might be one reason why it isn't recommended as often as MBAM.
That's interesting, I've never heard of that before, but it's certainly possible.
Nothing wrong with using both as on demand scanners, never know what one will miss that the other will pick up. When it comes to the paid versions of either, think MBAM is a much better choice.
As for cookies, set the web browser to keep or delete cookies on a per site basis when it exits. CCleaner allows you to easily choose what cookies to keep and delete too. But, stay away from CCleaner's registry scan feature.
+1, I completely agree with you on all points.