The pros and cons of a virus scanner with Extras

My system:
i7 3770K
32 GB of RAM
Win 8.1 64bit

In Detail:

The installation is easy - if you have a fast Internet connection. Surfing, like me, currently via UMTS modem, it is torture, because the entire program is drawn from the Internet and install anything from a CD. You put the CD, click on "Install" and the download will start.
On one hand, yes a nice idea - you always install the latest version - but a simple definition update would have possibly done. So the CD is just useless garbage. One could just as easily be able to sell an activation key / code on a piece of paper instead of a CD in a package that is as thick as a "Funny Paperback" ..

Did you first downloaded all linked the accompanying activation key with the installation, you can start. F-Secure is running in the background in the form of several processes that cause me between 0% and 2% hardware utilization.
Fortunately, a possibly existing virus scanner as the "Microsoft Defender" is automatically disabled so that it comes to no conflicts. One is thus protected seamlessly. A manual system scan is also quite fast and Resource Gentle of equip. Lack 100% comparable settings I'd say the F-Secure is about 1/3 faster than the "Microsoft Defender", but this is only an estimate because I can not understand exactly how "deep" the scanners. Much hardware utilization never produced the F-Secure for me anyway.

So far, so acceptable!

Additional functions:
Now there is "hairy"! The additional functions such as "Banking-protection", "Surf protection" and "Parental Control" like for many people quite make sense ... I am someone who does not like to be patronize automated and certainly not for a little more protection its data automatically passes. But that's what happens when F-Secure (and all comparable competitors)!
If you use this "banking / Internet protection", so the traffic is monitored, redirected quasi About F-Secure and checked and possibly banned. Depending on the browser installed - in Internet Explorer and Firefox I've tested it - logs F-Secure, when I run certain pages that it recognizes as "banking sites". Then I can, for example, no more emails or because F-Secure other server connections locks (to protect me ..).
Do you like!
Even more troubling, however, I found that my F-Secure scans traffic and of course also branches off my Internet connection bandwidth. Who calls ne 16.000er line or faster his own, can live without that .. but who is slower or go wonders what F-Secure does with the information indeed run on their server (need) to see if you surfs just on secure sites that will disturb.

I am really torn. On the one hand it may be that the scanner is faster than for example the Microsoft Defender (the coincidence that). It may also be that some people find it comforting to know that every page view is only cross-checked by F-Secure, if the address is also "safe" ..
Bugging me so a nannying rather.

Therefore my tip:
Users with little computer experience can drag the acquisition into consideration, you do not go wrong, it remains a reasonable fast scanner.
Users with a little more PC experience may come from without ...