Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 88
  1. #61
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by CNT
    From reading this thread, how come AVG was rated "bad" in beginning and now it's highly respected already?
    Not all people choose Anti-virus after reding reports or doing tests.
    They may take a product by various reasons (eg impression, recommended by a magazine)

    And its high fame and popularity may be due to "being the first to offer free AV", loyality, "appeal to popularity" etc.


    Also, could you do a sample test on PC-cillin by TrendMicro? The chart didn't show much? As much I read out there, PC-cillin is most awarded? But, like DELL computers are most rewarded too, but much better to build your own (than buying a DELL, if you know what you're doing!).

    Chuck
    I probably update my post some time later since it is about 1 year old.
    Time to do more revision.
    But I may post my result on my website this time.
    It needs plenty of time for me to prepare these things, so it's better to subscribe this thread. When my tests are ready, I will notify you here.
    Altrnatively, you may wish to leave your email address, so I can inform you directly by email.

    As to PC-cillin, in short, as far as the detection of spreading (whether less or more common) malware goes, the quality of PC-cillin is about the same as Avast & AntiVir. But it seems to be a bit higher (eg +1-2%).

  2. #62
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by SkaarjMaster
    So, based on your results and if we only wanted a free version, you are recommending AntiVir? If so, then I guess I'll uninstall AVG free and install AntiVir free. Does it work well with 98SE? I'm still using McAfee (paid) on my main computer though.
    Yes, AntiVir works with 98SE.
    Yes, I strongly recommend AntiVir over AVG as far as AV capability is concerned. You may try Avast since it is not bad. It's just a bit wrose than Antivir.

    And why not use McAfee then?

    As an overview, it has about ~90% detection rates for spreading malware (whether less/more common). It is already excellent!

    You should ONLY run 1 real-time AV, or you may even get (implicit/unnoticable) conflicts. 1 reason is since both AV compete for scanning the same file, they may nullify each other and claims it has no virus, but the file does being infected.

    You may wish to keep some AVs in your system (but please switch off their real-time detection functions). Then, say, you may use not only McAfee, but also other AV to do on-demand scan on your whole computer. In this way, you can maximise your chance to catch even the most hidden malware (but beware of false alarms/positives, especially when you scan with non-excellent AV).

    Alternatively, there are tons of free online virus/malware scan. You may simply visit the vendors' websites and do free online scans. In this regard, you don't need to install any additional AV at all.

    One more thing: how much of a memory hog is AntiVir free compared to AVG free?
    I deem both AVG and AntiVir are light.
    Avast is a bit heavier, but it is not heavier than Norton (Norotn is very bloated!).

  3. #63
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by CNT
    Thanks. Funny that many still mock Norton AV, yet it's has almost the highest ratings. As we all agree, NIS is a hog software. Only if NIS make a more selective installations for advance users to install less garbage, then it may win it's people back? I'll have to read some more before decide on AV yet...
    Symantec Norton is a long-established anti-virus(AV) (company).
    Symantec is the company name while Norton, the brand of anti-virus program.

    It was born in 1990. During 1990s, over 100 million people have downloaded and used it, so you could see how popular this AV was. Early versions of Norton were based on and integrated from Central Point Anti-Virus (CPAV). It is a DOS-based anti-virus program acquired by Symantec in 1994.

    After 2000, situation changed. It was no longer as popular as before. Although its AV performance (detection rate) became worse (eg my test in 2003-2004), it should not be the main reason why it declined. Strange to say, AV capability is not the prime factor for several reasons. Simply general users don't know how to get these figures, or they even don't know such independent reports/tests exist. They may simply depend on their own experiences to determine its AV capability (eg Excellent! I used Norton for 2 years. Norton will always alert when a malware is slipping through my computer)

    Usually it is the factors which directly influence their experiences that count. Norton became more bloated and bloated. Users often rate it as slow, resource hogging, inefficient. It is also difficult to install, especially with the introduction of "Activation system" - very irritating to the users! Instability issues also anger users. Norton just crashes in some people's computers. Some people just can't make it work/run.

    Recently it rebounded a bit. Sometimes it is managed to equal McAfee (but NOT Kaspersky). Kaspersky is still the best in detecting spreading malware. As to unknown/new malware, Norton still do poorly (can get as low as ~10%, as in Avast & AntiVir). The worst is again AVG (can be 4% or lower). Kaspersky managed to score nearly 50%, as in NOD32.

    If you read the previous reports of AV-comparatives, you may be disappointed at its performance (1 standard & 3 advanced only. No Advanced+) as far as a long-established (& highly-rated) AV is concerned.

    Hope the above helps.
    Last edited by Wai_Wai; 09-20-2005 at 04:47 PM.

  4. #64
    Joined
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Brookfield, WI
    Posts
    2,715

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Are you saying that Norton has the "best" virus detections (99+% in one of the links), but a very bloating installation? The bloating is worse than it's reputation of detecting virus? Yet, PC-cillin is lower than NAV, but same/"little better" than AVG?

    Anyway, I download the Kaspersky free trial. Do they have a "suite" where includes AV with (email) Anti-Spam, and Anti-adware/spyware? This is why I buy NIS because it's got "all-in-one" package for a good price.

    BTW, could you maybe list who makes "real-time" anti-adware/spyware? This is obvious something we should be having instead of doing "on-demand" clicks.

    Chuck

  5. #65
    Joined
    Jul 2001
    Location
    UK
    Age
    51
    Posts
    20,229

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by CNT
    BTW, could you maybe list who makes "real-time" anti-adware/spyware? This is obvious something we should be having instead of doing "on-demand" clicks.

    Chuck
    Adware/spyware tend to be a different category of malwares that most AVs don't detect too well. However, there are some excellent free tools you can use in conjunction with your AV application.

    Spyware Blaster is good for blocking spyware and preventing it getting on your machine to start with. Ad-Aware and Spybot are both excellent on demand scanners for detection and removal, and Spybot offers some protection too. Then there's Microsoft's Anti-Spyware app of which I'm sure you'll read/hear mixed opinions.

    Another worthwhile approach is to deploy a regularly updates hosts file to block access to untrusted sites. All this stuff, together with links to the above mentioned free apps is covered in depth in the main Sticky thread at the top of the forum

    Ned

  6. #66
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Age
    55
    Posts
    2,495

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by Wai_Wai
    Yes, AntiVir works with 98SE.
    Yes, I strongly recommend AntiVir over AVG as far as AV capability is concerned. You may try Avast since it is not bad. It's just a bit wrose than Antivir.

    And why not use McAfee then?
    McAfee is already on my WinXP computer and it's running fine with no problems and I already renewed the DAT file subscription back in March 2005. I'll probably get Kaspersky in March 2006 for this XP computer. But McAfee isn't going to be used for my Win98SE computer ever. It had its day on there and hosed the install. Luckily, I had a backup of the C: drive with DriveCopy and didn't have to reinstall. I uninstalled McAfee and installed AVG instead. I'll probably uninstall AVG now and install AntiVir and BitDefender on the Win98SE computer sometime this week.
    Last edited by SkaarjMaster; 09-21-2005 at 07:16 AM.

  7. #67
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by CNT
    Are you saying that Norton has the "best" virus detections (99+% in one of the links), but a very bloating installation?
    According to virus.gr, Norton had never reached 99+% as far as I know.
    It's just managed to get around ~90% at best.
    As far as I know, only Kaspersky family (but no others) manages to get ~99% so far.
    Others only get 90% something.

    Yes, NAV is a bloating installation.


    The bloating is worse than it's reputation of detecting virus? Yet, PC-cillin is lower than NAV, but same/"little better" than AVG?
    For many users, it is. I often hear people complain the bloatedness of NAV. Some gets crashed and so on. These are the main reasons why NAV receive so amny negative comments (The (somewhat) declining capabilities of anti-virus may have some effects, but ti should not be the main factor).

    As far as spreading malware is concerned, NAV does much better than AVG, a bit better than PC-cillin. PC-cillin also does much better than AVG.

    As far as new malware is concerned, both NAV and PC-cillin don't do well. AVG is around the worst among famous AV products.
    Last edited by Wai_Wai; 09-26-2005 at 05:33 AM.

  8. #68
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Anyway, I download the Kaspersky free trial. Do they have a "suite" where includes AV with (email) Anti-Spam, and Anti-adware/spyware? This is why I buy NIS because it's got "all-in-one" package for a good price.
    Kaspersky Personal Security Suite
    http://www.kaspersky.com/personal-security

    However, as a reminder, don't expect too much.
    All-in-one suite will hardly, not to say never, give you maximum security.
    Different companies specialise in different areas. One company can never win in all aspects.

    Hard Facts:
    - McAfee with bundled anti-spyware: McAfee is specialized in Anti-virus, not anti-spyware. In a spyware test, it gets as low as Spyware Doctor (ie only caught 163 spyware), plus it got many false positives (ie 29 wrong claims that innocent files are spyware!)
    - ZoneAlarm(ZA) with VET anti-virus: ZA is specialized in firewall. How does it perform in one anti-virus(AV) test?
    The following is an AV test which tests how well one can detect viruses/trojans/backdoors/macros etc.:
    • F-Secure / Kaspersky (catch roughly ~99-97% overall)
    • McAfee (catch roughly ~95-93% overall)
    • ZoneAlarm with VET Antivirus (catch roughly ~50% overall)


    The best bet is to purchase each separately. However the disadvantage is you may need to spend more money. [Currently you may only need to spend money on anti-virus program. You may probably need to buy firewall for some better protection. However save your money on anti-spyware since one of the best is available for free ]


    BTW, could you maybe list who makes "real-time" anti-adware/spyware? This is obvious something we should be having instead of doing "on-demand" clicks.
    Sure.
    Recommendation:
    Traditionally you may try:
    1) Microsoft Anti-Spyware Beta *FREE * (acquired GIANT software) (308/425)
    2) Webroot Spy Sweeper(235/425), Ad-aware(231/425)

    Note: Spybot Search & Destroy isn't bad, but it is not as good as the top few contenders. Thus I won't recommend it. Since there's 1 free product available, there's no many reasons left for not using it (but if you are anti-MS, then it's different!).

    Some new but promising guys (you may try them, they may be good, but I'm not very sure):
    - CounterSpy
    - X-cleaner

  9. #69
    Joined
    May 2001
    Location
    N.S. Canada
    Posts
    4,137

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    I find this a poor review and IMO appears to be quite biased

    jk
    Last edited by MousePotato; 09-25-2005 at 05:46 PM.

  10. #70
    Joined
    Jul 2001
    Location
    UK
    Age
    51
    Posts
    20,229

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by Wai_Wai
    No, Norton had never reached 99+%, at least as far as 2 major testsites are concerned.
    It's just managed to get around ~90% at best.
    As far as I know, only Kaspersky family (but no others) manages to get ~99% so far.
    Others only get 90% something.
    Not true - Norton got 99.41% on the August 2005 AV-Comparatives test, probably the most definative and impartial test available IMHO incorporating over 400,000 samples.

    BitDefender (97%), Kaspersky (99%), McAfee (98%), Nod32 (98%) and Norton (99%) engines all score highly and any one could be highly recommended for their high detection rates.

    Of those, McAfee and Norton have had a reputation for being somewhat bloated in the past.

    Ned
    Last edited by Ned Slider; 09-25-2005 at 06:04 PM.

  11. #71
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by Ned Slider
    Not true - Norton got 99.41% on the August 2005 AV-Comparatives test, probably the most definative and impartial test available IMHO incorporating over 400,000 samples.

    BitDefender (97%), Kaspersky (99%), McAfee (98%), Nod32 (98%) and Norton (99%) engines all score highly and any one could be highly recommended for their high detection rates.

    Of those, McAfee and Norton have had a reputation for being somewhat bloated in the past.

    Ned
    Ned,
    Good news to Norton
    Again, Kaspersky is still the best (99.88%).

    According to virus.gr, there are 9X,XXX malware in its test. Kasperksy Family (the best) are around (~96-99%). Norton is just ~90%.

    So the best and safest bet is again Kaspersky.
    Last edited by Wai_Wai; 09-26-2005 at 05:40 AM.

  12. #72
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Age
    55
    Posts
    2,495

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    I don't know if I said this in this thread already, but I'm only getting Kaspersky Anti-Virus in March 2006 and not the whole suite. I know someone that bought the whole suite and I will be finishing up reinstalling everything on his system tonight as he did something terribly wrong (probably unrelated to Kaspersky) and the Kaspersky Suite was causing other things to run not quite right on his system anyway. He probably didn't configure it right or something though. I'm already using anti-spam and anti-hacker stuff anyway. I'm not taking any chances...........no suite for me

  13. #73
    Joined
    Jul 2001
    Location
    UK
    Age
    51
    Posts
    20,229

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by SkaarjMaster
    I don't know if I said this in this thread already, but I'm only getting Kaspersky Anti-Virus in March 2006 and not the whole suite. I know someone that bought the whole suite and I will be finishing up reinstalling everything on his system tonight as he did something terribly wrong (probably unrelated to Kaspersky) and the Kaspersky Suite was causing other things to run not quite right on his system anyway. He probably didn't configure it right or something though. I'm already using anti-spam and anti-hacker stuff anyway. I'm not taking any chances...........no suite for me
    Kaspersky, as do all reputable AV companies, offer a fully featured free trial. I would highly recommend that you trial ANY AV software on the intended machine before purchasing a 1 year licence just to ensure that it runs OK on that particular machine as sometimes you can get wierd conflicts. If you're happy with it at the end of the trial period, simply purchase a licence to continue using it. Plus, in this case, you're getting 1 month for free

    Ned

  14. #74
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sarasota, FL
    Age
    55
    Posts
    2,495

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Yeh, I think I'll do the free trial first for anti-virus only. Thanks for the pointer Ned!

  15. #75
    Joined
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    206

    Re: My Anti-virus Program Comparison Analysis

    Quote Originally Posted by Ned Slider
    Kaspersky, as do all reputable AV companies, offer a fully featured free trial. I would highly recommend that you trial ANY AV software on the intended machine before purchasing a 1 year licence just to ensure that it runs OK on that particular machine as sometimes you can get wierd conflicts. If you're happy with it at the end of the trial period, simply purchase a licence to continue using it. Plus, in this case, you're getting 1 month for free

    Ned
    Good Advice!
    I always tell people to try anti-virus program first. Every computer is different. The AV may be totally fine on my computer, but not for yours. Except you hear too many instances about that, it doesn't really matter how an AV crashes on someone's particular computer. Since you are not going to install your Av on his computer, you don't need to worry too much. If your AV is happy with your computer, then it is stable to you. Otherwise it is unstable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •