What AV after NAV

[Gin]

hi there!


well, could you help me to clarify the situation:
F-secure seems ( according to the latest tests) ranked #1 ; another benefit: it handles virus AND other malwares, right?

so, checking the latest posts, people here often recommend KAV, RAV, dr Webb....NOD ( no sort); I'm sure that these AV are top, but it seeems me that f-secure is not appreciated as it should, according to tests, so is there any cons that i don't know...?

here : Win XP, 512 RAM, TDS 3 and NAV, ( never had a prob...as far as I know), but I really dislike the future policy of Symantec activation and I won't renew with them...so I try to find another AV


Thanks for your advice

[wizard]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Gin link=board=24;threadid=9797;start=0#msg64021 date=1054461287]well, could you help me to clarify the situation:
F-secure seems ( according to the latest tests) ranked #1 ;" }-

Which tests you are refering to? If you really look in the figures for F-Secure you will find that in comparison to other well performing scanners the advantage of F-Secure is only "theoretical".

F-Secure is a product that is designed mostly to meet companies needs instead of home users (usability, features, etc).

-{ Quote: " another benefit: it handles virus AND other malwares, right?" }-

If you are refering here to (backdoor-) trojans it has an advantage to other scanners because it uses the Kaspersky engine.

-{ Quote: "so, checking the latest posts, people here often recommend KAV, RAV, dr Webb....NOD ( no sort);" }-

IMHO one of the above is a better choice for home users.

-{ Quote: " I'm sure that these AV are top, but it seeems me that f-secure is not appreciated as it should, according to tests, so is there any cons that i don't know...?" }-

As I mentioned earlier it is designed mainly for companies. Also if you really look in the details you will find out that the overall good performance of F-Secure relates back only to one part: the KAV engine.

-{ Quote: "here : Win XP, 512 RAM, TDS 3 and NAV, ( never had a prob...as far as I know), but I really dislike the future policy of Symantec activation and I won't renew with them...so I try to find another AV" }-

If you already use TDS-3 you are good protected against (backdoor-)trojans. So no real need to have an av that covers this area as well. So that gives you a wider range of products that you can consider. So why not give NOD32 a try? According to the tests of VirusBulettin it performance better on ITW viruses than F-Secure. :)

wizard

[Gin]

Thanks Wizard for your answer...

when i talked /tests, I thought of the latest tests results posted here:

New VirusP AV-test 5-2003 (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=9385)
or
New Virus Test by GEGA IT-Solutions (av-test.org) (http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=8294)

and latest Virus Bulletin tests are good too

yes i've seen that f-secure uses the kav engine, but not only this one if I'm right; anyway in these latest tests, it always performs, slightly, better than KAV, and doesn't use too much resources, (KAV seems well known for it), so...????

-{ Quote: "As I mentioned earlier it is designed mainly for companies" }-

seems strange 'cuz I downloaded the 1 month trial since a couple of days, and F-secure 5.41 seems very simple and stable (kinda install and forget) with my config (TDS, ZAP, PestPatrol <- I know this latest is not very efficient, but it does the cookie management and other little things I want)

-{ Quote: "If you already use TDS-3 you are good protected against (backdoor-)trojans" }-

I hope so :)
but, frankly speaking, I never caught a trojan/backdoor with TDS....NAV got them all before any warning of TDS, and the HDrives check with TDS didn't find any....say I'm lucky

for the moment I see only 1 problem : F-secure is not very cheap...

thanks again wizard....

[wizard]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Gin link=board=24;threadid=9797;start=0#msg64034 date=1054472783]
yes i've seen that f-secure uses the kav engine, but not only this one if I'm right; anyway in these latest tests, it always performs, slightly, better than KAV, and doesn't use too much resources" }-

The advantage of the second (F-Prot) engine in F-Secure is only as I mentioned before a theoretical advantage. Same applies to AVK (uses RAV in addition). I've been watching this since years in different tests: If you scan a large collection of (zoo) malware you will notice a slight difference but if it comes to pratical (ITW) scenarios there is hardly the change that you gain some advantage through a second engine besides KAV.

-{ Quote: " (KAV seems well known for it), so...????" }-

F-Secure should be slower than KAV due to scanning with 2 engines. I know a lot of people that are telling that KAV uses too much resources but all I can tell you is that KAV 4 performance well on my old C433 computer. :)

wizard