Panda: Its their time now.

[trjam]

We have beat all the rest to hell and back. But we really dont talk to much about Panda, is this because we dont use it or what?

[zapjb]

I surmise it's because Panda's not worth using.

[C.S.J]

well i aint too sure about it,

low cpu, low ram, neat and tidy although basic interface, good options and a fast scan speed.

it renamed quite a few threats i tested it with, which i didnt like and its hard to find any settings to change this. (probably can though)

it did detect / handle a similar amount to my dr.web, maybe even a touch better than dr.web on the ones i tested it with.

but i dont know what it is, i dont prefer it over my dr.web thats for sure, but its still very good, and id probably use it again if i had to fall back again from dr.web whatever the reason may be (this time being, drweb dont have a vista version) its working here on vista which is cool.

ive not seen so many updates from panda yet, but i doubt any give as more as dr.web, so i cant compare it to that.

by default, i had to change a few options, mainly to do with heuristics, for files it wasnt turned on, and then i had to turn it up to high when i did enable it, the options are pretty neat in the program though, so it didnt bother me doing this.

my only problem so far, and yes... so far, there is only ONE, was the scanner froze (not responding) twice on my large test set, but with over 40,000 viruses, its not really a real-world thing that would happen, plus this only closed the on-demand and in no way closed any protection.

here, my aswell post a screenshot of it on vista for those people curious of either vista or panda

http://img2.freeimagehosting.net/upl...0c5f47eb80.jpg

i do like the software, great substitute for me, but i do prefer my dr.web

cool software though, and like norton, have improved in their 2007 range

[bigc73542]

I have used Panda several times over the past few years and Panda will update at least once a day sometimes two or three time a day. and the detection rates have always be suffecient to protect the average computer user easily.

[C.S.J]

i think most avs what are mentioned on this forum are good enough anyway, even the ones i have slagged off for some reason or another.

[Alphalutra1]

Panda sends spam to their users. Or at least they used to. With that type of business practice, I will never consider them.

Alphalutra1

[TAP]

Originally Posted by Alphalutra1

Panda sends spam to their users. Or at least they used to. With that type of business practice, I will never consider them.

Alphalutra1

I totally agree. Panda has been doing the bad business practice, at least by its spams.

Panda has continuously been sending spams to me even I unsubscribed all their news letters several times. I don't even touch or considering to use any security products come from a company that has a bad business practice (advertising) such as Panda Software.

[Mongol]

I have used Panda in the past and am running Panda AV 2007 right now and have to say its been pretty good so far. Reasonably light and good at bagging any baddies it finds, especially on the spyware front. I have never been spammed by them at all. I only receive what I opted to receive, alerts on new outbreaks and the monthly report. Like CSJ I really like DrWEB but in lieu of the renew to get spam filtering with DrWEB just two months after renewing with them this is a fine replacement ...

[C.S.J]

im not replacing my dr.web mongol, using panda till dr.web is vista compatible, i like them both though, but still prefer my doctor over panda.

its running well on vista though, so not too many people can slag it off.

[Mongol]

Originally Posted by C.S.J

im not replacing my dr.web mongol, using panda till dr.web is vista compatible, i like them both though, but still prefer my doctor over panda.

its running well on vista though, so not too many people can slag it off.

I've been trying to squeeze DrWEB's sales folks for more feedback on the Anti-Spam thing. Have you heard anything new? I'm trying to find out what the price is and if the Doctor will still run with or without the Anti-Spam. Maybe it's saved in the key so if you don't do their renewal thing the AV still works OK. I'm straying off topic here so that is all on this for me...

[GES/POR]

Originally Posted by TAP

I totally agree. Panda has been doing the bad business practice, at least by its spams.

Panda has continuously been sending spams to me even I unsubscribed all their news letters several times. I don't even touch or considering to use any security products come from a company that has a bad business practice (advertising) such as Panda Software.

I wish more av/at/etc. fine products would spam me with large discounts,go go Panda

[C.S.J]

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...7&postcount=24

is this really a problem, panda AV 2007 uses 111mb on my hard drive, its nothing, of course its massive compared to drweb of 'upto 10mb' but, 111mb on an 80gb / 160GB / 250+GB HD ?

hard disk space will never worry me, unless it reaches 500mb, because even though its not much, that is the limit that would annoy me with an AV.

the ram of panda is low, cpu usage is low and i really have been impressed by this 2007 version, and its working well with vista, cool.

i was only looking forward to dr.web in the tests, but i hear panda could be back on the tests soon, so i will honestly look out for them too, would be nice to see

[eBBox]

Originally Posted by C.S.J

http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showp...7&postcount=24

is this really a problem, panda AV 2007 uses 111mb on my hard drive, its nothing, of course its massive compared to drweb of 'upto 10mb' but, 111mb on an 80gb / 160GB / 250+GB HD ?

hard disk space will never worry me, unless it reaches 500mb, because even though its not much, that is the limit that would annoy me with an AV.

the ram of panda is low, cpu usage is low and i really have been impressed by this 2007 version, and its working well with vista, cool.

i was only looking forward to dr.web in the tests, but i hear panda could be back on the tests soon, so i will honestly look out for them too, would be nice to see

Could not have said it better myselv, totally agree I like Panda a lot too

[rdsu]

Originally Posted by zapjb

I surmise it's because Panda's not worth using.

Ditto.

[C.S.J]

i love the scan speed of panda, scanned my machine in just 11 mins on highest settings.

dr.web takes over an hour. *lol* but i know they have an improved one down the line

i do like panda, it just isnt the doctor ... but none is

Originally Posted by Mongol

I have never been spammed by them at all

Lucky you . Recently my license for Panda ( which I used long long time ago before I switch to NOD32) was about to expire . When I received the first reminding message , I contact the address in the reminder (real address to a some sales dept) and explain I don't want to renew + my reason . I also contacted via email Panda's local office to do the same - say I don't want to renew and to tell them why . Even though I already told them my desire and although I replied to the bot of Panda with "unsubscribe" , I contunied to receive Panda renewal messages and other advertisements every day (sometimes more than once a day) , advs about my subscription will expire , my PC will be exposed to malware , Panda have better versions (AV,IS...)... Stupid strategy but ...

[Londonbeat]

Originally Posted by GES/POR

I wish more av/at/etc. fine products would spam me with large discounts,go go Panda

Most of the time it isn't large discounts though, and if you submit your email on their activescan page -- expect a large volume of emails (even if you do tick 'no adverts').

I haven't used panda activescan for months yet 2/3 of my addresses that have been used for Panda Activescan over the years still get their spam to this day.

[C.S.J]

in doing my 'little testing' with the panda 2007,

ive noticed that scanning archives is quite poor, finding nothing, ...however... if those archives are then unzipped, the real-time protection finds and sorts out the infected files automatically, its a strange one.

[dan_maran]

Originally Posted by C.S.J

in doing my 'little testing' with the panda 2007,

ive noticed that scanning archives is quite poor, finding nothing, ...however... if those archives are then unzipped, the real-time protection finds and sorts out the infected files automatically, its a strange one.

Sounds like a "feature" to me

It should greatly increase scanning speed.

[C.S.J]

lol, maybe.

[Graystoke]

I gave the trial version of Panda IS 2007 a try. I really liked everything about it except, that it seemed very heavy. It slowed my computer down at start up. No problems with browsing speeds. I think the problem with the slow start up might have something to do with TruPrevent. I may be wrong though. If it wasn't for the slow start ups, I probably would have purchased it. I also tried the trial version of Panda Antivirus 2007, I didn't run into the slow start up problem, but I didn't like it as well as Panda IS. One of the things I didn't like is, you can't set up a scheduled system scan.

[Mongol]

Originally Posted by Graystoke

I gave the trial version of Panda IS 2007 a try. I really liked everything about it except, that it seemed very heavy. It slowed my computer down at start up. No problems with browsing speeds. I think the problem with the slow start up might have something to do with TruPrevent. I may be wrong though. If it wasn't for the slow start ups, I probably would have purchased it. I also tried the trial version of Panda Antivirus 2007, I didn't run into the slow start up problem, but I didn't like it as well as Panda IS. One of the things I didn't like is, you can't set up a scheduled system scan.

The scheduled scan thing is one thing that surprised me. I guess you can go through the Windows scheduler and set it up. I seem to remember seeing it in the Panda support area...

[Graystoke]

Originally Posted by Mongol

The scheduled scan thing is one thing that surprised me. I guess you can go through the Windows scheduler and set it up. I seem to remember seeing it in the support area...

Hmmm, I never thought about going through Windows scheduler. I don't know why they would leave a scheduled scan option out. If I remember correctly, it's always been that way with their Titanium version.

[TonyW]

I did try them out some years back, and the thing that attracted me to them at that time was their daily signature updates.

[C.S.J]

yes, so far, it looks to be 'daily' updates.