I'm leaning towards BitDefender now - good choice?

[mvdu]

It's a good price, firewall is being improved, seems light and without the false positives that Avira has. My only question is - is the detection still top notch?

[risl]

I think all the well known AV's are able to provide sufficient protection. I'm talking about blocking threats that average user would face during normal use, not about sets of thousands or millions of malicious files that probably most are not active/spreading anymore.

If it doesn't annoy you and it's working well with your OS, other programs you have and produces no other problems or errors, why a no for BitDefender?

[mvdu]

Thanks for your answer.

I noticed BitDefender now has an option for IDS? I turned it on, as it was off by default, but does anyone know about this IDS?

[risl]

Originally Posted by mvdu

Thanks for your answer.

I noticed BitDefender now has an option for IDS? I turned it on, as it was off by default, but does anyone know about this IDS?

Usually IDS stands for Intrusion Detection System if we are talking about the firewall. Perhaps it's some reactive system that blocks certain ip's if malicious connection activity is detected. Ping flood or other similar attacks for example.

If a malicious packet X is detected repeatingly incoming for Y times per second or many ports probed per second = trigger a flood/port scan/ddos/etc. attack warning and block the ip.

Someone wiser than me should correct or lighten this

[debls]

I started out with BitDefender AV10 about 3 yrs ago. I went to BitDefender Internet Security 2008 and just upgraded to BitDefender Total Security 2009. Running like a champ. I was not crazy about BD support in the beginning but I believe they have come a long way in that area.

I think it is a great value for the $$$.

[The Hammer]

Originally Posted by mvdu

Thanks for your answer.

I noticed BitDefender now has an option for IDS? I turned it on, as it was off by default, but does anyone know about this IDS?

Vendors usually have good reasons why a feature is turned off by default. Perhaps BitDefender has info on their website you could access in addition to Wilders.

[bluesprite]

BD 2009 has a behaviour monitor/blocker, which is turned off by default. Probably that's what the IDS is in this case? It can ask some questions about legit applications, which could be confising to the average user. Maybe that's why it's off by default. It should add an additional layer of protection, though.

[icr]

Bit defender is very good AV atleast better than Kaspersky

[mvdu]

Originally Posted by icr

Bit defender is very good AV atleast better than Kaspersky

Just curious - why better than Kaspersky?

[Peter2150]

Originally Posted by mvdu

Just curious - why better than Kaspersky?

Lots not go there. That starts an A v B mess.
Pete

[mvdu]

I understand that. But he made a claim, and I wondered why. I never agreed with this Wilders policy, but have been following it.

[lodore]

hello,
i have gone off bitdefender.
bitdefender 10 was a nice product.
bitdefender lastest version has to much junk like registry cleaner etc. focus on secuirty and not pointless addons. what they going to add next a media player?

[Fajo]

Originally Posted by mvdu

I understand that. But he made a claim, and I wondered why. I never agreed with this Wilders policy, but have been following it.

Check the firewall forum you will see why this policy is in effect.

But if you really want to know and don't want to go A vs B PM is your friend.

[vijayind]

From my experiance of BitDefender 2009 beta, I can tell you that the main issues with it were FPs, Spyware Removal and some compartibility issues (in Vista).

I have heard from Niels, that they have improved upon this post-release (haven't tried it after beta). So if you don't see such issues, go ahead.

[mvdu]

I'm not going to comment on the policy more; we can agree to disagree as long as I follow it. There are other forums where I can discuss A vs. B, and as you said, PM.

Anyway, I have noticed that web surfing is too slow unless I put scanning on the most permissive level in BitDefender.

[tiagozt]

I won't discuss about it but in my tests BitDefender has poor detection.
They ar emy tests with my samples that I get day by day and it doesn't have statistics validation. So try it and compare with other AVs if you have samples to do it.

[Medank]

Originally Posted by tiagozt

I won't discuss about it but in my tests BitDefender has poor detection.
They ar emy tests with my samples that I get day by day and it doesn't have statistics validation. So try it and compare with other AVs if you have samples to do it.

Not only in your test but in many other test it seem they never improve they maybe stay at top but never #2 or #3

I dont know if i would install their product on my laptop and belive in their detection rate that i would be protected well.

[trjam]

Bitdefender is very good. But I can think of one better, since you asked.

[StevieE9]

Originally Posted by mvdu

It's a good price, firewall is being improved, seems light and without the false positives that Avira has. My only question is - is the detection still top notch?

No it definitely is not (and never has been) since it *FAILED* the Virus Bulletin 100 test for August 2008 for WinXP.
It fails more often than several free AV programs.

[mvdu]

I decided to go with KIS 2009 instead. Thanks to all.