FYI: Another review of various AVs

http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/antivirus-software/index.html

 

That's an interesting read. I got a kick out of this statement:

So many of those reviews are by clueless folk.

 

I wouldn't say completely clueless, at least they know there are other options besides the Big 3.

 

a review based on other reviews, useful.
I liked "That puts NOD32 out of contention for anyone but sophisticated computer users" Yeah it may not be the simplest of interfaces, but it isnt rocket science!

 

I beleive it is pretty usefull.
These are reviews from consumers. Not the regular US loves US products and European loves their European products

 

Actually it is mostly a review of reviews (& reviewers).
They try to weight the various reviews according to their strengths ("CS Credibility rating").
For example in this particular AV rating version, 23 different reviews (reviewers) were considered, (including AV Comparatives.org)

Check out how the 23 different AV reviews ranked and explanations why.
http://www.consumersearch.com/www/software/antivirus-software/reviews.html

 

This IMO just degrades the "review" granted it is great they explain where they obtain the info but still, in a Antivirus review lets rank Scot's news letter a 5 and AV-compartives 3, a site that specializes in anti-malware tests. Lame.....

 

Just utter bullshit thats what this is

 

Why do you believe your opinion is bullshit?
The information on this site is based on only facts. Facts about several reviews

 

Because most fo the reviews are made by clueless folk.

Scot's Newsletter states that NOD32 is the best antivirus yet he only compares it with F-Secure.
CNet reviews are bs and crappy.
Virus.gr does not make credible tests and pcmagazine also has bs
amazon.com has spysweeper with 5 stars even thoguh it cuases an intolerable amount of problems on many computers.
etc.

 

I especially enjoyed this part:

Frankly, one who does not know who runs the website is obviously not paying enough attention to the credibility and eligibility of the tests. Now, I don't need to clarify my stand I think because anyone who knows me well will know what I think.

 

This is true I must admit

 

i like 'most' of cnets reviews,

however, i mean the actual review and not the scores, most times, their scores dont match the actual review.

 

BS? Possibly.
Although curiously, the final tally still reflects more or less what most regulars on this forum seem to consistently use or recommend.
So, are you implying it's simply pure coincidence, or by analogy, most recommendations here are also BS?
I would hope that it's the former!


# of Picks / Model
4........ Kaspersky Anti-Virus 6.0 (*est. $60)
4........ ESET NOD32 2.7 (*est. $40)
4........ ZoneAlarm Internet Security Suite 7.0 (*est. $40)
2 ....... AOL Active Virus Shield
2 ....... AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic
2........ Grisoft AVG Anti-Virus Free
2........ Panda Antivirus 2007 (*est. $25)
(1 each:: F-Secure Anti-Virus 2006, avast! 4 Home Edition, Microsoft Windows Live OneCare , BitDefender Antivirus v10 , Norton Internet Security 2007 , The Shield Pro)

 

Having kept up with Scot's reviews in his newsletter, he examined several AVs before he settled on F-Secure in 2006. The others included KAV, AVG, Avast, Bit Defender, and others.

Although he considers Kaspersky at the top of detection he found it to be buggy. A major objection he has with F-Secure is that it does not run well with some of the other security systems he liked, and uses.

Scot's discussion can be found in his Newsletter here.
http://www.scotsnewsletter.com/83.htm#avv

Just for info, as I do not completely agree with his assessment or choice. However, he makes some good points, and either NOD or FS will give excellent protection as will others also.

Best,
Jerry