How to rank AV-programs?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Firefighter, Jan 29, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    Hi Wilders Forum fans, I want to read your opinions about prioritism of 3 main aspects, when we are ranking AV-programs.

    What do you think is the order of priority, when the aspects are:

    1.   Capability of archive scanning.
    2.   In the Wild detecting rates.
    3.   In the Zoo detecting rates.

    If you can tell something about more of your opinions, it’s very fine.

    If you can bring some more aspects to this ranking issue, that's very kind too.

    My point of view is that, which is similar to the way to eat an elephant.

    1.   At first, find that you have to eat.

    2.   Take those part first, which you think are the best part to eat.
    3.   Look for more spices to the soup, and let them rest to go trough your throat. o_O


    "The truth is out there, but it hurts"

    Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  2. octogen

    octogen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Posts:
    212
    The aspects you have listed are definitely the top considerations since they address detection which is the main purpose of an AV. I may switch aspects 1 and 2 with each other, but that is just my opinion. Other important aspects IMHO also would also include (not necessarily in order of priority): 1)resource consumption 2)compatibility with other software 3)ease of use 4)scanning speed.
     
  3. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To Octogen from Firefighter!

    I appreciate your opinion. One thing I have found in my real manufacturing work, which have nothing to do with computers, is that in human mind, it is better if you have only 4-6 parameters to compare, otherwise it will be too complexive issue! ;)

    "The truth is out there, but it hurts"

    Regards,
    Firefighter!
     
  4. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    My criteria:

    1. Detection rate.
    1b. Ability to detect BOTH in the wild and zoo viruses.
    3. Stability/cross-compatibility w/OS platforms/Scalability on the wire.
     
  5. Firefighter

    Firefighter Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2002
    Posts:
    1,670
    Location:
    Finland
    To JimIT from Firefighter!

    Thanks to you.

    I had to separate in the Wild and in the Zoo properties, because among av-programs there seems to be excellent in the Wild programs (NOD32, DrWeb32 etc.) and excellent in the Zoo programs (Kaspersky, F-Secure, McAfee etc.).

    I mean that it seems to that if you are an excellent sprinter, you may be only average on 10 000 meters run. :rolleyes:


    "The truth is out there, but it hurts!"

    Regards,
    Firerfighter!
     
  6. JimIT

    JimIT Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,035
    Location:
    Denton, Texas
    You're absolutely right, Firefighter. But where I work, (in an educational setting) I get some weird ones, because users will sometimes bring in an ancient, infected floppy with an old virus that may have been on their old, unprotected machine at home for ages! :)

    It's kind of enlightening, though! Never know what I'll see out there... :D
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.