NOD32 vs NAV

Personally i have used NAV, AVG and now NOD32. NOD32 has discovered some viruses NAV has missed and now i am doing the craziest thing possible: using both NAV2k4 and NOD32 in ACTIVE mode. The reason for which i am feeling a bit reluctant to switch all to NOD32 is because i used NAV since v2000 and it really did a good job and the v2k4 is even better with those advances protection settings against worms, trojans and stuff. You knw what i mean if you used it. On the other hand i love the NOD32 fro the settings and enhanced settings for heuristics and internet monitor. The quesiton i have is: would NOD32 be at least as good as NAV2k4 ... and i mean from ALL points of view. Will this internet monitor equivalate the settings nav2k4 has for the extra threats categories incluiding worms, security risks, spyware, adaware, joke programs, dialers, remote acces and hacktools? I really feel like switching totally to NOD32 ..just need more info before i do so.

 

Hi MicroB, welcome to Wilders.

If you like Nod32, then run with it for a month or so and see how you go. I don't think you will be disappointed, it is a world class Anti-virus program with heuristics that are second to none. There is a step by step tutorial on how to tweak up Nod32 here.

Hope this helps...

Cheers

 

It's an antivirus program, while it does catch some, that isn't the intended use... the only one that does a solid job with that is KAV.

 

BitDefender's not bad against those types of malware either.....and lets not forget McAfee

 

The new NOD32 2.5 Beta also provides Adware/Spyware/Malware and potentially dangerous application removal. It's as good as the rest.

 

Yup, I forgot to quote that one - NOD is getting better at overall malware removal.

This is probably off-topic, but does NOD32 remove the reg entries, BHOs and other crap made by malware into Windows?

B'coz your gonna see a new thread soon - NOD32 vs. BitDefender

 

Absolutely no idea
Luckily I haven't seen adware on my system for ages... security is pretty tight here

 

Prove it.

People generally don't buy products if they are getting better... they'd rather buy something that is already performing above it.

 

Then please, point out a product with more VB100 awards than all others.
Or please show me a product with the best heuristics.
Or please show me a product widely praised for it's extremely low resource usage.
Or please show me a product which is already low priced and even offers an 50% discount for students so I can get it dirt cheap.
And please make sure that the product is continuously developed, it's development team is not trying to bundle mediocre firewalls with it calling it an all-around solution when way better firewalls exist, and a beta is more stable than some final versions.

Ohh... you say ONE product exists incorporating all these wishes into it? Isn't it called NOD32? I guessed somehow!

 

1) You sound like a fanboi. I have NOD32 on 2 boxes right now and have licenses for 9 other AVs.
2) VB100 is not the shiznit, end all, be all. I wouldn't quote VB100 as a reason to buy an AV.
3) Where has it been proven that NOD32 has the best heuristics, other than AV Comparatives and claims made by Eset? Show me the data.
4) FProt and couple others have lower/comparable resource usage.
5) There are great deals on other AVs all the time. All you have to do is look.
6) I do agree that the 2.5 beta has potential.

My point is that rational consumers buy a product based on the fact that it meets their current needs... not that it might at some point in the future offer more performance or meet those needs.

I also never said there was a perfect product.

I like NOD32 but can't stand it when folks toss rational thought out the window.

 

Um, about the 100% awards, if you're talking about the past 5 1/2 years, that would be Norton; only Norton has a perfect unblemished record for the past 5 1/2 years, don't believe it, check it out. BTW, I do not believe that Norton is the best AV, just pointing out that depending upon one AV testing site is absurd. Many of the other respected sites have NOD only in the middle of the pack, does that make NOD only an average AV, no, again just means that affixing your site on one test site is very narrow minded.

Acadia

 

How do you figure?
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?eset.xml

http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?symantec.xml

 

I see your point, the last fail for Norton was 1999. Almost 5 ½ years. I have used Norton in the past but It was a tad bloated for my taste.

 

Yeah, I might sound like a fanboy, since when I decide to buy something I do quite some research, and the product coming out as victor has all my faith in it. To the extent of my limited negligible knowledge VB100 is a very well respected award. If something has several very well respected awards it IS a differentiating factor isn't it?

Sorry, NOD32 doesn't have the best heuristics. It has one of the best heuristics. OK now? I see one proof is no proof. My personal tests are not counting of course.

These are both neat things. My aim was to find an AV matching all these critiques. An AV costing $10 taking up 3 MB RAM isn't worth too much if it has a 80% penetration, now does it? (Just random figure, no such AV exists.)

IMHO that's a bit euphemistic. No other arguments2.

Neither have I. 'The best' and 'perfect' aren't synomims.

When I bought NOD32 the official release was 2.12.3. It's still the official release. It still has all the potential I need. And it was very thoroughly tested by me before getting it. Now what's the problem with full-heartedly supporting what I found to be the best and still consider the best?

 

Just had to comment on that...
I've installed F-prot on numerous machines and in my experience it eats up way more resources that NOD32. Also, when updating F-prot downloads a ridiculous amount of data. Someone should tell the F-prot guys about incremental updating...

I like the NOD32 client for it's detection capabilities and low resources.


Cheers,

JS.

 

1) You should never rely on one body/group/organization to certify a product. You need more than one source... I remember when I was in college a long time ago, doing an internship working as a reporter for a paper distributed in Asia, I had to verify my facts with 3 independent sources. Same thing here.
2) Check your RAM figures again... 3MB... seems incredibly low. I've got a fast system, 3.6GHZ CPU, 2GB of RAM, Raptors... looking at 14MB VM, 19MB RAM, 38 sec CPU time with Blackspear's settings.
3) The issue I originally had was just the fact that you stated the adware removal "was getting better" (which isn't a reason to buy a product) and has "the best heuristics". Again, really only verified by one source... AV Comparatives... same issue as referring to VB100 as your only source.

Unless you post the test methology, sample and data you used to evaluate... all you are doing is stating your opinion, which means you cannot say with authority that these things are the best. Your objective observations though are relevant... no infections, risky habits, low resource usage, good compatibility, good support etc...

 

No contest.

NOD32.

Norton is one antivirus which seems more like a virus; it adds so much bulk to your computer, and once it detects a virus, it will refuse to quarantine it or delete it. (if it does catch a virus).

If I seem sour, it's all because of my past experience with Norton. Please excuse me if I offend you in any way.

BTW, right now I'm using NOD32. (And yes, I've tried Kaspersky and McAfee.)
NOD32 is the one for me.

 

I used Norton from 2000-2004. Then I was introduced to NOD32 and won't go back. After NAV2003, it just became bloatware and took over my system. It just kept getting bigger and bigger.
NAV took anywhere from 45min-1.5hours to scan my entire computer. NOD32 scans it (deep settings) in less than 20min!

I use AVG and F-prot on different systems and have tried McAfee before but nothing compares to NOD in my eyes. IMHO that is.

 

I agree, and for whatever reason it seems that some NOD enthusiasts are quite emotional about their AV choice-preference; no offense to anyone. I will cast my {subjective} vote for NAV, just to balance out the negative things being said on that side of the ledger. I agree with you taz, that NOD32 needs to get more support to backup its claims, other than the VB100% record; and as was pointed out, NAV actually has the slightly better record in that Dept. over the last five years. I think they are both good scanners and provide adequate protection to their users. Warmly, Ran

 

Most (not all) people have the "Big Boy" AV's either because they are sold everywhere (convenient) or came pre-installed with their machine. Most likely they didn't need to do any hard "reseach" in their selection and really don't care to. Users of AV's like KAV (or whatever) believe they did a fair amount of research in their selection. This is why I think people get a little agitated when you question their AV program of choice... They feel like you are questioning their judgements. Anywho, back to homework.

 

That RAM figure was a mere example that IF an AV has 3MB RAM usage it still can be an appalling product. It's said a sentence further that no such AV exists. NOD32's actual RAM usage for me is around 20MB. Please reread

I tried correcting these misfires in my former post, stating NOD32 has ONE of the best heuristics and "getting better" is not a reason, but a very positive modifier. (Who wants to invest in a slow developing product? After using NAV2003/4/5 I must tell that while NAV2003 is a very solid AV, the other versions contain additional bells&whistles and some extra resource usage... nothing more. Now I don't want this.)

I cannot say as a divine decision that "NOD32 Is The Best". I think that without 5 labs backing someone up he still couldn't say that. But as a power user I do say that from all AVs I evaluated for a long time, and those "only-NOD32-without-other-defense" tests it passed easily it far outwits the competition in my humble opinion.

A polite remark.

As this is obviously escalating towards a flame, I'd propose that after we both stated our opinions pretty clearly we abstain from this discussion. I'll do that at least in the future.

 

Claim down..... i think ShunterAlhena is not a fan boy. Because i am not but i argee with all his points.

But then again. I don't see why one need to change AV if their current AV is working well. Norton does its job. So if your liscense doesn't expire soon than no need to waste it.

P.S - Where is symantec AV corp 10?? :evil: