Norman vs. EZ trust vs. Fprot

Which one would you go with? I currently use Norman and it's okay, haven't caught anything yet but I don't know if it's something I can trust. I run a relatively slow pc so I only have a AV running, no AT running beside it and I'm not to worried about trojans.

How would you rate Norman in terms of quality? It's fairly light but when it updates I gotta restart the PC and I don't like how you configure it since it's doesn't show files scanned in real time.

 

Norman has an ok heuristics engine from what I've seen, but their signatures/definitions are a bit lacking. It would protect you from viruses in the wild, as it has a good history of Virus Bulletin awards. But I don't think I would trust it too much when it comes to "exotic" worms or that it will protect much from trojans (or spyware/adware).

I also notice that it very rarely catches anything at jotti's online scanners.

My personal opinion, I think F-Prot would be a much better choice.

 

Definately F-Prot seea review at PC Flank. But you should be worried about trojans no matter what you run.

 

EZ Trust - Bad heuristics, good detection of Trojans/Spyware
Norman - Excellent heuristics, bad signature detection
F-Prot - "OK" heuristics, good detection of Trojans/Spyware
Command AV - Better heuristics than F-Prot; same engine as F-Prot (hence same detection as F-Prot).

 

How important are heuristics?

 

Only heuristics can save you when an outbreak of a new malware occurs - After all, it does take AV developers some time to release an update to detect and remove the malware.

Also, heuristics have found variants of existing malware in many cases, which signatures couldnt detect (unless they released an update after the heuristic detection).

 

Are you sure they use same engine? I have seen it written elsewhere that Command gets virus definitions only, from F-Prot and Command's resource usage is higher as Command has it's own engine. i'm not arguing as I do not use either one. Just repeating what Ive seen elsewhere.

 

CAV is using F-Prot engine, but it's modified. Also they use their own signatures.
As far as i can tell CAV has a bit better detection.

 

Yes, Command AV uses it's own engine and FProt too. It has a very simple GUI nothing fancy. Some may not like it for that reason, but imho it is the best AV around for the money. Was a little hard to set up. I do my updates manually after being notified automaticlly. Other then this for me it is set up and forget (if you like that). It has never failed to operate properly.