opinions on various AV's (sorry for nagging)

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by tahoma, Apr 21, 2003.

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

    tahoma Guest

    hi, i currently use KAV and drweb ,and i ahve experience with pc-cillin, norton, e-trust and a few more.

    i would like to ask members to rate all the av's they have tried in the same format as i have done below. im looking to invest in a new av and id appreaciate your opinions. im especially AVK, bit defender, command, cos those are the ones im considering. but any other av is welcome too

    0=poor 10= best

    product detection resident scanner speed trojans resource use
    ---------- ------------ ------------------------------ --------- ----------------
    KAV 10 0 9 1
    Drweb 9 10 8 10
    pc-cillin 8 6 6 6
    e-trust 7 6 6 8
    norton 8 6 7 2
    mcafee 8 7 7 5
    F-secure 10 6 9 5
    RAV - - - -
    BitDefender - - - -
    AVK - - - -
    Command - - - -
    VET - - - -
    NOD32 - - - -

    ---------------
    those are my views. can as many as possible fill in the blanks and post their views on all av's based on these criteria?

    thanks
     
  2. tahoma

    tahoma Guest

    ps, i want just one scanner, so the av's ahve to be able to handle trojans too, cos im not looking to run a trojan scanner as well
     
  3. Patrice

    Patrice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2003
    Posts:
    571
    Location:
    Antarctica
    Hi tahoma!

    Sorry, but such a rating isn't objective at all. It's very subjective and therefore not reliable. You certainly find some tests somewhere in web about these criterions.

    You should also take the following suggestions into your consideration:

    a) How many processes are started and running in the background?

    b) What's the size of these processes?

    c) What's the amount of mem consuming by these processes in idle state?

    Best regards!

    Patrice

    P.S. If you care about security a trojan scanning tool is an absolute MUST!!!
     
  4. tahoma

    tahoma Guest

    patrice: those factors are covered by 'resourece use' :) besides, these are the factors ive decided are important for me :)
     
  5. solarpowered candle

    solarpowered candle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,181
    Location:
    new zealand
    Hey Tahoma, nice to see you again :)

    Apparantly the soon to be released KAV 5 is meant to be looking really good according to the Wizard.
     
  6. meneer

    meneer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2002
    Posts:
    1,132
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Well, my input?

    product detection resident scanner speed trojans resource use EOU
    ---------- ------------ ------------------------------ ---------- ----------------
    KAV 8 0 - 1 6
    Drweb 8 8 - 10 5
    e-trust 8 8 - 8 8
    norton 8 6 - 2 6
    F-secure 8 6 - 5 5
    Command 8 5 - - 5
    VET 8 8 - - 6
    NOD32 8 9 - - 7
    Norman 8 8 - 5 3
    AVAST 8 8 - 7 8

    Detection rate: can't say that I can test, they all find a virus in my incoming mail now and then, that should do: 8, and Trojans: I don't have any :p

    I added Ease of Use (EOU): how is the interface (ugly DrWeb... sorry pals :doubt: ) , how many tools (the less the better, sorr Norman, NAV), updating and speed/unobtrusiveness of download.

    In my opinion most scanners are alike. I just have to trust the makers and AV-tests of others, since I am just an end user and not a virus collector. The only way for me to rate a product is by measuring resources used and, more important (give my opinion that all are alike) the way that I have to handle a tool.

    I like the minimalist approach, so EtrustEZ is fine with me. And for the price, I like Avast a lot.

    ---edit a typo (last typo never found, just like bugs I suppose :) )
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.