AV-C On-Demand Comparative Test

Good points

 

Well, On-Demand tests are also important, even though they show only a part of AV's capability.

 

Sry, it wasent ment to offend u mate

I absolutely agree that its best if people do try all the vendors to get more feedback and thereby better products But users should test products because they want to and finds it interesting like U and me! And not because product x had 1% better score than product y in an on demand test and therfor product y is a dissaster and cant be used anymore

 

I also think that along with many "trjam" users, there are also many "RejZoR" users which try all sorts of stuff and then always come back to their favorite program. In my case, that's avast!, for others it might be Kaspersky, NOD32 or something else. I just tried pretty much all kinds of programs but in the end i always return to the trusty avast! and even if it's not the very best in detection or false positives or performance or the nicest interface or i don't know, something, i simply find it the best for my needs. And i'm sure others have their own favorite program that mostly stick to it even if it's not exactly the best in one or two segments.

 

Indeed, I do totally agree with you here.
There are so much reviews/tests/comparisons about all the security programs, but I just base my choice on my own experiences. I trial all the products which I consider "potentially wanted" and upon the release of major updates I test them again. But at the end of the day I always return to ESET because it fits my needs best.

Something which is also worth noting in my eyes is that all the major vendors are very competetive, it is just not possible to say whether let's say Kaspersky or ESET will protect you better. Both probably will protect you well, especially if you have common sense, but also the probability exists that both of them will fail one time. ESET never failed on my (my own experience) so why should I desperately want to use a product which scores 0,2% per cent better?

 

totally agree. I think my home is Avira but I do have a beach house in Eset in a mountain house in Avast. Any of these 3 homes I really am comfortable with.

 

Nice Summary!

 

Yay people juging Norton so fast, but let me tell you one thing, Sonar is still the best BB out there, and thats

Also the other modules are fantastic, the Intrusion prevention works perfect from my experience (personal testing)

 

Well, maybe it is THE best for you but it's debatable if it's actually THE best, or if "The best" even exists on a global scale.
Lets wait for AVC Dynamic tests to even start discussing that.

 

Well from my testing i know its not professional etc, but still decent..its almost impossile to pass Sonar, and comparing other BBs its much better from my experience, now i know this means nothing to you but from like 20 tests i did (for around 20 days period of testing) Sonar did quite better then all of the other BB i tested, and yes i included Mamutu and Threatfire as well. But yes your right there is no best, just personal experince.

 

I have the same results. I use Norton because it needs very little resources and offers a good protection. I bought Malwarebytes Pro too.

As far as i remember in on-demand tests Norton was always not so good. In these tests always those products are good that have good signature/heuristic protection. Like G-Data or Trustport, they have dual engines.

I like dynamic tests better.

 

exactly my point ... dont understand why people are attacking just norton

To me its still great , it has great real world detction and most importantly 0 day malware detection ... I am sure we will see that in upcoming tests


anyways , i really like avast scoring well... always good to see free product doing good


to me mcafee wasnt a surprise as last time also it does well in on demand test ... but it doesnt perform well in other tests .

Eset also showing more FP is new ,,, but we can excuse it some time..

hoping to see next dynamic tests soon

 

Glad we agree, on a different point, i was told from mods and admins on Norton forum to not use in any case MBAM pro along NAV/NIS because they dont work well together in real time.

 

also i dont quick heal ... hope they can explain

also want comodo also supposed to participate in this test only ?

 

they said it would be participating in single product test first.

but not sure when it will tested and published...

 

Nice job Panda

 

In my experience, ThreatFire is one of the best BB's i've ever tried, used and seen. Good detection and it also cleans the junk fine where others tend to get into a loop and never get out of it (had few such cases with AVG).

 

Some people beg to differ. Fireball for ThreatFire via KernelMode.info

Would appreciate technical comments on the above review. Sorry to say, but my usage experience pretty much reflects the review. Huge slowdown and many conflicts.

 

Panda ftw!

Sup, Ibrad?

 

Well, mine doesn't. So far i haven't seen any miraculous malware that desroys ThreatFire.

 

I like how 19 FP from Avast! is considered "many". Considering they used over 403K samples, that's less than 0.004% false positives, and on programs I've never heard of, other than AdAware. All in all I'm very pleased Avast! did so well, but I'm more interested in the Whole Product Dynamic test, since I think prevention is a lot more important than on-demand scanning.

 

No. False positives are based on a CLEAN set, not the malware set.

 

Oh duh, I didn't even think about that.

Do you know how many clean files they scanned for the FP test?

 

1) As far as AVG is concerned, the detection rates seem about normal. I've seen fluctuations from AVG a lot and this is always their "bare minimum", which IMO is not too bad.

2) I am a little surprised that PC Tools scored less than Norton as they supposedly have the same engine and definitions. It could be possible that their cloud networks are different, thus making NAV score higher.

3) Does BitDefender not use the cloud at all? eScan seems to have the exact same score.

4) I do think Trend Micro will get better over time, the Titanium product line shows promise. However, I do worry that maybe Trend depends too much on the cloud.

5) I wonder if Kaspersky engine based products like ZoneAlarm score the same or similar in these tests. After all, Kaspersky does have cloud detection technologies......

 

Based on RAP, ZA seems having a better overall detection than KAV enterprise (engine in ZA) and basically equal with the KAV commercial (PURE) http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/RAP/RAP-quadrant-Oct10-Apr11-large.jpg . ZA had cloud since ages...