Another antivirus test

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Ailric, Aug 3, 2005.

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

    Ailric Guest

    "This year I decided to put NOD32 http://www.nod32.com to the test. All these NODheads keep telling me that this program is unstoppable, unbeatable, invincible and invulnerable."

    http://www.suggestafix.com/index.php?act=ST&f=16&t=16990&

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take it for what it's worth. Oh yeah, you can call me a NODhead too! :D
    P.S. This is not my test.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 3, 2005
  2. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Any details on the test-bed you used?
     
  3. Mikkey

    Mikkey Guest

     
  4. VikingStorm

    VikingStorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Posts:
    387
    For some reason, it seems more like some random spewing than an actual "test."
     
  5. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    The above quotes give me the impression that this reviewer is a rookie at best and still has a LOT to learn about AVs.....
     
  6. 543452

    543452 Guest

    Firecat I agree with you!

    He said that Awast and Antivir have better detection.... must be he used old DOS based samples for testings...

    Learn learn and just learn...... there is a lot to learn for this guy.
     
  7. jlo

    jlo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    UK
    Hmm and Norman had excellent detection!!

    Well in my experience and looking at Jotti scanner its Sandbox is impressive but its detection rates are not so good.

    I would take the above test with a 'pinch of salt'

    Kind Regards

    Jlo
     
  8. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I don't like the guy either. He called my AVG Yuk! :'(
     
  9. Uopp

    Uopp Guest

    But AVG is not a good AV...Avast and Antivir are regular...the only good free AV that I know is Bitdefender...but doesn´t have realtime prot.
     
  10. ErikAlbert

    ErikAlbert Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Posts:
    9,455
    I ran recently NOD32 Trial and KAV beta, both didn't find anything on my computer.
    AVG Free doesn't find anything either. Being carefull on the net also works.
     
  11. ---

    --- Guest

    Well not everyone agrees.
     
  12. SDS909

    SDS909 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Posts:
    333
    They give me the impression he is an angry 20 year old for some reason.

    He is right about some things, like NOD32 being flakey with other software at times. But his other claims are pretty frivelous and shallow at best.
     
  13. fosius

    fosius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Posts:
    479
    Location:
    Partizanske, Slovakia
    That man who has written this antivirus reviews probably never had NOD32 on his computer. Just can't understand how he found out that NOD32's heuristics is not better than other avs..... :eek: funny man... maybe he forgot to write "I am kidding"... :D
     
  14. Tinribs

    Tinribs Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts:
    734
    Location:
    England
    Sadly its a case of, "Move along, nothing to see here"
    I know for a fact that I could do without yet another second rate amateur 'test'

    Leave it to the experts.


    Kev
    :)
     
  15. Black Orchid

    Black Orchid Guest

    Well, if you'd read further down in the article, he explains what he does during the test. It sounds to me like it's done pretty scientifically, just written in a way that a layman can understand. I see people running their mouths about this guy without offering anything useful in rebuttal.

    "Most tests you read on the Internet are simple file scanning tests. They introduce an infected file into a system and see if the antivirus can detect it.My tests are much more comprehensive.

    Scanners and viruses were introduced before, during and after infections in different order. A variety of binders and packers were used to compress files to varying degrees. Files were ultra-compressed, uncompressed, recompressed (if you do that often enough it will become an entirely new virus variant). Viruses were joined with other files, sent in various forms via email, in webpages, etc. I try to employ as many different methods as possible, taking most to extremes in order to test the limitations of the virus scanners.

    I watched how well the antivirus software removed the files associated with the virus, checked to see if there was collateral damage to system software, allowed viruses to run in the system for extended periods to see how well the av software could handle it afterward and checked system performance while the av software was running."
     
  16. Tinribs

    Tinribs Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts:
    734
    Location:
    England
    I feel the comment about people 'running their mouths' a little aggressive, here at Wilders we try to keep things friendly and hopefully non-threatening.

    I am sure the test is well managed and based on experience and knowledge.

    :)
    Kev
     
  17. StevieO

    StevieO Guest

    After reading Black Orchids post, i think maybe things look a little different now.


    StevieO
     
  18. Black Orchid

    Black Orchid Guest

    I apologize. I shouldn't have used the term "running their mouths". All I meant to say was that although the article is written very simply, it does appear that he did a fairly extensive test and people seem to be quick to run him down. I read the entire thing carefully, even the part where someone else kind of attacked him. He also states the test was done on an AMD 3400 with 512Mb of PC-3200 running XP, a system "a little over the average".

    What I think he is attempting to do is perform and report a test that is geared more to the average user, someone who isn't interested in reading a technical whitepaper but wants to get a good idea what's good, what's not and what is hyped without falling into a trance. Personally I think NOD is a good program and use it, but I also think there has been alot of hype about it. I don't see too much I would consider to be actually wrong with his results. I may not entirely agree with him, but I don't think he's either too far off from the truth, or is steering anyone in the wrong direction.

    He's done this on his own, with no help and influence from the software companies. Just for the sake of giving him the benefit of the doubt I dug around. It does appear that he has put alot of work into it and, after digging into past reviews, posts and history, is alot more educated and knowledgable than some of you may be giving him credit for. I Googled around and saw he does have some letters after his name, like MCSE, and a couple of security certs. The guy is no newbie and no kid.

    I think the guy is alright. Maybe you should give him the same courtesy.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.