Hi, I consider that the most important is the heuristic engine, because it proactively protect you from new worms, viruses, malware, etc.
For me detection rate is most important. I also like heuristics for the reason already stated. Support and the lab? Those two items are important also,but an a/v has to have a good detection rate. Otherwise,how can I trust that particular program?
If the detection rates are top-notch, I don't care if they do it with heuristics or an ouija board. Like Dolly Parton always sez, "It's what's up front that counts."
The detection rate. After this the detection rate. Then the detection rate. Then a while nothing... ...and after this the detection rate Because this does include heuristic as well. Or is a heuristical detection not a detection and does not count into the phrase "detection rate" ?
No necessary, for example KAV have best rate than NOD, however there are many old viruses that aren't spreading. The KAV databases include many viruses/malware than NOD not, but NOD is identical effective than KAV, or maybe more, because the heuristic of NOD detect many new worms, viruses that the heuristic of KAV not detect. I'm speacially speaking about mass-mailing worms and P2P worms that are currently spreading. The detection rate in the AV aren't all.
I won't argue with you on this point But with twenty plus years in the software compatibility field working with networked systems and single user computers I will stick by my guns and say that without good detection rates an antivirus is risky at best. And as far as hueristics go that is just a software program making a guess that a file or e-mail might be infected. along with good detection rates hueristics are a great addition but on their own hueristics are not that great yet. But the final decision on what protection you deem appropriate is yours alone.
