AV-comparative February2005

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by IBK, Feb 27, 2005.

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

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Hello,

    very soon (now) I will upload the results of the February2005 comparative (www.av-comparatives.org). :cool:

    Regards,
    IBK
     
  2. .....

    ..... Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts:
    312
    Great! Thanks :D

    Suprise that symantec beat macafee
     
  3. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    THANK YOU!!

    Acadia
     
  4. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    Norton got over 98% - what is going on here!!
     
  5. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! ... and I just dumped Norton for McAfee!! :oops:

    Acadia
     
  6. .....

    ..... Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts:
    312
    :D

    Remember this is just ONE test, others show macafee is better than norton. However both products are excellent.
     
  7. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    I would like that peoples understand that little differences in percentages does not make that great difference. That is the sense I introduced the standard, advanced and advanced+ levels. McAfee and Symantec both have advanced+, so they are on the same level. etc.
     
  8. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Ok, so what is Norton version 11? Is that the same as 2005?

    Acadia
     
  9. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Wow, Symantec made a good step forward ;)... Kaspersky is still top of the bill, and McAfee seems stable in their results...
    I still feel safe with my F-Secure, but I keep an eye on Symantec AntiVirus Corporate, they will release version 10 in march... Many university students can get it for free :)

    McAfee is stable in their results again, and their Enterprise VirusScan remains a nice product...
    I'm a little dissapointed in Avast!, I thought they would preform better :(

    Thanks for the test again :)
     
  10. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    Yes sir..
     
  11. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Some interesting results here;

    NOD continues to improve in trojan/backdoor detection and just about on par now, if not better, with some of the usually quoted AV programs for both virus and trojan detection.

    As a number of us have already stated, Norton AV is very good for malware detection and definitely not as bad as a lot of Norton bashers state on this forum.
     
  12. bs259

    bs259 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Posts:
    141
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    Please help me to make my decision, Since I am not as experienced with these companies as perhaps some of you are also I am not a computer expert as some of you guys probably are.

    I have narrowed my list of Anti-Virus companies to these:

    1. Kaspersky 5 personal pro
    2. Mcafee 9.0 personal pro
    3. Panda Platinum Internet Security 2005
    4. ArcaVir 2005

    I am looking for an Anti-Virus that has excellent detection, no major system slowdowns, if firewall present have the option of not installing or turning it off, I have my own firewall (Zone Alarm), I would prefer an Anti-Spam program be included, My main computer is a Dell XPS with Pentium 4 (3.4MHZ Extreme Processor), 2048 MB RAM, I have Norton GoBack 4.0, Ghost 9.0 and Acronis True Image just in case of any major problems.

    Does anybody know why AV-Comparatives removed Panda from their tests?

    I posted this additional question in another forum but if anybody here knows here it is.

    does anybody know what version of mcafee aol is using?

    i see it says 8.0 does that mean they are using last years version? or are they using the enterprise version?
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2005
  13. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    because in the year 2004 a condition was broken by Panda. For respect to the Panda company, the real reason is not told publicly. Panda will very probably be reincluded in the year 2006.
     
  14. bs259

    bs259 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Posts:
    141
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    IBK,

    does anybody know if it was something major (cheating, etc.), or something insignificant
     
  15. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    On-Demand only. On-Access is much worse (it doesn't detect any riskware or spyware).
     
  16. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    As I just told, I will not tell the reason to the public. In my eyes major enough to exclude them for one year. But this decision does not have effect to the results for Panda of the year 2004.
     
  17. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    RejZor, hi. Am I blind, where are you seeing that!?

    Acadia
     
  18. Acadia

    Acadia Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Posts:
    4,048
    Location:
    SouthCentral PA
    Folks, we have to respect IBK's decision not to go public with this information. :blink:

    Acadia
     
  19. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    Please note that in this test riskware and spyware are not included, so, in this test, they would have probably the same detection rates in on-demand and on-access.
     
  20. mikel108

    mikel108 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Posts:
    1,057
    Location:
    SW Ontario, Canada
    Nice work
     
  21. Honyak

    Honyak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2004
    Posts:
    346
    Location:
    Deep South
    to bs529

    I use Arcavir 2005/MKS2004 and have been for six months now. I use it as my RTM and it is very light on my AMD 2.0 ghz cpu. While the memory usage is high if you look in task manager, I hardly notice it when using other apps.
    I did not activate the firewall (optional) as I use Kerio 2.1.5 with no problems. I did activate the registry monitor and it works very well.
    I can run a full system scan while surfing or tasking and notice no significant slowdown.
    You can download a trial at http://www.stormbyte.com/
    There is a forum at http://www.stormbyte.com/forums/ and Mariusz is in this forum frequently, in fact he is giving free liscense in a contest here in Wilders
    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=68040

    I cannot comment on panda, have never tried it. Have used Extendia avk single with Kaspersky engine, it slowwd my apps on opening, currently using it my on demand scanner. And McAfee is very good as you can find in this forum.
    Try them out and decide which one you like the best.
     
  22. Diver

    Diver Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,444
    Location:
    Deep Underwater
    Norton AV has never been bad on detection and false alarm performance is good as well. I believe it is second only to NOD32 in VB100 awards. The problems have been with compatibility, stability and support.

    Perhaps the 2005 version is better, but when NAV 2004 came out it caused widespread problems. One bug that took months to solve caused it to write 10,000 (ten thousand, really) useless files to the update directory. That slowed the machine to a crawl.
     
  23. bs259

    bs259 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Posts:
    141
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    im not asking him to give me an exact reason, i just would like to know if it were something serious before i spend my money to buy their newest product, im sure you too would like to know if it were something serious enough to keep you from waisting your money
     
  24. bs259

    bs259 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Posts:
    141
    Location:
    Queens, NYC
    thank you for your response i have actually used their trial, when i had the firewall on it started to act strange, but i cant say it was that that caused it, my main concern with them is how do they compare against kav or mcafee in detection rates
     
  25. IBK

    IBK AV Expert

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2003
    Posts:
    1,819
    Location:
    Innsbruck (Austria)
    The reason for the exclusion from the test should not take you to the decision to do not spend your money for panda. I do not see the connection. Of course you can buy panda, and as you see from the 2004 tests, panda is not bad regarding detection rates.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.