AV-Comparatives Tests of 2006

Sure it is... Take a look at past threads, you'll see ...... "tests mean nothing... blah blah blah...real world...... blah blah blah...."

 

If tests don't mean anything, then what does? Ignore the ignorant

And I'm not a fan of Norton by any means for other reasons, but that is just plain ignorant.

 

id have to agree with lollan, my main issue with NAV was its resource usage not detection rates (i havent tried 2006 but people say its much improved). also one thing i like about testing AV's detection rates is that unlike "performance hit" or "resource usage", its not affected as much by machine specs or the user.

 

I'm just saying that it's what I have seen people say on this board and on others.

 

That is a pretty sad state of affairs when people just repeat what others have said without knowing if it is right or not just so they can be in the "in group"

 

Folks do seem to bash NAV and McAfee frequently for any number of reasons. I've given them both (very recent versions) a thorough workout. Both companies dress *very* effective anti-virus engines in a pretty wrapper. These programs frequently appeal to new users (OEM bundling is one reason), and I suppose a pretty GUI makes them feel good. Here's the nutshell analogy that I'll use for both of the consumer versions: Lance Armstrong competing in the Tour De France on a 500 lb. cast iron bike. Great athlete, horrible vehicle. Don't tell me that NAV6 is a fleet program, it's not.

 

I agree.. I use Norton IS 2006 on 2 computers and like it very much.

 

The nice thing about living in a free society is that you don't have to use it. But the rest of us that do use it and don't see any slow down and don't see it useing up all the resources will probably keep useing it without having any problems with it.

 

Wilders Security Forums has over 5000 members. This is one of my favorite threads in Wilders. I always think about it when these Antivirus Tests come out.https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=117883&highlight=infected+Virus
My point is that you can take the last place finisher in this test and keep it updated and your chances of ever geting infected are less than 1%. I've had DrWeb, NOD32,Kaspersky4.5,TDS3, Wormguard,RegRun,RegDefend and BoClean and the only thing that was ever detected and deleted, were about 100 Email worms,viruses, or Trojans that were detected by Yahoo Email Antivirus before it reach any of my PC's. Their Email antivirus is Norton.

 

Actually we have over ( Members: 42,961) been a long time since 5000 members

 

Hmmmm, that brings the chances down to about .25%

 

Yep it does dilute the chances down a bit

 

Just under 9,900 are active.

 

Yep, AVG is still my favorite AV and because KAV, NOD32 and others didn't find anything either after using AVG for six months, I was too lazy to look for another AV.
I also know that AVG is recommended by qualified helpers at SWI, while some of these qualified helpers were using NOD32 or KAV
I think it has something to with the main activity of SWI : solving HijackThis Logs and most victims don't have the money to pay for an AV scanner and AVG is free.

 

Personally, if I had to recommend a free AV, it would be avast!, not AVG.

 

I would agree on Avast for a free av over Avg

 

No 500 lb. cast iron bike here. NAV 2006 runs very light on my computer, and it isn't a supper powerful one by todays standards. Only 1.1 Gigs and 512RAM. Have you tried NAV 2006? I've run KAV 5 and NOD32, and differences in browsing speeds was undetectable.

 

By my customer's standards, you've got double the average memory still unfortunately.

 

512MB is standard today, 1GB highly recommended.

 

In Asia, the standard is still 256MB. Global standard is approxmiately 384MB.

 

Unfortunately, that's only wishful thinking as Firecat pointed out. There will always be cheapos out there and OEM manufacturers have to scoop up that rather large percentage of the PC market place. Most people only buy PCs for basic functionality anyways, but then they get on the Internet which is readily available thanks to other cheap services (Thanks a lot, AOL) and properly get their system infected.

So... on top of the overly bloated NAV trial version that came with their computer, they've got WinAntivirus for $100 and Spysheriff infections running rampant.

How fun it must be.

 

I can only hope people actually test the other products thoroughly before posting so passionately about them.

Of course there is a bit of fanboyism, but I'm just saying that comes with good experiences.

My job makes this pretty easy as I am constantly cleaning systems. I try to test most of the more popular scanners on a weekly basis on atleast one of my customer's systems. I'm rather passionate about the field and do this for fun sadly. (I just built a computer for the sole purpose of running AV tests on it )

 

Well Put !! In the 18 months that I've been using NAV and Norton Firewall I fail to see what this whole " hate scenario " is all about.

I'm presently using NIS 2006. Oh, by the way I don't really care if this makes me part of the " in " group or not !!

HR

 

Will there ever be possible that AV-comparatives tested the free version of ie Avast, Antivir, AVG, Clamwin and others to determine which free AV is the best? Cause I am not certain that its automatically so that the best pro also is the best free?

Best Regards