Ditching McAfee for NOD32-any suggestions?

Since i'm fed up with McAfee and my subscription is ready to expire, i think i've decided to go with NOD32.

Would the security experts here say NOD32 is at least on par if not better than McAfee overall? Also, since i have McAfee's Internet Security 6 i am going to need a new firewall as well, again, any suggestons?

If it means anything i also run Trojan Hunter along with Spybot, MS AntiSpyware and AdAware Pro.

As always, thanks for the thoughtful answers!

 

if u can get it, mcafee VSE is very good and better than the retail. as for detection, i believe mcafee is better but i still prefer nod32 for its excellent heuristics and http scanner. as for a firewall i recommend outpost pro since its easy to use and offers plenty of protection and plugins or if u prefer u can try looknstop, which passed the grc test 100% tho ull often times need rules for some programs/games.

 

Thanks for the reply WSFuser, unfortunately there's no way for me to get my hands on McAfee VSE so thats not an option.

I'm just curious though, if McAfee's detection rate is as good if not better than NOD32 then why is it that everybody praises NOD32 and not McAfee? I mean, i understand the disdain for the dreaded McAfee "Security Center" and the need for ActiveX, but wouldn't the fact that McAfee has better overall detection override that?

 

A lot of people praise NOD32 because their forum is here and people have tried it out at least once. NOD32 and McAfee are two of my favourites for good detection and low overhead.

McAfee's need for ActiveX is no big deal, by default ActiveX cannot be installed by itself. And the Security Center splash can be easily disabled.

NOD32 + Trojan Hunter = excellent combination

I also recommend Agnitum Outpost Pro. Set it to learning mode for a couple of days, run all of your programs requiring a connection then set it to "Block Most" when done. A real secure firewall.
Two more I like are Kerio 4 and ZoneAlarm.

 

Nod32 reputation is well know in the industry of virus protection. Here is a quote from their home page which by the way can be substantiated and backed up.
=======================================================
NOD32 Receives 31st Virus Bulletin 100% Award


April 4, 2005
Since May 1998, NOD32 has not missed a single in-the-wild virus in VB tests. This month's virus bulletin comparative review was based on antivirus products which run on Linux Red Hat 9. According to the researchers, "all files were detected, with a VB 100% award the equally predictable result." This latest comparative test gives ESET an unprecedented 31 VB 100% awards.
========================================================
Now McAfee is a find software however can McAfee claim 31 Virus Bulletin
100% Award?

 

KAV offers the best if not most virus definition however some people would still rather use nod32. now granted KAV is more system heavy than mcafee. anyways u might wanna read this thread:

Nod32 more liked than KAV

 

KAV and McAfee are pretty close to each other in terms of malware detection. However, both dont have very good heuristics engines (though McAfee has better generic signatures than KAV) and are a bit pricey and that is why some people prefer to go for BitDefender or NOD32 or DrWeb instead.

 

A nonsense post (sigh-how many more?) removed... Detox

 

VB100% is the biggest BS. Who gives a F about it anyway? Wooouuu we have 31 VB100% awards McAfee has only 25 woohoo,big deal.

 

I totally agree. Only when products fail every VB test the users should worry, I think. The AV-comparatives test, for instance, gives much more feeling of what's up with a program.

 

Exactly. On-Demand and retrospective tests show much more details that VB100% that gives just few % stats and thats it. Not to mention stupid pass/fail signs. There is nothing as black and white. There are always shades of grey... They also never explain why it failed. avast! failed at least for 3 times because of some stupid reason which was later explained to me by Alwil staff. Why should i then trust VB100% ?

 

I think independant/inexperienced AV users must be able to rely on some sort of test story and I think VB100% is one of the better. I don't think it's fair to state here why you should trust VB100% after an explanation of the Alwil staff........who the hell of us 'normal' people gets explanations of staffs of whatever AV developer anyhow?
You guys are very narrow minded when it comes to openly discuss all those 'great' AV programs.
All you can ever talk about is Avast......I don't think it's fair. Is there nothing else? You get all excited about a 3 time failure, what was a stupid failure after all? (says Alwil!!!!!)
What and who are we gonna believe? Tell me what test will give the right solution! Do you know? The one that gives Alwil no failures?

That's what I always read here.

Putin

 

It is pretty simple with me.

1. word of mouth. The very best test of all.

2. All those testing organizations results.

3. In that order.

 

I talk about avast! because i work with it like 80% of my time.
Alwil staff explained what went wrong and it was totaly stupid reason.
No i'm not narrow minded,but i can state something for sure because i know the case. But i have heard similar stuff for other AVs.

I don't give avast! no failures? You are so damn wrong. Read avast! forums and you'll see. And i trust Alwil guys more than VB100% because we work together for many things. And thats how you build trust.
I'm also lots into viral stuff so i understood what he expained about those failures.
If thats the case i trust IBK's tests more because they tell you where is specific AV weak and where strong,plus all testing procedures and explanations.
With VB100% you just get stupid PASSED mark.

I'm also defending McAfee at the moment if you haven't noticed...

 

All I'm saying:.........How can people know about any discussions with the Alwil staff when reading VB100% tests? It's great for you knowing of all this, but the average test reader knows bugger all about failure discussions and therefore I wouldn't jump up and down so hard about a negative outcome sometimes and just take the tests for what they are at the moment. I don't think it's right to put down VB100% publically, because of some failure!!!!!!
All I can do is ad up all the awards and the failures and that should give me a pretty good idea about the quality of an AV scanner, should it not?
But when you guys start analyzing the VB100% results here, by stating that awards and failures shouldn't have been awards and failures, it makes it very messy and untrustworthy to read your ideas about a lot of products.
That's all.......no more....no less.

Putin

 

Thats why VB100% is useless.

 

Just stick to your very useless ideas.......in this matter!!!!

Putin

 

Alright enough!

Everyone just stick to the topic without any personal comments or this thread will be closed.



snowbound

 

Putin,i know what i'm talking. And those NOD32 VB100% awards are overhyped imo (not imho).

 

I've always wondered whether the "h" in "imho" stood for "Humble", or "Honest". Which is it?

 

Humble...

IMO -> In My Opinion
IMHO -> In My Humble Opinion

 

Aaahhhh...."I see", said the blind man.

See, now all this time, I thought it was "Honest". Glad I asked now

 

It's not useless in the marketing scheme of things, i wonder many costumers Nod32 would have, if not for the "100%" awards?
We (the 2% of users) with an interest in security might not think too much of VB100%, but they must seem very impressive to the 98% of the world.

 

Unfortunately thats they way how it looks right now...