Does your security software measure up?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by tsilo, Nov 11, 2008.

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

    tsilo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Posts:
    376
  2. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    There's no Avira:ouch:
    Edit: There was in the av only, not in the suite :D

    BTW: Avira's installation is not 356 MB!
     
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Isn't it funny. First they were the bottom feeders and now when they finally got it right, they advertise it like they invented cold fusion. Sorry, but others performed like this all the time you sucked...
    Also percentages are wonderful stuff. One AV uses 4MB of RAM and another 8MB. Thats 100% difference. But in reality, either of these two values are pointless as they are both so low it doesn't even matter at all.
    Also what difference does it make 500 updates with 1 or 2 signature added or 200 updates each with 50 signatures? The difference of lets say 2-3 hours doesn't make that much of an difference but in the end you still get better coverage overal. You really have to look at the numbers from all angles, not just the one they feed to you.
     
  4. rogervernon

    rogervernon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Posts:
    289
  5. pykko

    pykko Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Posts:
    2,236
    Location:
    Romania...and walking to heaven
    I am propmted for user\password to acces that website.
     
  6. Ed_H

    Ed_H Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    662
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Same here.
     
  7. Dark Shadow

    Dark Shadow Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2007
    Posts:
    4,553
    Location:
    USA
    Same here with the user name/password.I guess I do not have the gold membership.LOL
     
  8. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
  9. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    It looks like they denied access to the public:D
     
  10. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    Obviously, Kenn Fine of Fine Design Group doesn't think it's fine to share with the rest of us. ;)
     
  11. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
  12. RobZee

    RobZee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Posts:
    290
    Location:
    Texas
    The new link now works for me also - the first one did not.
    Rob
     
  13. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    They're acting like an over exited kid who has just learned how to read.
     
  14. emperordarius

    emperordarius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2008
    Posts:
    1,218
    Location:
    Who cares
    They finally found something in which they're better than the others and are focusing everything they have on it:rolleyes: .
     
  15. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    wow that test is the biggest BS ive ever seen, it updates more often than KAV? lol and other products, yes the new version of norton is MUCH better than previous versions, but that test is a whole load of lies coming from idiots at norton.
     
  16. Nightwalker

    Nightwalker Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2008
    Posts:
    786
    I like Norton 2009 series but what i read from "security software measure up" is simple ridiculos LOL. With lies Symantec wont be back in people hearts 's very easy :blink: What a shame !!
     
  17. De Hollander

    De Hollander Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2005
    Posts:
    718
    Location:
    Windmills and cows
    At the bottom under sources, they refer to http://www.passmark.com/ftp/antivirus_09-performance-testing-ed2.pdf

    Now looking at the file, I came across this section


    Am I correct to assume that Symantec paid for this test.
     
  18. gery

    gery Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Posts:
    1,786
    Not really bad idea
     
  19. Subgud

    Subgud Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2008
    Posts:
    151
    Location:
    Norway
    Ha ha. This must be a joke. It says it 79% lighter than eset smart security.:p :p I dont belive it a single second.

    NIS 2009 is most definitly light, but i eset smart security, KIS 2009, Avira Antivir premium i will say is just as light! This is sellers tale(can you say that in english?) (if you can..HURRA for me!!:D )
     
  20. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
     
  21. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,635
    Location:
    UK
    Whilst it's true to say Norton's new line of products for 2009 have raised the bar with update frequency, it could be misleading to think you're more protected because of that. A single update many only contain one or two signature updates.
     
  22. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    the new nis2009 can update almost every 5-15min thats def far more than any other i know of even kaspersky was very often but not that often
     
  23. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    actually i just had a update 7 minutes agao and it just updated again.. so id say they are correct on that... it says updates 37 sec ago (and counting of course), as far as mem usage even eset smart security used just over 30mb total for me nis2009 uses under 10mb while idle and of course more while scanning. i dont think it runs that much faster overall than kaspersky or avira but i can say web browsing is def faster than with kaspersky and it was fast with kis2009. im VERY PICKY abut that sort of thing and i would not have bought a lic if it didnt work as well as it does

    but i do agree they are going a bit overboard with the whole we are faster than you thing.. i think its bad marketing myself..
     
  24. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    acutally its pretty good marketing considering the average consumer will usually go with maybe mcafee or norton, and when they see something like that on their site, it will most likely work to convince the average user. but people like the experts on this site:D won't be fooled so easily by this marketing ploy.
     
  25. Pseudo

    Pseudo Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2008
    Posts:
    193
    What? Faster updates = a marketing ploy to convince "average users?" You went from saying "Norton doesn't have faster updates, hahaha" to "Well, it's just a marketing ploy. 'Experts' can see right through it."
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2008
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.