Dr.WEB vs Kaspersky

As we all know, these two companies are 2 av vendors that still exists in Russia. Kaspersky(AVP) was founded in 1989 and Dr.web in 1994. There technology are both advanced.

I want to know whose product is better and which company performs better on Market?

PS: I'm not quite sure about one thing : Their technology is developed separately or learning from each other ? Who is the "teacher" then ?

 

In Russia still exists several other vendors,simply KAV and Dr.Web are most well known

 

drweb has better heuristics,

kaspersky is still the AV that tops detection and the adding of new malware.

 

as CSJ said. Dr Web for heuristics and KAV for detection rates.

also people say Dr Web runs very light; I dont know if thats important to you.

 

im very pleased that drweb are adding more signatures now, about time.....

280 in the last 12 hours aint too bad for dr.web, about 5 times what they used to do.

this greater adding of signatures has been happening for a few weeks now.

http://live.drweb.com

 

Dr.Web and Kaspersky's technology are quite different from each other. The two companies decided to focus on different things during their early days. In Russian market, competition is cut-throat, and hence in a lot of cases both companies learned from each other.

But overall, based on company ethics, work standards, engine licensing and the fact that Dr.Web is the underdog, I prefer Dr.Web

 

Doesn't it bother you that Dr Web has one of the poorest detection rates of any tested? Why does one have an AV except for protection, and since Dr Web is so low it is strange to me that anyone uses it instead of Avast Home or even AVG.

Best,
Jerry

 

I do not use Dr.Web, but people who do have always had enough faith in it that it would protect them well.

Besides, I do not care solely about detection rates. Just because an AV scores 99% does not make it the best in the world. There are many things to consider for my specific needs:

- Decent detection rate (i.e. Any "Standard" level + ICSA/West Coast certification will do)
- Virus Submission System (Dr.Web was lacking in this, though they're improving)
- Support (Dr.Web has generally good support)
- Features, how much I can play around with its settings, INI-tweaks

Considering the above characteristics, Dr.Web still lacks somewhat, but they have started improving now. Currently I am using AVG (Internet Security) for quite a while now and am very satisfied with it, but if Dr.Web improves their Virus Submission System to a point where I can send samples and get them added within a reasonable period of time, then I will have no problem at all with Dr.Web.

 

Thanks, Firecat, for the reply.
Best,
Jerry

 

other than av-comps latest test, what other source have you got to back this up?

last av-test.org test, it scored a creditable 91% and it has good heuristics and add this to its vb100 record, its not as poor as you say.

15kb max updates, very frequent updates, fantastic support and with a strong unpack support and multiple file type scanning,

also with many many updates to come soon, its only gonna get better and lately..... many signatures are added, x5 what they used to so detection will only get better too.
new and better heuristics than before, and they were good already.

low ram and cpu and a realtime scanner that is hard to beat for speed and removal, damn that spider(guard) is fast!

8 legs are better than 2.

so, why not choose drweb would be my argument.

 

[other than av-comps latest test, what other source have you got to back this up? ]

I don't have much other as some do not test it, for example the latest PC World chart.
I trust AVC, and if it isn't good there, I am willing to accept that. It just seems to be at the bottom of the heap, and not as good as the freebies, so I can't figure why anyone would bother with it when there are some much better ones around. Each AV tested has the same opportunity, and Dr Web does not show itself equal to almost all others.

Of course each is free to make his choice on whatever criteria he chooses. He can make it on the icon if that makes a difference.

Regards,
Jerry

 

the pcworld test was done by av-test,

the last test they did which tested a wide range of products, drweb scored a decent enough 91%.

the comments i made in my previous post, are enough reasons to use drweb

 

Jerry, in case you haven't noticed there are a lot of fanboi's on this forum. If they have <insert AV name here> then it is the best, period.

Anyone using Winantivirus?

 

btw i aint saying drweb is better than kaspersky,

just stating some 'facts' about why i and many others use drweb.

i just love the software for the reasons given, i think they are valid points.
just as im sure people who use other products give reasons why they use them.

 

I don't have a quarrel with anyone if they want to use it, and 91% makes it better than Microsoft One Care, and almost as good as Avast Home and probably better than AVG free. It is a decent AV, but not in the same league with Kaspersky, which was the subject of the thread.

Regards,
Jerry

 

well i have a cheap 3yr kaspersky suite licence, yet i still use my drweb as its preferred and just works better on my laptop.

id flog it for some more years of drweb anyday

 

["just works better on my laptop."]

An excellent reason. As great as Kaspersky is in the detection/protection area, since MP2 it is the buggiest AV I have tried on my PC.

I remain confident that with V7 some of those bugs will be corrected, and maybe my 2 year KAV or 3 year KIS license will be useful to me. If my confidence is misplaced, then the cost has not been much more than a dinner for 2 in a nice restaurant, well maybe a dinner for 3 or 4 since I am cheap, and don't usually eat in fancy places.

In the meantime I am appreciating Avira PP.

Regards,
Jerry

 

This av-test?

Linky

 

yeah the pcworld test was done by them NAMOR.

interesting results too, lots of information for people to look at.

 

You got that right EliteKiller. I've been caught up in that also. I'm back to using KIS again, but I don't know for how long. I about ready to use some AV or suite that hardly anybody has heard of, or that everyone thinks is crap, just to be different.

 

Software is just that. As long as it does well for me I will use it, and support it. However, I am not a loyal fan of any when it does not run well for me.
I don't pull for losing football teams either.

Best,
Jerry

 

hope you aint implying thats me,

ive stuck with my drweb for a while now, and now have a 3yr licence.

some people might not like the comments/defense i try to put on for drweb, but i do try and give people help or comments on the software if asked.

not that many drweb users on here, but its nice we have one.... ME

does that make me a fanboy?...... hmm, if so... oh well

 

Jerry I am starting to feel the same way. Who cares about detection if your PC is already infected and your AV cant clean it. I am starting to join the ranks of feeling the most productive method is keeping it from getting their in the first place. I have heard, third hand, that Prevx at some point may look at incorporating some sort of sandbox into their product. I to think AVs will have to evolve to being proactive instead of after the fact active.

 

I think your intentions are honorable. There is nothing wrong with being a fanboy. You like Dr Web, so stick with it. The fact that I would not accept the results of its detection does not make it a bad AV. Well, not a real bad one.

Best,
Jerry

 

I agree with you Jerry. I was becoming one of those "fanboys" with a certain AV that shall remain nameless. It started misbehaving, and their web site, as far as I'm concern, is crap. Not too crazy about their forum either at this point. Goodbye to that AV, hello to something else.