eTrust or AntiVir

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by richo, Mar 5, 2006.

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

    richo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Posts:
    73
    I'm curious about people's views on which would provide the better protection... eTrust EZ Antivirus (12 months free via Microsoft) or Antivir Personal Edition. Thanks.
     
  2. tiagozt

    tiagozt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Posts:
    331
    I believe that Antivir is better...
    eTrust isn't so good...
     
  3. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    AntiVir 7 without any doubt. The team behind version 7 really did an excellent job.:thumb:
     
  4. Benvan45

    Benvan45 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Posts:
    556
    eTrust is a wonderful simple to use and fully automatic AV scanner for people who know nearly nothing about security issues and just want to be protected without having to configure a program. Updating is fully automatic. I't's certainly not the best, but I find it very strong for newbies.

    Antivir 7 is a great and also very simple to use AV scanner, without heavy configuration and I think gives a better protection, but it does not scan e-mail as eTrust does. Personally I like the email scanning option, as I find it a good feeling to have things detected before it reaches it's target!
    It's also updated fully automatic!!!!
    Detection is better than eTrust!!!!!
     
  5. Blackcat

    Blackcat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2002
    Posts:
    4,010
    Location:
    Christchurch, UK
    Antivir would give much better protection.

    But detection abilities should not be your only criteria for choosing between the two. For example, if you are on dial-up I would recommend eTrust instead.
     
  6. Don Pelotas

    Don Pelotas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Posts:
    2,257
    I agree, AntiVir if you have broadband, if not, then eTrust EZ Antivirus.:)
     
  7. pilotart

    pilotart Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    377
    Have EZ-Trust on desktop, used for OutlookExpress/Hotmail, MS Message and 'safe' surfing.
    (Along with SpywareBlaster, AdAware and SpyBot w/immunize.)

    This had been an offer for "one year free or two years for price of one ($24.95)"
    within a few months, she saw a PopUp from CA that "payment was due"o_O
    and she paid the $24.95 and they added another year to the free one.

    Replaced NAV with AntiVir on my main system and truely love it, :thumb:
    its "Guard" will stop you if you try to open an Infected Email Attachment
    and I appreciate that it has a reported :) detection rate that doubles EZ-Trust's.

    I have both on 56K Dial-Up and the difference is that you never see EZ doing anything,
    but AntiVir always puts up a tiny minimized window in the upper right corner for 10 seconds to two minutes
    (average is well below a minute) and Updates you immediately upon connection (incremental updates).

    I prefer it to work that way, but sure it could be set to do it in in an invisible mode.

    AntiVir "free" has increased from 3 to 8 download servers within the past month,
    they keep the largest reported 'Signature' database, but usually only download 20
    to 30KB update three times a day (if you 'dial' three or more times).

    Dial-Up or not, I prefer AntiVir but have no complaint with EZ-Trust and suggest that SpywareBlaster,
    AdAware and SpyBot w/Immunize be installed as well (they require manual updating).

    For my main system, I also have ZoneAlarm (free) and AntiHook and they add complexity with their "Should we allow?" boxes.
    The EZ-Trust System gets some of those through SpyBot's Immunize.

    When the EZ-Trust paid subscription expires, will switch that system to AntiVir!:D
     
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Thats not true. AntiVir 7 does show a small window on updates, but you can disable this in Scheduler settings (change from Minimized to Hidden).
    Then it will update silently. And they are working on servers too.
    If i heard correctly they now have 8 servers even for free edition.
    It also appears to update without any problems latelly.
     
  9. metallicakid15

    metallicakid15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Posts:
    454
    which ever feels better on your system... you cant go wrong with either of them.
     
  10. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    In the past I would have said eTrust, but as of late Antivir has really made some great strides in their program and now I would have to: recommend Antivir over eTrust for raw detection but I would go with eTrust on ease of updates. Personally I would rather have the better detection
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2006
  11. Albinoni

    Albinoni Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Posts:
    709
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Isnt so good, please explain ??
     
  12. Albinoni

    Albinoni Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Posts:
    709
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    Sure AntiVir 7 should scan emails. I've never heard of any AV software out there (free or paid) that does not scan emails. To me if an AV product does not scan emails than it redeemed useless.
     
  13. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Well you know wrong. F-Prot, one of very well known and respected AVs doesn't scan e-mails in any way. It relies on On-Access file scanner.
     
  14. Alphalutra1

    Alphalutra1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,160
    Location:
    127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0
    The paid version of Antivir does scan e-mails, so I don't know what everyone is griping about. The free version is fine, it catches the stuff before it starts, so whats the difference? The guard will catch everything on-access. You could also get an e-mail account that has a virus scanner on the server which would be an extra layer of security. Just my opinion though...

    Alphalutra1
     
  15. pilotart

    pilotart Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2006
    Posts:
    377
    I had left it 'Default' and as I like to see what is happening, that is fine:D

    I see now that 'edit job' has the "invisible" option available, also the 'help' mentions "Additional Options":
    This must be the default and is what I prefer, did notice that it did not Automatic Update on a WiFi connection,
    that must come under the 24 hour setting rule.

    When AntiVir replaces EZ-Trust, I will set it to run as "invisible" as possible to keep it unobtrusive for :-*

    See that you can set three levels of "Priority" on the Scan, default is "Low" and I wonder if there could be "priority" set for Update?
    (Adobe has that option)
     
  16. TopperID

    TopperID Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2004
    Posts:
    1,527
    Location:
    London
    Of course AntiVir scans email. It scans all files that are read from, or written to, hard drive. Thus as soon as you attempt to open an email it will be scanned.

    The only real difference is that email POP3 scanners will intercept infected files before they reach your HD. That does not increase your security and is more to do with convenience than safety.

    With attachments, you can always have them scanned before opening by simply saving them to HD first. Again, this is more to do with convenience. But of course if you use the paid for version you get a POP3 scanner in any case.
     
  17. tiagozt

    tiagozt Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2004
    Posts:
    331
    I don't like and I think isn't efficient

    That's all
     
  18. richo

    richo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Posts:
    73
    Thanks for everyone's opinion. It's a great help. I'll give Antivir a go.
     
  19. richo

    richo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2005
    Posts:
    73
    Also... any comments regarding heuristics in either product?
     
  20. metallicakid15

    metallicakid15 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2005
    Posts:
    454
    antivr eats etrust in heuristics and detection
     
  21. hemkop

    hemkop Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Posts:
    61
    How do you know that and how can you be so sure about that? I'm very curious! :cautious: Pls tell me how you know this "Fact" ?
     
  22. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Because AntiVir actually detects stuff with heuristics, while i haven't seen eTrust to detect anything with them yet...
     
  23. Alphalutra1

    Alphalutra1 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Posts:
    1,160
    Location:
    127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0
    Antivir just updated their heuristics as well with the new heuristik 2 module that was in beta testing for about a month. It only detected two fps on my pc when it was in the midst of testing and they were corrected quickly. It's a great product, heartily recommend it!

    Alphalutra1
     
  24. hemkop

    hemkop Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2006
    Posts:
    61
    Yeah but still AntiVir can never compaire to nod32 Heuristic *puppy*

    Because nod32 hade/has the best Heuristic long time now.:p
     
  25. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    Yes and no. I agree NOD32 has very advanced heuristics, but BitDefender with HiVE is closing in lately. AntiVir might not compare directly with these two but my guess is that it's doing pretty well. Well see more on Retrospective test from AV-Comparatives. But in general my expectations for AntiVir are pretty high.
    Well see :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.