Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Rush_, Sep 18, 2005.
Which one has better protection?
I have too say Kaspersky Personal 5.0, because I have never have used Gdata AVK 2005 before.
Very even, use the one you like best after trying both.
Good question, though I'd say GDATA AVK (which has the KAV and BitDefender engine) is better. After all, two engines are better than one.
If thats true, then why is three engines not better (F-Secure with Kav + two others and still not better than the real thing).
I guess thats why we should not trust the old beliefs
Are you saying that i'm old. ...........................................
Kaspersky has always been among the top rated AV's for quite a while now so i will go with it any day any time.
I use to use Kaspersky, but switched out since the version I was using did not do http scanning. You could go to eicar.org and actually download the test virus. Kas wouldnt catch it until you went to open the folder. The new beta version of Kaspersky has http scanning, but it doesnt seem to play nice with Outpost firewall.
For me AVK 2005 is the best choice since it uses Bit/Kas engines, and yes, scans http. Doesnt seem to be too bad on resources either.
I'm trying avk2005 now, it's running fine: light about ressources (15000 k and 700 for the service), fully configurable, and efficient, I guess. The only problem with their trial is that there's no update - virus database: 07.02.2005 !! , better to use it for a very short time... What's surprising is that we can see the boxed Avk 2006 in the shops, when the Antiviruslab site only shows 2005; only the G-data site is showing the last release, but no trial available here.
the better between Avk and Kav, can't tell; but Avk may be running previous versions of KAV and BD engines, theres no information about that. Good point is that the scan stay fast, despite the dual engine. I already like this av
It wouldn't matter because the older engines have the same signatures......and GDATA even has the new HIVE heuristics engine of BitDefender.
The result is what count, not the quantity of engines...
Well, if it scores 1% or 2% below KAV in most tests and costs lesser, then its still as good as KAV, considering the price......value for money counts too
When it scores x% below KAV, its NOT as good as KAV
Fact is, the price is lesser then KAV.
You get indeed value for money, but I have a different approuch.
Maybe I have easy talking because the price isn't important at all to me, so I'm a lucky guy, I know, for a lot of people price IS really important and that they are thinking like you: "value for money" is understandable.
But when I have to make a devision, I prefer KAV, like I already explained: the price is no problem to me at all.
Antiviruskit may be cheaper than Kav, but only 10 €, +/-12 $, and it depends which countries: the price is the same in Germany ( 49 € ), so I'm not sure the price argument is very important.
Did someone actually see some tests where Avk was behind Kav ?? would be interrested in seeing that.
there's no clue about availability of the extended databases in Avk, even if G-Data tells about spyware protection: that would be great if they could provide more information on their site !
Kaspersky is 39.95 euros in germany.
Oh, really : good, indeed, one more clue to set that the price argument is not important, about the choice between Avk and Kav.
The quality is important, not the price.
Gdata Antivirus 2006 test in the German ComputerBild this week: very bad score, 5 on a scale 1-5.... (in German language: "mangelhaft").
(1 is excellent, 5 is the opposite).
Yeah yeah, I already know the comments like: "ComputerBild is not a serious Computermagazine".
Fact is, it IS the most selled computermagazine in Germany.
ComputerBild 21-2005, 10-3-2005, page 80
When making comparisons, also consider this:
Security Vulnerabilities Revealed in Kaspersky and BitDefender (05.10.2005)
The two manufacturers of the virus engines used by AVK are currently receiving a bad press. News broke yesterday of the Kaspersky virus scanner being used to take over computers and a similar problem with BitDefender has been reported today. AVK remains unaffected by these issues. .....
Kaspersky has fixed this security vulnerability now.
obviously, such a bad review could only be caused by a compatibility problem, and not about the performance or quality of the AV by itself (they were rated best AV by the same magazine for AVk 2005): here is it, seems there was a problem with firewalls, already beeing addressed
Exactly. Something as important as antivirus, how can anyone squabble about a few dollars? Break it down to a cost per day...your computer is costing you more in electricity.
If you are talking about Outpost 3.0, then you need to disable all the features in the Attack Detection plugin Ethernet tab - KAV 2006 should then work OK.
The article is very, very pro Gdata and "coloured" in Gdata colours, and therefore not reliable.
Reality is different, not only a few customers were in trouble with AVK 2006, but a lot more.
BTW: not only the compatibility problems with firewalls was the cause of the bad rating in ComputerBild, there were other issues too.
Separate names with a comma.