New av-comparatives.org test 8-2004!

To Stan999 from Firefighter!

I understand your opinion according to SOME bad experiences. My opinion is based only to the probability to get infected against most common nasties.

When I used some other av:s than KAV, MKS_VIR 2004 or F-Prot (or just now CSAV 4.92), there were occasions that some trojans were passing through. I have never get infected with worms or Win32 viruses, where in my own tests KAV is still superior as a whole but these other above mentioned av:s are still very good challengers.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Hi Firefighter,

Actually those where GOOD experiences in that NOD was able to detect some
potential infections prior to some other AVs.

I also have never been infected with those "common nasties" you speak of while using NOD and BOClean in my day to day use. And again, NOD with AH has stopped some of the newest infections prior to KAV and some other AVs on my end.

Plus NOD and BOClean both running real time protection do not impact the game machine we use unlike some other AVs might.

It has been posted, at times, that when using some of the other AVs to just shut down the real time protection while gaming. However, this machine is primarily used by a teenager and his friends so there is no guarantee they will remember to always enable it again.

The reason folks choose different AVs is based on more factors then just AV test results. I could use F-Secure, which is provided free by my ISP, but it is a bit heavy handed and not really suitable for a game machine.

In your active quest for current infections your needs are different then mine.

For my use, all things considered, NOD works best for me and the machine using NOD hasn't been infected.

Folks should take into consideration more factors then just selecting the AV with the best tests results. For others KAV or another AV may be their overall best solution based upon their day to day usage, surfing habits, etc..

I am just posting what works best for me, all things considered for my daily usage.

 

Right. There are more factors that have to be considered. This is also stated on the main site of my website

This can be noticied by the retrospective test, where NOD32 got the 1st place

 

i find it very surprising how different the testresults can be,
as a Licensed nod32 user this result is very disappointing.
In the last testresults i read, NOD32 detected 100% of the virusses for the x..th year.
I think i don't go to work next week, dress in black, climb a Dutch mountain,
and go sit on top there crying for a week.

And hope to find another URL after that week, with test results that are better.
Or i have to switch back to Mcafee which i used years ago,
but always gave problems with downloading updates.

And yes, i (also) don't understand why they did not test Fprot or Norman.

....i think i am gonna take my laptop with me, just in case..

 

Well pretty good results for avast!. To bad version 4.5 didn't fell in,otherwise results would be a bit different(better) :evil:
It beats AntiVir and two giants,Trend Micro and SOPHOS. Not bad at all

 

Platinum is the Internet Security box = Antivirus + Firewall

Titanium is the Antivirus (only) box
see: http://www.pandasoftware.com/products/

 

McAfee shows its colors once again! Small footprint and high dection rates are the way to go!

 

Yeah, with Platinum I meant Platinum Internet Security.

NOD32 is the best in (the important) VirusBulletin Tests, where it has since years always 100% detection of ITW-viruses.
My tests are done on (not so important) Zoo-samples. No reason to be worry if there is no 100% detection there.

F-Prot is included in the tests.

 

Until now I can conclude that KAV is the best, but without here signatures, the NOD32 is the best... heuristics...

I prefer the speed and the customization of NOD32... and until know I didn't had any problem with that...

I am anxious to see the 4.0 version of F-Prot, since I like it a lot...

 

But i don't understand, How other OS malware is important............... KAV lose this round simply because lossing on this Area.

 

Hi all,

I am a current NAV user and I have found NAV reliable - though I believe there is lots of room for improvement concerning the size of the organization. They don't seem "hungry" anymore. The problem I have had with KAV is that I don't really like the ADS streams and it seems to be the most in hospital to other detection software that I have on my system (most likely to collide and hang up my system). I purchased McAfee a while back but never used it because it was causing havoc on my system. NAV has been a very nice co-inhabitant especially with other trojan and anti-spy software like TDS-3. I haven't tried Panda out but it looks interesting as does NOD-3.

Does anyone run any two of these products in the background on their machine? It seems like it is inadvisable but I was just wondering since each product has its strong characteristics.

Thanks for any advise.

Regards,
Rich

 

Wonder why AV Comparitives never test AVG and also why a recent Rokop test for AntiVir produced better results than this test.

 

Based on this test I decided to give McAfee a trial. When I tried to download the trial copy, a pop-up appeared telling me that trial versions can ONLY be downloaded with Internet Explorer.

I can understand why some programs specify system-compatibility requirements that include having a certain version (or later) of IE, because that can impact upon other aspects of the Windows environment (such as explorer.exe). But requiring me to use IE to make a simple download is sheer nonsense.

My interest in VirusScan disappeared -- POOF! -- yust likee dat. Requiring me to use IE is sort of like Wal-Mart refusing to sell stuff to me unless I drive up to the store in a Yugo.

 

McAfee must have ActiveX enabled for its use; could that have something to do with needing IE? Shame, because in my opinion McAfee has otherwise greatly improved from several years ago.

Acadia

 

Yes, I use NAV and like it very much, but shhhhhh, don't tell anyone, I don't want to get flamed and you'd be wise also not to advertise that fact in this forum.

Acadia

 

Why download it when you can buy mcafee 8.0 with a licenses for two ccomputers for a year each for $19.95 at the link single computer licenses for $11.99

 

Ronjor, I agree with you 100%, unfortunately there are some here, or at least there were some here, that think that THEY KNOW what is best for everyone else.

Acadia

 

I never heard that one before, I like it. Unfortunately it reminds me of a young lad I knew several decades ago, um, I won't bother mentioning his name.

Acadia

 

I don't understand why there aren't many mcafee users here. In every test I have seen mcafee came out no. 1 or no. 2. Aren't these test reliable or something? I tried out many other antivirus scanners, but mcafee is the best for me. Any other mcafee users here?

 

Which McAfee are you using??

@bok

 

I am useing mcafee 7.03.6000 as my on access and command av as my on demand