pc magazine gives Avira Security Suite 9 a Thumbs Down Review

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by Securon, Apr 8, 2009.

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

    Securon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2009
    Posts:
    1,935
    Location:
    London On
    Greetings! It appears P.C. Mag didn't think much of Avira Security Suite 9! Anybody read the review,and if so what are your impressions of the review. Sincerely...Securon
     
  2. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,827
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    Here's the link for anyone interested. I haven't read it yet, but I anticipate a lot of comments about how biased Neil Rubenking is and how PC Mag only publishes good reviews for companies that advertise in their magazine. :)
     
  3. Macstorm

    Macstorm Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    2,531
    Location:
    Sneffels volcano
    hmm what did you expect?
    haha.. have you ever read something so funny :rolleyes:

    Well I'm not shocked a bit. Indeed, I think the same of that magazine as I do of its editor :thumbd: :thumbd: :thumbd:
     
  4. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    .
    Unfortunately you may be right, but I've always found Neil's reviews thorough and evenhanded. On rare occasions I don't completely agree with his conclusions, but I always appreciate his in-depth testing. Sometimes I think people claim "bias" when they can't find any substantial basis to refute his findings. By the way, I have not carefully read this review of Avira Security Suite 9 and can't comment (yet).

    OK, I've read the review and I can't find fault with his methodology. There is also the fact that he communicated directly with Avira when he had questions and noted problems. It's hard to understand how some are already simply dismissing the review. I'd like to see the objectors comment in detail about what they feel is inaccurate.
     
    Last edited: Apr 8, 2009
  5. BrendanK.

    BrendanK. Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Posts:
    520
    Location:
    Australia
    I think he writes in the magazine for an everyday "couldn't care less" user, who just wants protection without pop ups. And I mean those pop ups can be easily configured to work things out automatically :|

    But the bug is a serious issue. :eek:
     
  6. Eliot

    Eliot Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Posts:
    854
    Location:
    Arkansas, USA
    +1 :thumb:
     
  7. Eice

    Eice Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2009
    Posts:
    1,413
    Seconded.

    In cases where I have used the product in question before, I often find that the comments in his reviews are in line with my personal experiences - although I don't always agree with the final score he dishes out, which are mostly from the "average user"'s point of view.
     
  8. Saraceno

    Saraceno Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2008
    Posts:
    2,404
    I don't agree with his review, or score, and I think Avira is a top product.

    But his review is well written, and he's talking if you were a total 'novice' user, how your experiences might be. These ratings won't apply if you're a reader here, as your 'technical' ability is much higher.

    Also keep in mind, other products, such as McAfee got two and a half stars, and a-squared received two stars. So he is critical and believes in a high 'everyday user' standard.
     
  9. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    Advert plug-in this month for Avira Software, next time another software company bid for being ontop of the Advert chart.. We're all here better judge to believe what the mag reports anymore.. I tested everything out there and what I use is listed under my sig...
     
  10. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    5,121
    Location:
    USA
    .
    I'm not understanding this. Can you explain what you mean?
     
  11. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Finally, Avira is crud, now we can all rest in peace and continue using our crud.
     
  12. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    I don't know about that Eset got a pretty good review and I haven't seen adds from them.o_Ohttp://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2343639,00.asp
     
  13. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,212
    Neil Rubenking is the guy who gave Norton Internet Security 2004 the editor's award at the time as the best suite. Do I have to add anything? I have to give him credit that he is commenting on the "Avira's suite" which I think like all suites have too many things to offer and in the end, some aspects can be less successful than others.

    He is conveniently avoiding Avira's best capability and first law of any antivirus application: if it is detected and denied access, you won't have to clean anything. He goes on forever about cleaning infected machines, spam, parental control, etc.
     
  14. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,827
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I said I anticipate a lot of comments about how biased Neil Rubenking is and how PC Mag only publishes good reviews for companies that advertise in their magazine, but I didn't mean to imply that I felt that way myself. On the contrary, NR usually does a superb job with his reviews... and who really keeps track of who the advertisers are? Not me. ;)
     
  15. Arup

    Arup Guest

    Cons

    Malware protection is intrusive, complex. Serious bug in on-demand malware scan. WebGuard failed to block phishing sites. Spam filter slows e-mail downloading to an unacceptable extent. Rudimentary backup and parental control.

    Nothing further needed from Mr. Rubenking.
     
  16. Page42

    Page42 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Posts:
    5,827
    Location:
    Last Breath Farm
    I don't think he is avoiding it. He writes:
     
  17. fce

    fce Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2007
    Posts:
    758
    please forgive PC Mag. author....it's FP :ninja:
     
  18. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    i fail to understand if pcmag's review are so worse than why are their review's being posted here?
    only to criticize? its been happening for years now and i think the mod's should do something about it...
    Pcmag is not my magazine so i don't care if they are being blasted review after review....
    But my point is what is the fun? just ignore them...
     
  19. Arup

    Arup Guest


    Good point, but I am really happy to see Avira being declared poor, that way us poor Avira users can rest in peace using our poor bad AV.:D
     
  20. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    ya rite.....he hehe
    i am using it myself................poor us....
     
  21. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    I have read the review, I think the reviewer has some points.

    Back in Avira 8 the default option of the free version was Ignore, you could not change it (had to buy the paid version). My wife once downloaded a file with a virus, Avira 8 popped up, but left it untouched. Off course you can blame the user, fo rnot reading the presented info, but Avast default action is to delete for instance.

    I have corresponded with Avira on it and theire reply was that when using Avira in its default mode (check at read and writes) Avira could also find a critical executable which was infected, using the default delete could make the system malfunction (e.g. hang on next re-boot).

    When running unattended scans, they advised to use 'complete' reporting option, so you can hand pick them later with an attended/interactive scan afterwards.

    Since I use Avira to check at write only, I switched back to Avast. Since V9 (with the powerfull heuristics), I am using V9 again. The free version does not have greyed out automatic options, so I thought it used the setting of the scan (not through when reading the review).

    So for me the review has value (not agereing with all opinions and keeping the free version on the PC), but the reviewer has a point that most 'innoceny/ un savvy/unexperienced' users asume that their 'expert'AV is configured out of the box with the best settings.


    Regards Kees
     
    Last edited: Apr 9, 2009
  22. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,212
    Virus Bulletin have failed Avira for ONE FP. The results show FAIL at the same level as AVs who missed more than 100 signatures. Same story with AV Comparatives who gave Eset Advanced +, and Avira Advanced, even though Avira detected 2.1% more than Eset (out of 1.3 Million samples= 25,931 detections). The difference in FPs between Avira (24) and Eset(13) was 11 FPs!

    These aren't opinions, nuances, small laboratories differences, we are speaking the language of numbers, and the results speak for themselves.
     
  23. Boost

    Boost Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Posts:
    1,293

    PC Magazine is the same joke that also said Firefox is dead :argh:



    Just another joke to laugh at from PC Make-crap-up-zine.
     
  24. Bambo

    Bambo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2006
    Posts:
    194
    Yep, and this is rarely explained in ads, on forum "recommendations". Even AV-Comparatives hardly makes much effort - not compared to how much it means for stars and glory. FPs should be punished and complained about but so should lower detection rate. If program handles FP badly it might be ok to take out a star, but when nothing is comprimised there is no need for FP scare.

    Well evaluaitons is also about price, I think Avira should be 50$ for 3 licenses, tops. Norton for example comes with the 1 user - 3 pcs - can change expenses somewhat. Avira is a no nonsense product, price should follow/reflect.
     
  25. TJP

    TJP Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2006
    Posts:
    120
    This kind of thread will always bring out the fanboys and haters in equal measure :rolleyes:

    Having just read the entire article (and not just the summary page like a few posters), I believe Neil J. Rubenking scored Avira fairly based on his experience with Avira's product.

    Further, I didn't read any bias in this report. The issues encountered in regards to virus and root kit removal are serious and were acknowledged by Avira as bugs and will be fixed.

    Just for perspective, I looked up his review on what I am using currently, KIS 2009. and I'd agree with the overall score and some of the cons listed.


    Cheers.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.