PC World - Top Standalone Antivirus Software for 2010

Well , ok .

Thank you ! Much appreciated !

Well , I won't tell you that Symantec is number two because for me it is Number 1 And it is pretty normal because everything changes - the circle of life . Also , for me , Avast is and has always been the last . I have been working as an IT for about 5-6 years now and I have seen quite a lot really infected computers running update Avast . I have never seen Avast and a clean computer .

This test shows that AVIRA detected 99.3% of the samples AV-Test.org used . However , again this test focuses on the consumer's side . Consumers (end users) are not interested in the technical part . However , AV-Comparative's tests are focused more on the technical part of the things . More consumers read AV-Test and magazine tests . More professionals read AV-Comparatives and VB tests

 

Calm down rejZoR
Let us wait for release of Avast! v5 Its going to be great !

Well I don't give a d**n on how the AV performs in any of the test. I believe on only one test that I perform myself
All the AV that have been tested are good and nobody has an edge over others its the matter of fact which product gels with system and works according to your needs.
I have said earlier and say again all the AVs provide necessary protection from the threats in the end its upto your common sense

 

Of course !

People here at Wilders are different from PC World regular/typical readers . Here - professionals mostly and users who know what they are doing . There - consumers who have small or now idea of IT stuff.

 

Well it might be number one, because you represent them (I have a good memory that goes back many years and your previous name was something like "tech boy", very much promoting Eset). Now fine with you, Hell with me: Symantec is not number two or even number three, as matter of fact I wonder why they should be even forgiven for ripping off millions of customers for years on end, and suddenly be redeemed on account of producing decent software.

 

would have been interesting to see where they ranked MSE.

 

really?... wuld u like to take a look at mine then? and its running Avast Alone.

 

I have used Avast in the past. The GUI is a mess to say the least! The detection rates are good, however I'm not going to put up with the GUI, I feel there are better choices for the average user. I'm not even going to try to explain to anyone how that thing works!

Avira is a little better, but come on guy's a little more polish please! I completely agree that detection rates are what it's all about, but one must be able to use the thing without pulling your hair out!!

 

No , I am quite objective person , as you wrote . When someone or something deserves good , deserves promoting , you can be sure I'll be the first in the line who would give them this "good" , who would promote them .
However , when something fails to deserve good (because of numerous reasons) , you can also be sure that I'll be the first to try to save it and if they don't want to be saved , I'll the first to critisize them.

This thread is not about me and my life (past or present) . It is not important what I have done or said in the past , important is what one says NOW and TODAY. Additionally , I am more mature now . No longer just a small boy (if you get it)
Please , stop talking about me . Thank you

Trust me , there are quite a lot of reasons (I cannot share with all of them) . One is - everything changes . Symantec is not Symantec from (let's say) 10 or 5 years ago . Symantec is a corporation/company = made of humans . People there who now work at Symantec are not those who were there 10 years ago (for example) . Symantec now is important . AVIRA at the moment is important . AVIRA 4-5 years ago was very bad , now is important <just giving an example>

 

You are not a typical home user , I suspect . Home users / less IT knowledge is what my average clients are.

 

ASpace, is now important.

 

I am just expressing an opinion - 1 single opinion . If you don't like it , it is your own business . This doesn't mean you shoud make post like the above

I don't remember having a discussion with you personally (in this thread) but I am sorry if I have said something that have pottentially harmed you . But if you change your avatar tomorrow ... that will be another story

 

Well, like my pappy said, why put off to tomorrow, what you can do today.

 

The results look accurate and consistent with prior tests done by AV-test.org. NOD32 scores approximately three points lower with AV-test.org compared with AV-comparatives.

 

The real problem I have with this test is not the testing it self. It's the fact that they are basing the scoring off GUI and not having this option or that option instead of what a AV is supposed to do, PROTECT. IMO People that score like this have very little understanding of the in's and out's of the internet, and would gladly take a pretty user interface or a static option over pure protection.

 

@Fajo

A combined test (AV part from AV-Test.org) , everything else is PC World's

If you don't like the numbering (1,2,3,4...) you can click on Specs. button and have a deeper look at the more important for us things

 

Aye, The only part of this whole thing I'm complaining about is PC Worlds. The other stuff I'm not disputing, but the 1-10 is just crap as there scoring system has NOTHING to do with how well the product protects. And that's where the problem lye's, some people see that #1 spot and start to doubt there current solutions even tho there current solution could of gave them "Better" protection.

Reviews like these makes me want to hire a hitman.

Edited.
Fixed a Typo

 

Im a bit confused.
how is f-secure behind bitdefender?
F-secure uses the bitdefender engine and f-secures own engines including blacklight,hydra etc and on other tests has a better detection rate than bitdefender which makes sence.

one thing ive noticed is in any review from pc world magazine Norton is always top spot.alot of my clients had norton and were infected,other tools pick up the malware right away. I wonder if symantec is paying themoff or something.

I also dont get how Avira is 7th. how the hell can you call the avira UI to technical? and what is wrong with the looks of the interface?

 

Tomorrow another test and new rank one product and we will see another avatar of trjam
Someones pretty rich here (just joking)

 

One doesn't need to be rich to have licenses for all (most) AV products on this planet - they are not that expensive . However , one must be crazy to change them on daily bases .




(nothing personal . anybody who thinks there is something in this post related to him/her , should know that he/she is wrong)

 

"Stupid is as stupid
does."

 

The negative aspect of "awards" like this is that G-data is simply encouraged to continue their policy of non-existent customer support. It is just awkward that PCworld has the little "check latest prices" click through link beside each product. That probably explains why no free stand alone antivirus made the top 10. But an av with zero customer support, has a 257 mb download (yes, 257 MB!), high resource usage (comparatively speaking) gets stand alone av of the year? What a bunch of bull.

 

no the bull is in your comments. yes it is huge in size but I am running on 2 laptops with only 2GB and it is as light as any other so called light AV. 2010 is not heavy in using up resources so please dont say that, I will agree with lack of support though.

 

The computers you have it installed on must be a Quad core. Because when I tested on my Core duo2 with 4gigs memory Windows 7 It brought the damn thing to a crawl. With nothing else installed.

 

How much Megs it uses on your lappie just curious to know

 

I think the problem with G-Data on a laptop may not be the CPU or the RAM. But the hard disk. If it's a 5400 RPM (which is common yet in laptops), a dual engine scanning all files, may have a noticeable impact.