Top 10 Anti-Virus products

no matter wat ppl say Kaspersky is the best.

No matter wat

 

No! Brain AV is the best you require Brain to make decisions

 

I think that DrWeb have to be among the top 10 home av:s, although most people don't even think about that. The best and very popular cd/dvd-burning software, Ahead Nero, has DrWeb combined in it's burning software, so after that quite a lot people are using DrWeb too even that they don't know that.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

Here is a link showing how many ppl are connected in each country
http://www.internetworldstats.com/top20.htm

These are the countries that the antivirus should be marketing most important U.S.A

KAV is most used in russia its number 1. But there are not so many ppl in russia connected

 

But European Union has even more internet users than USA.

http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats4.htm#eu

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

These results are vote of Home users.
Yes Kaspersky's have part ~70% in Corporate field (business).
But, Dr.Web used by Russian government, national mail service (mail.ru) etc.

 

Sooo true, FF! I don't say it's great simply because I use it. Rather, I use it because it is great.

As to Kaspersky -- when I first heard someone say, "Kas-PER-sky!" I thought they were sneezing, so I said, "Gershundheit." IMHO Kaspersky is the best right now. However, based on NOD's & AntiVir's recent forward momentum toward improving themselves, I have to say that one of them might eventually take Kaspersky's lead away.

Based on a post earllier in this thread, I decided to give Jiangmin AV a trial. But I shied off when the download started -- 29MB!!! Only $19.95 -- has anyone tried it yet? (By the way, how many MB in a Norton d/l?)

Note aside: I might some day trial a Chinese AV but I'm leery of eating Chinese food -- 2 hours later, you're hungry again. Also leery of eating Italian food -- 2 weeks later, you're hungry again.}

As for Norton users having a high incidence of nasties (per an earlier post herein) I think one possible reason is that Norton comes pre-installed on many brand new computers. Thus, Norton might tend to have a higher presence on the computers of neophyte computer users who are clueless concerning safe hex. Just as safe hex can keep a person relatively safe, even with a weak AV, the reverse must also be true, wot?

Also, didn't Micro$oft gobble up Sybari last Feb?

 

By using this,

http://webtranslation.paralink.com/urlmode.asp

you can get all that,

http://voter.land.ru/view.php?pl=14802

in English.

Best regards,
Firefighter!

 

And here's what it looks like...

 

24

Acadia

 

Well said, I couldn't agree more. I'm glad to see you posting something about NAV that I can completely agree on. I would add that not even KAV can protect an idiot from his own foolishness, hehe ..

 

I sure do not have much knowledge, and am not competent to argue the merits of the various Av and other security utilities/programs.

However, I do know what I have personally experienced. I had Norton AV for over 5 years. It came installed on my Micron in 1999. I did a lot of surfing, although not the "high risk" sites. In that time several viruses and at least one trojan did attempt to get to my computer. Norton caught every one, and my computer was never infected.

I also had Adaware, Spybot, and Kerio 2.1.5. I did not even know what a trojan or a worm was, but it was never a problem.
I know a fair number of people who have used Norton all their "computer life" and have never had an infection.

I guess I have to think that there is a lot of unnecessary heat generated about AV. I realize that some may be better than others, but if one is never infected, then what more can one ask? I don't think anyone is dumb because they use Norton.

I now have a new computer, and because of all I have read about the "bloated" Norton I chose to use a different one. I am using Bit Defender 8.0, LooknStop, Ewido pay, and various other programs to protect my system. But I do not think that I am better protected by the AV and firewall than I was with Norton and Kerio. I am convinced that my system is about as well protected as an average user can do.

If all I had was Norton or McAfee I would feel perfectly secure.
I do not dispute at all the posts that so many computers brought into one's shop had Norton and were badly infected. I put that down to lack of keeping the updates current, and a lack of scanning with not only the AV, but also various tools and spyware programs, and carelessness.

Maybe it is better that I am ignorant, and not worried about the security of my machine as long as I get the updates, scan, and use common sense.

Jerry

 

Well Jerry, looking at the programs you mentioned using on your machine, you're certainly _NOT_ ignorant!

 

Guys, an antivirus programs ability to capture and detect an unknown nasty is (to be honest) pretty simple. An ideal antivirus (I think we would all agree) would detect all known and unknown virii and trojans and pretty much all malware out there.
The business of detecting malware is rapidly becoming a second art, and one which is passing the genereal guy by and concentrating on the pleb

 

U ppl are saying that norton is a good antivrus

one question.

why is norton so slow and heavy on resources?
And the coporate version is not??

and nod32 wont become better than KAV because Nod32 is not a good antivrus for removing trojans. KAB on the other hand is one of the best if not the best antivirus for removing trojans, worms and viruses.

 

To be honestly in my opinion, Norton is one of the best AV and Symantec is probably the best in AV business.

Nothing wrong with good advertisement and clever marketing strategy than other competitors and Norton AntiVirus itself is good at qualities (if not the best as many people want) so there're no any doubt that why Norton is most widely used and is the world most trust antivirus solution as we see this fact right now.

Good qualities should be implemented with good advertisement/good marketing strategy in order to be successful in business. It's very good to see that Kaspersky is implementing these two important factors.

 

lets me get this clear u are saying than norton antivirus is the best antivirus there is. Its even better than Kasperskt. Well Bu** Sh** i am sry to say i used to use norton than i changed to avg and avg found a couple of viruses then i changed to nod32 and now to kaspersky and i can say Kaspersky is the best.

And wat u say about norton the most used yes. But think about this.

Intel processor is the most widley used but its not the best AMD is better.

Look internet explorer its the most used but firefox and other web browsers are better.

Just coz norton is the most used doesn't mean it the best for detecting and removing viruses, worms, trojans etc...

Kaspersky is the best for that.

 

Folks,

These are just AV's we are talking about, let's not have emotions run wild.

Norton is a excellent product, top tier performance, with substantial market share, and clearly some issues on some machines (even high power ones). The fact that it doesn't run well on some configurations doesn't mean it is a bad program, only that it is a poor option for anyone using that PC.

KAV is an excellent product, first rate detection capabilities in most tests, substantial market share in some regional markets, and it also has some issues on some machines - mainly related to resource footprint relative to machine capabilities. If it sucks the life out of a PC, it is a poor choice for that PC.

Blue

 

Yes, that's what I want to say. Something is widely used doesn't mean that it's the best.

But hey, Norton is not that bad.

 

Well put, for example, KAV, as excellent as an AV that it is, will never touch my system again. I bought it only to find that it was totally incompatible with my system so it is gone forever, but it is still an excellent anti-virus, you've just got to find what works for you. Only the immature type think that what works for them, everyone else should also have on their machines!

Acadia

 

i am not saying that acadia.

wat i am saying is for an antivirus the most important thing is the detection and removel and KAV has the best. That is all. And when the new version comes out try it when it comes.

 

After trying several AV's, I just purchased an AV that I liked. I will put it on when I reformat this week.

It's not NOD, KAV or NAV.....ohh my god, I am not protected



LOL .....my attempt at adding some humour

 

Has anyone used KAV 4? I work as a techie for a retail store and our machines come down with kaspersky 4.0, for the new user kav is very difficult to get to grips with, it involves doing something! While its detection rate is high most people wont even bother to update it. At least with the likes of norton, symantec have made life easier for the new user. I'd vote for norton as its ease of use and spyware detection make my life easier!

 

why don't u try KAV 5.0

And by the way KAV has the best detection and removel rate than any other antivirus