Total Footprint

In considering an AV the subject of the footprint usually comes up. Evidently KAV has a larger footprint than most. However, it seems to do so well in detecting trojans that an AT is not really necessary, or at least not necessary to run all the time.

So it would be interestng to compare NOD plus an AT with KAV without a dedicated AT. It might be that KAV comes out using fewer resources than many others combined with an AT.

I use BD 9.0 and Ewido.
Coments?

Jerry

 

BD isn't that low in usage, Ewido is the same...

NOD32 with Ewido uses less, because NOD32 is much lighter.

 

I know, but how would NOD + Ewido compare with KAV? I am thinking about total resource usage. My own combination is not a concern, but just curious about the comparison, since discussions never seem to addresss it.

Jerry

 

IMO, system "drag" is a much more important thing to consider than resource usage.

KAV is light on memory, however heavy on the CPU, although the 2006 range seems (atleast at the moment), to be light on both.... lets hope it stays thay way.

Ewido i found is pretty heavy. Bitdefender isn't too bad.
I would say KAV uses the least resources. Bitdefender uses a similar amount of memory and CPU time than KAV.

 

I agree - KAV was just too slow for me (5.x) and Ewido isn't helping much either, so I disabled it's resident scanner and just running with NOD enabled. And no, I can't tell it's actually there and running, untill it stops a threat. Gotta love that

 

NOD and BOClean run very light. BOClean uses very little resources and I noticed no system drag from adding BOClean to NOD.

 

I've heard alot of good stuff about boclean, but sadly I can't find a trial. (or maybe I didn't look hard enough)

 

Brian,

There is no trial, but there is an iron-clad 30 day money back guarantee as long as you purchase directly from PSC. If you go through a discount reseller, the reseller's policy applies.

I very highly recommend BOClean.

Blue

 

If I ever decide to spend the money NOD wants for their AV. I believe this would be an excellent combo. I would feel very safe and believe my machine would be fit and trim. No bloat.

 

Why would you try to cripple another AV product for comparison by making it run hand in hand with another product, while your chose AV products runs alone, it's an uneven comparison.

My vote...NOD32 by itself, because it is light...and it also does so well in protecting against threats.

 

Because I still do not trust an AV to stand alone and guard my PC. These two products will complement one another.

I have yet to see anyone crank out the updates as fast as Kevin and company.

Nothing is fool proof and I will, at least for now, want a plan B backup. Nothing beats layer protection. Both are light and both are good.

 

Right on. All the KAV and NOD gurus have a layered defence.

 

Interesting concept - but for me, the thing KAV misses most are trojans. I run KAV as my main real time scanner and then run BitDefender, McAfee CL, ewido and a-squared occasionally, and it's trojans that are detected most often by the others that KAV has missed.

Not to say KAV isn't good at detecting trojans compared to other AV's though, just as with any other project, it doesn't catch them all.

Ned

 

That's all up to the end user to interpret based on their use....incorporate their paranoia level based on risk

I know what websites I go to, it's all basic tech sites, and work sites, a few trusted news sites, I don't do e-mail except for web mail. So NOD32 works for me, also have Microsoft antispyware, and Spybot S&D, regularly updated and immunized (no naggy teatime though)

Add to that, I don't think there's much of a gap anymore between KAV and NOD32...esp since version 2.5 and the plethora of def updates they've been adding this summer. So I'd say "Compare apples to apples, oranges to oranges".

 

Glad you qualified your comments from post #10 wher you seemed to suggest a general policy for the average user. Hope you continue to have a good experience with NOD but I'm with mercurie on this one. No Av is presently good enough to to be a super do it all program in my opinion. To each his own.

 

Exactly...it's a matter of defining that computers average use (who is behind the wheel doing what)...

The greater percent of my clients are mostly small to medium business office networks...so generally on the cleaner side. Compared to say...the average home user, perhaps teenager, who regularly hit porn and websites.

Leading to my point...you don't HAVE to overdue protection with 88 programs running....depending on the case.

 

On your medium networks your likely to encounter at some point the following: 1. internet gambling, 2. porn surfing, 3. employees downloading files from dubious sites and sending and opening risky emails. People seem to take chances at work they don't take at home so I hope your clients don't get any nasty surprises. There are numerous articles you can access about employer surveys regarding worker abuse of their networks and BOClean is designed primarily for and sold to businesses.

 

Yup, there's always an employee or two here and there...and certain types of businesses where things are let to run more amok...which I try to stay away from those types of businesses. Some places you get to learn some employee habits...so you know when you walk in, if you haven't been there for a month or so, you'll not be surprised to find something on their machine. And those employees...I'll often beef up their workstations.

It's up to the employer to enforce employee computer use policies, not me. When I send in the bill that says "worked on Janes computer to remove shopping toolbars"....management should learn to keep their eye on her.