"Very badly catches viruses"?

Ah, the convict mentality appears to live on in some, it seems. Thank you for your positive contribution. It will be appreciated by all.

 

Oh what a turbulant thread this is.

I read the original comments....and to be honest any company owner that doesnt big his own products up and his competitors down isnt in the real world or last long.

I use Nod, after many years of using Panda. I chose Nod because of its speed of scan, over all the others I tested including KAV.
That doesnt mean I dont like KAV or think its no good, it just doesnt meet my main criteria.

To me and AV product is just that AV, I have other software to check for Trojans, Spyware,Malware etc. Each product does one thing and one thing only.
For example....do you put your dirty crockery in with your dirty linen in the washing machine?

Each to his own as its all about personal choice and tastes regardless of what others think.

 

Sorry boss. :-(

 

Very good comparison!

 

As far as I am concerned the Kav Developer/Owner can say what he wants to about his product or his competition. His bottom line is to make his sales go up.

I have found what works best for my Computer set up. So IMHO that is all that counts for me.

 

But dear Mr. Jevgenyi Kaspersky does not behave like gentleman should. Nobody here pointed to his employer in the past. And it could really hurt from the marketing point of view.

 

I like your thinking here. I haven't tested AV products since 2000 after purchasing NOD32. Given the state of affairs regarding trojans, worms and malware in general I've started testing once again. I'm not a fan of blended
products such as Nortons newest endeavour and prefer to use stand alone products that excel in thier given fields such as Pest Patrol, TDS, NOD, etc.
Some will mention Ad Aware, Spybot,Aluria, etc, but I've found PP does the best here given this is what I do for a living and get to run these programs on a large variety of computers everyday.

I have found a few surprises but like you said, its nothing more than adding a
new signature to the database. I prefer a product that has an advanced scanning engine and will leave the database detection to the products that
define this approach such as malware scanners. During testing last week I tried out Avast since it was free and proceeded to d/l a hockey sock full of viruses and malware. Avast did a great job on the both the viruses and the
spyware, but then again, signatures is all that was required, but nevertheless
the experment was a pleasant surprise and for a freebee, its hard to beat given the broad spectrum of crap that it did detect. It did so on installation which was also a nice surpise.

When it comes down to just VIRUS and WORM detection, I stick with NOD due to its advanced heuristics. I'd like a nickel for every email I've had in the last two years that contained a virus that NOD could not identify by name yet stopped it cold. You could always depend on the virus being identified the following day once the db was updated.