Views in F-Secure IS 2007

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by ankupan, Mar 10, 2007.

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

    ankupan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Posts:
    436
    Hi,

    Please comments on F-Secure IS 2007

    Is it light on system ? good for spyware proctection also ? what about firewall ?
     
  2. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    hi
    it's not light, it's quite heavy.
    it offers good protection & the firewall is also quite ok
     
  3. Simon6776

    Simon6776 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Posts:
    282
    There are several threads on here about F-Secure, so you might want to do a search for some more info, but here's my comments, in a nutshell, and in no particular order.

    1. It has lots of running processes, but none are particularly system heavy, and I have noticed no significant impact on performance. In fact, Internet and download speed seems faster on my machine, than with other security suites, even with HTTP scanning enabled.

    2. Full scan is slow - about 2½ hours on my machine, for something like 350,000 files.

    3. Protection is good, as far as I can tell. The spyware component combines the Kaspersky and Ad Aware engines, so should be good, and it checks for updates every two hours.

    4. The firewall passed the full stealth test at grc.com, and is certainly less annoying than the KIS firewall, but not as silent as Norton IS 2007. That said, the pop ups are infrequent, and clear to understand.

    5. The interface is clear and easy to navigate. The default settings are fine for most, but there are lots of configuration options for the technically curious.

    6. Installs easily, but (and this is a BIG BUT), will require the removal of other security programs, particularly anti-spyware apps. F-Secure requires virtual exclusivity on your machine, and considers itself the only protection you will require. For most, but the intensely paranoid (who, me?), it's probably right. Uninstalls easily, but to remove all traces, the uninstallation tool available from support is recommended.

    7. Talking of support, they replied to my requests within a couple of days, but didn't actually come up with a solution to my problem, which is that the Quick Spyware Scan stalls and crashes after about 5 minutes of scanning. That said, the full hard drives scan covers spyware as well, so that troublesome component (on my machine) isn't critical to requirements.

    Overall, it CAN be troublesome on some machines, but if it works well, it's a great program, and even with the spyware scan problem, it is still my chosen security suite, and I would recommend anyone to give it a try. You can use the evaluation license for one month, before activating your official license, and it would almost be silly not to, as this gives you an extra month's subscription, should you continue using it.

    You might want to check out this thread for a special offer, which you can apparently use to license the English version.
     
  4. ankupan

    ankupan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2004
    Posts:
    436
    Is it better than KIS 6 and NIS 2007 ??
     
  5. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    kis 6 is better then f-secure (lighter, dection rates about the same, proactive defense...) and norton is about on the same level as kis
     
  6. Simon6776

    Simon6776 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Posts:
    282
    Depends on who you ask! ;) It's mostly a matter of personal opinion. Protection probably isn't any better or worse. The only way to find out, is to try it for yourself.
     
  7. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    f-secure all the way, its probably the most 'secure' suite on the market today, and thats the main purporse of security software.

    sure, it can be slow on 'older' machines, but if you have a ok machine, or even a vista compatiable one, it will run great.

    sure, KIS has its proactive defense, but f-secure has normans sandbox.

    F-secures firewall is mainly a background one, whereas KIS just pops up all the time, even in training mode, i also feel KIS offers pop ups that most users will not even understand, and most users will not know if to allow or deny.

    f-secure offers more information on detected threats compared to kaspersky, so i user knows if to delete or not. (if unsure)
     
  8. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    i switched from f-secure internet secuirty to kis6.0 because the splash screen took ages to show and it added around 50seconds to boot up time.
    also it uses a whole 13 processes 4 engines but the detection rate is about 0.1 percent higher than kaspersky for 10 extra processes and 40seconds on boot time
    lodore
     
  9. Simon6776

    Simon6776 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Posts:
    282
    It does boot up slower than KIS, but I suppose it takes time to load all the processes. That said, I can still check my mail, etc, while FSIS is starting up, so it doesn't really affect me all that much, and 40 seconds isn't really a great deal of time to worry about. In fact, it's taken me longer to write this post! :D

    One other thing that must be said, is that F-Secure is cheaper than KIS and Norton. ;)
     
  10. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    My experience with FSIS parallels Simon's, except a full scan takes about 45 minutes.
    I do not notice any slowdown in operation. It does take a couple of minutes longer than NOD or KAV to boot up, but I think it is one of the absolute best for protection.
    I have it on my laptop, and do not intend to change it for the 3 years of my license.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  11. Banshee

    Banshee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2004
    Posts:
    543

    It is a nice suite.But.Resource hog.heavy and heavy.The firewall ? You cannot configure the fw the way you could configure jetico or outpost or Kis fw (to some extent).I personally do not like f-secure's Fw.:thumbd:

    Try it and if you like it keep it if not just uninstall it and move on.
     
  12. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    My experience with FSIS is pretty much as Simon stated except I didn't have problems using the full computer check. The firewall stayed pretty much silent except for a couple of cases it informed me that it had blocked a MyDoom worm.
     
  13. rayoflight

    rayoflight Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Posts:
    180
    Just curious:how many times you turn on/turn off your machine during a day?
     
  14. lu_chin

    lu_chin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Posts:
    294
    I read that FSIS 2007 had multiple AV engines in it. It also got a very good rating in AV tests. One thing that puzzles me is the inclusion of the AdAware engine. Is it the same AdAware that many folks have rated quite negatively in other threads here? If so, using it within FSIS does not really add any significant protection to what FSIS already has (such as the KIS engine).
     
  15. midway40

    midway40 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2006
    Posts:
    1,257
    Location:
    SW MS, USA
    I noticed on the latest AV comparative that for the first time FS had surpassed KAV but only in the malware/spyware catagory. There was some mention that the '07 version was using a new malware/spyware engine. I am guessing it may be the new AdAware 2007 that is in beta now.
     
  16. Sputnik

    Sputnik Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    1,198
    Location:
    Москва
    F-Secure still uses the old Ad-Aware engine, difference in the 2007 version is the usage of Kaspersky's Extented Database, providing detection for spy- and ad-ware.
     
  17. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i aint too sure, f-secures website states it uses an improved adware engine than the 2006 version.
     
  18. A884126

    A884126 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2004
    Posts:
    191
    Absolutely true. Especially if you use the trial in the first instance. After the trial period they offer you 25-50% discount!!
     
  19. TonyW

    TonyW Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2005
    Posts:
    2,634
    Location:
    UK
    I guess this might depend on which setting one has it on. When I tested it recently "out of the box", all ports were stealthed bar one.
     
  20. bugsy_pal

    bugsy_pal Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Posts:
    76
    I found that F-Secure Client Security 2007 thrashed the heck out of my HDD, so I uninstalled it. The firewall in F-Secure is not bad - there is actually a lot of configurability under the hood - you just have to drill down a bit to get to the interface for adding and changing application rules. I found the popups that the firewall gave to be only moderately informative.
     
  21. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    ok i need to rephase that.
    it adds like 50 seconds to login time.
    so if e.g. my dad logged in then he logged out and logged in it would take at least 1minute 30seconds before i could do anything with the pc about 1minute of that is after the desktop and background loaded.
    lodore
     
  22. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    That time frame is about what I experience, but it does not bother me. That is the only slowdown I notice.


    Best,
    Jerry
     
  23. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    tbh i think part of the problems where due to the ram being partly bad at that time plus spysweeper bsod alot didnt help. the ram has been bad for a few months now ever since one of the acronis true image was corropt uing high compresion. im getting new ram in a few days woot!
    so other than f-secure using alot of processes and a bit of a long startup its a good secuirty app
    but still not enough configaration
    lodore
     
  24. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    ive always said that there is no need for other programs these days if you have an AV, especially not spysweeper, they are just not needed.

    spysweeper might aswell use the name norton 2006 for its resource usage, everytime this software pops up, you hear problems....
     
  25. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,006
    yup it seems that norton 2007 has fixed most of the problems and spysweeper has taken norton's old place as being bloated and crap:D
    lodore
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.