Which is better, NAV or NOD32?? and why?

I have NAV and considering switiching to NOD32 IF it is better at viral detection. It seems that most AV are basically the same except one may update more often than others. I rather look into an AV that is on par with the best while consuming the least amount of resources. I run Windows XP on a solo laptop.

 

Alright, here's my opinion: you are talking about two of the best products in the business (remember, my opinion). You can't go wrong with either one. But Norton has a bigger footprint, uses more system resources (if like me, you have an old system) and scans a bit slower. So I use NOD, but if I had a new computer with a modern processer, it probably wouldn't matter to me. Both products constantly rate at the very top in independent testing. Good luck.

Acadia.

 

This depends on how you look at a product. If you are talking about ITW detection most programs get 100% (or at least) detection rate. This is in my opinion related to the fact that complex viruses are less ITW than years ago. Today most of the ITW list consits worms, which are mostly less complex and therefore a simple signature is enough to add to the program. This is also the form of malware I do not need an antivirus software for to detect: If there is an executalbe file coming in via email that I have not requested I assume straight away that it is malware.

What I personally prefer for antivirus software is: a program that has powerfull heuristics and strong detection rates on real complex malware.

Than you should prefer NOD32 as it is (compared to NAV): faster, cheaper, less resource hungry and has better ITW detection and stronger heuristics (at least that is my personal impression of both products).

wizard