Which of the following anti-virus are better?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by spider_darth, Mar 4, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. walking paradox

    walking paradox Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Posts:
    234
    When I said slower updates, I didn't mean in how long it would actually take to download the updates, but how frequently the AV would receive updates. Why this might make a difference in AV testing and detection rates should be obvious. As far as pop3 protection, or the lack thereof, I meant that this is an important aspect of how effective an AV is and how much protection it offers, and thus should be taken into account.

    This was exacly my point. See below.

     
  2. Tarq57

    Tarq57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Posts:
    966
    Location:
    Wellington NZ
    A few users liking AOL because it's based on the Kaspersky engine. One review I've read, (admittedly at Download.com, not famous for the users' skills base...)
    states this (in part, originally posted by CableguyTK)

     
  3. spider_darth

    spider_darth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Posts:
    82
    Well.. I've narrowed my choices to AVIRA, AOL AVS and AVAST!

    1. I understand that AVIRA and AOL AVS has better detection rates. And, for AVAST!, it has lower detection rates. What does this mean? Does it mean that it detects lesser virus and is thus more risky as the comp is more easily exposed to virus attacks?

    2. Also, AVAST! hogs resources more than the other AVs. May I know by how much more? Is it significant, such that I can feel the difference in my daily usage?

    3. Though AOL AVS is a slimmed down version of Kaspersky6 and has no Web Antivirus and Proactive Defense, is it still better than AVAST free? Anti-spyware/adware inclusion has little impact on my choice as there are still many anti-spyware softwares alternatives.

    4. If I install on-demand scanners such as ClamWin or Dr.Web CureIt, will any of the above AVs (AVIRA, AOL AVS and AVAST!) conflict or interfere with it? In other words, can they work together harmoniously?
     
  4. Tarq57

    Tarq57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Posts:
    966
    Location:
    Wellington NZ
    Better detection rates means that a greater percentage of potential infections are detected. The only way to get an indication of this is on a site such as AV-Comparatives.org that test antivirus programs against a very large database of malware. (Another way would be to use identical computers, and go hunting for viruses in the wild. A bit hit and miss.)
    A scanner with lesser or inferior detection rates is, therefore, riskier. How much riskier?
    If you look at the difference, it's quite small. Something of the order of 2 - 6%, depending on the test. For actual everyday use, perhaps not significant. AOL wasn't tested, nor were the other freeware AV's.
    I use Avast, and am very happy with it; the free (home) version has the same detection capability as the pro version. I've also used Avira in the past, and AVG, and Norton. Like Avast the best; it's been the most hassle free.(Zero hassles.) Haven't noticed it slowing down the system at all. Nor have I got any viruses.
    I use CureIt now and then, as a double check (It has good heuristics) and Avast doesn't interfere. Updating CureIt involves re-downloading a fresh version of the application, 5.5Mb; there are no separately downloadable def. files.
    Should you go with AOL, read the license carefully. (See attached txt file.) The screenshot is of a program called EULAlyser, having scanned the agreement, opened at one of the flagged texts. The license is, the way I read it, inviting you to be hounded by advertisers.
    A lot of users here swear by Avira for its excellent detection rate, and I wouldn't (and couldn't) argue. I've just found Avast suits me better, and the protection appears more than adequate.
    (Sure hope the text file doesn't take the whole page! :oops: )
    EDIT Oh good, it didn't. :)
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 7, 2007
  5. spider_darth

    spider_darth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Posts:
    82
    so.. it's more advisable to install AVAST! and use it together with on-demand scanners and online scanners, am i right?

    any on-demand or online scanners to recommend? that is light on resources and has a relatively high detection rate.
     
  6. Tarq57

    Tarq57 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2006
    Posts:
    966
    Location:
    Wellington NZ
    I'm not qualified to give advice, not far off being a newbie myself, but that's been my experience.
    Why not try 2 or 3 out for a week or three each, then decide which works best for you?
    Any of the three (Avast Avira or AVG) AFAIK provide pretty good or very good protection, unless you're a high risk user. If you think you might be, best go for something like NOD32, which is very well thought of by the experienced folk here. (But if you are, 'tis likely the best AV in the business won't save you.)
    Frankly I can't remember a demand scanner or online scanner picking up anything significant on my setup, but then it's not protected by AV only. It's a bit hardened with SpywareBlaster, S&D's bad download blocker, MVPS hosts file, and Malware immunizer. For antispy/hips I'm using SpywareTerminator. To monitor stuff Winpatrol.The other "guard dog" is Comodo firewall. Got a collection of demand scanners.
    So I can't say if Avast alone will do it for you. But it's got to be a damn good start.:D

    [EDIT] PS, some pretty reputable demand scanners, (spy, trojan) are Superantispyware, Asquared, AVG antispy. (virus) Cureit seems pretty good. I believe WinClam might be a standalone demand scanner with pretty good detections...not sure, though.
    Online, Housecall (TrendMicro) or Fsecure.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2007
  7. spider_darth

    spider_darth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Posts:
    82
    what's the difference between on-demand scanners and online scanners?
     
  8. lodore

    lodore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2006
    Posts:
    9,065
    on demand scanners you download and run to. (sometimes you install)
    with on line scanners you go the the anti virus vendors website and run the scanners from there servers normally using IE 6 or 7 using an ActiveX control.
    sometimes they use java
    lodore
     
  9. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,995
    Just for my personal information, not to stir the pot. But how does everyone compare the available free AV's verses a full-blown version of F-Secure? I suspect that it is much better than many of the free versions.
     
  10. spider_darth

    spider_darth Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2006
    Posts:
    82
    does it mean that demand scanners are scanners which u download only when u want to use them? so one has to download it everytime in order to use it.

    or.. do i have to just download once and it'll update itself. and, it's always in my comp. so, i don't have to download everytime i want to scan.
     
  11. KikiBibi

    KikiBibi Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2006
    Posts:
    173
    This is correct. On demand means you have to scan to detect. Works like normal application except no real time protection.
     
  12. Hipgnosis

    Hipgnosis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Posts:
    297
    Location:
    Witness Protection Program
    I can also offer my own personal vote for Avast Home. I have been using it for several years, currently have it installed on five computers (2 of them used by teenagers) and none of them have ever been infected. I am also behind a hardware router/firewall.

    I regularly read about, and consider, other AV's but thus far I have not found another free one that has convinced me the change would be unquestionably superior in all respects.
     
  13. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Well, I suppose I'll be the dissenting voice for avast!.

    The one thing I have against it is that Alwil doesn't seem all that dedicated to improving the quality of their software. Submit an undetected virus sample to them, and watch as avast! still fails to detect it four days later. AVG, on the other hand, has been improving by leaps and bounds. It's still not up to scratch as AntiVir and AVS, but at least Grisoft is showing effort. Version 7.5 improved polymorphic virus detection considerably, according to the AV-C tests, and undetected sample submissions usually get added 1-3 days later, sometimes even a matter of hours. Not to mention the great strides in detection rates and number of added samples. I'd rather put my faith with a software whose developers show interest in improving, which unfortunately is not something I can say for avast!.

    Ideally you'll want either AntiVir or AVS as a free solution, but if they don't work out for you, get AVG.
     
  14. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500

    You do know that there is a considerable difference in detection in AVG free and AVG antimalware? AVG Pro only gets standard according to IBK.
     
  15. solcroft

    solcroft Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,639
    Where does IBK say that, exactly?
     
  16. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    Ive not tried it yet, but AOL is Kaspersky, just a free version of it, Maybe I'll take a look when the Vista Version is released :)
     
  17. MalwareDie

    MalwareDie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    500

    He says this:


    Found here: https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=166519&page=2
     
  18. jawadde

    jawadde Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Posts:
    18
    I just want to say that AVS is a kind of spyware...You will recieve a lot of e-mails (read spam) and your "internet-movements" will be registred.

    Sorry for my englisch, im from Belgium you see :)
     
  19. 19monty64

    19monty64 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Posts:
    1,302
    Location:
    Nunya, BZ
    I've been using AOL/AVS since last fall and have only recieved the activation code....no other eMail (or spam) from them or third parties. If they are monitoring my browsing-habits...I must be boring them terribly!!! lol
     
  20. plantextract

    plantextract Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Posts:
    392
    avs is kav, the only non kav part is the bundled toolbar, which you can choose not to install.
    as for spam mails nothing here either.
     
  21. jaydub

    jaydub Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2006
    Posts:
    75
    Nor here. :)
     
  22. Hipgnosis

    Hipgnosis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Posts:
    297
    Location:
    Witness Protection Program
    For what it's worth, I am rescending my vote for Avast. As stated above I have used Avast Home for years and thought very highly of it and felt it was protecting me. However, within the last couple days I decided to take a look at some different security measures and received some unexpected surprises.

    Without going into all the details and in the interest of brevity; I removed Avast from my main PC, installed NOD32, did a complete system scan and it came back clean. That supported my feeling of security with Avast. My next test was to remove NOD32, install AOL Active Virus Shield, perform a complete system scan and to my surprise, it found a trojan in my deleted email folder. (** I am not knocking NOD32, just stating the facts)

    Next I removed Avast from one of the kids computers, installed AOL AVS and again, it identified a trojan in the Internet Explorer temporary files.

    Needless to say, AOL AVS is being installed on all my PC's in the next few days.

    I still believe that Avast makes a fine product as evidenced by only one malware item being found on each PC thus far, obviously it could have been much worse, but for now and the forseeable future, I am going to entrust my PC's antivirus duties to AOL AVS.
     
  23. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    they could be false positives,

    either way, you cant judge a product on one or two threats found with another av.
     
  24. Hipgnosis

    Hipgnosis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2003
    Posts:
    297
    Location:
    Witness Protection Program
    I do know the email was a bogus email. When I received it I forwarded it to Paypal because it came to a mailbox I don't use with my account. Paypal confirmed it was not from them and that it was a phishing email. I had deleted it but had not removed it from the "Deleted Items" folder; so in my mind that lends some credence to AVS identifying it.
     
  25. The One

    The One Frequent Poster

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Posts:
    246
    Hi

    Sounds like not a regular choice.

    AVS is KAV without web scanner and without the PDM.
    Avast has a minor detection rate than the others but is working fast on it and has pretty well support.
    Avira has best detection rate of the three but also has a lot of False Positives.

    My vote will be for Avira. Great detection, great heuristic, great support forum.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.