Why F-Secure is not better than KAV?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by AGD, Apr 26, 2005.

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

    AGD Guest

    F-Secure uses 3 engines, incluiding the AVP engine...so why F-Secure AV 2005 isn´t better than Kaspersky 4.5 or 5?
     
  2. no13

    no13 Retired Major Resident Nutcase

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Wouldn't YOU like to know?
    1. heavier
    2. slower on scanning [real time or on demand]
    3. updates are AT LEAST 3 hours AFTER kaspersky Labs

    at least that's what I've experienced...

    advantages of f-secure...
    1. as you said... three engines mean more comprehensive
    2. I think price advantage over Pro version
    3. UI is more configurable, If i remember right
     
  3. tazdevl

    tazdevl Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Posts:
    837
    Location:
    AZ, USA
    The crux of the problem is that F-Secure's detection rates with 3 engines are no better than Kaspersky's single engine solution. Why have that drag on your system if there is no incremental gain. F-Secure's product is a niche play to the highly paranoid.


    The way I look at it, if I have to wear a diaper, I'd rather just wear 1 good diaper than 1 good and 2 OK ones. All that added protection just makes it more difficult to move about. :D
     
  4. no13

    no13 Retired Major Resident Nutcase

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Wouldn't YOU like to know?
    I actually have two.
     
  5. no13

    no13 Retired Major Resident Nutcase

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Posts:
    1,327
    Location:
    Wouldn't YOU like to know?
    AV's I mean ;) ;)
     
  6. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Well F-Secure's updates are slower, and the two extra engines dont add much extra clout to its detection (instead they just hog resources :()

    But F-Secure does do better than KAV in some rare cases :)
     
  7. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,047
    ROFL. The mental imagery of that is hilarious. :D
     
  8. AGD

    AGD Guest

    Ok, I think I´ll stay with NOD32 2.5.7 Beta + KAV Personal PRO 4.5 (on demand)
     
  9. tuatara

    tuatara Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2004
    Posts:
    772
    Is there nobody who runs Pampers +4 years and 15KG then ?

    :D
     
  10. gerardwil

    gerardwil Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2004
    Posts:
    4,748
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    Anyone has any clue to why some AV vendors use several engines? I am sure that's not only for fun reasons and/or try to slow down systems.
    Regards,

    Gerard

    P.S. I remember some AV testing regarding 2 seperate AV apps. running together and some AV apps. using 2 engines. They did an excellent job comparing single engine AV apps.
     
  11. Nika

    Nika Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2005
    Posts:
    27
    f-secur killr function is in big network. good mangment an corporat suport :)
     
  12. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    And F-Secure has a bigger partner base than Kaspersky itself :)
     
  13. Tinribs

    Tinribs Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2002
    Posts:
    734
    Location:
    England
    I personally would go with just Kav.

    Most would agree it is THE best detection engine available.

    Now if a program says it includes orion,bitdefender,avg and avast would it make it better? of course not, the inclusion of lesser equipped and lesser quality scanners makes a mockery of multi scanner products.

    If Ferrari said it used ford,vauxhall and skoda parts in its engine would you suddenly jump for joyo_O?


    :)
    Kev
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.