Your honest opinion towards BitDefender AV?

Discussion in 'other anti-virus software' started by corkee, Dec 2, 2006.

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

    corkee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Posts:
    9
    Hello. :]

    Honestly, what do you guys think of Bitdefender? Does it takes up a lot of resources? Does it lag your computer? I do not know much about this product and would love to. Please give your opinions here. =)

    Always,
    Corkee.
     
  2. acr1965

    acr1965 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2006
    Posts:
    4,954
    I have used the free version as a stand alone, #2 scanner and it seemed to work well in that capacity.
     
  3. corkee

    corkee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Posts:
    9
    I never tried their free version. Um, is it slow at scanning? I dislike waiting for scans that "never" seem to finish.
     
  4. ashishtx

    ashishtx Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Posts:
    389
    Location:
    Houston,Texas
    i have used it for a while and i found it be little slow especially while dealing with packed files. It also takes a long time to clean temporary files(IE cache files) while using bitdefender. Http scanner slows internet speed. Has pretty good detection rates. Just a info:-IBM has partnered with bitdefender to provide antivirus for their ISS security products-: Some installation problems may occur.It does a fairly good job however.
     
  5. corkee

    corkee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Posts:
    9
    I've installed BitDefender on my other machines and it seems to slow down the internet a bit. I just preformed a scan on the computer, lets see how long it'll take.
     
  6. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    Corkee, When you install BitDefender, it installs at default settings, Click on the AntiVirus tab, and make sure the slider is set in the middle, if you slide it up to the Agressive Setting, it will scan every packet sent by the Internet, hence the name (Bit)Defender, thats what it does, it scans every single bit of data on your computer. This is the reason for such an excesive scan time, I used it once and it scanned over 600000 files in Full System Scan Mode it scans files individually not just in groups like other AntiVirus Scanners do. Realistically BitDefender is installed with all the recomended settings, the only changes I would make are to schedualled scans, and for those I would set the program at maximum. If you have Java installed I would sugest disabling these plug-ins in your browser, and your Internet browsing speed should increase again, Java causes a few headaches with Internet Explorer 7 and also Webroot SpySweeper, hope this helps :cautious:

    Edit: BitDefender is one of the lowest resource consumers of AntiViruses,and it recieves high accolades and reviews.
     
  7. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,694
    Hello,
    It's a nice product.
    Mrk
     
  8. RejZoR

    RejZoR Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2004
    Posts:
    6,426
    I hate it's updater (even though it's not restarting itself anymore, it's still showing stupid taskbar "bars" which are super annoying). And fact that predefined actions are borked up (if you set Clean then Quarantine for identified and just Quarantine for suspicious files it will sometimes do something on it's own, leaving stuff on HDD instead moving it to Quarantine.
    Other than this, it's very nice program.
     
  9. tec505

    tec505 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Posts:
    284
    Location:
    Romulus, class M planet
    I'm using BD 10.0 buid 108. I'd been using BD AV since 9.0 ver.
    It's a great Antivirus. Very settable. Powerful heuristic: B-Have 2. Signatures continously updated.
    Very low on resources. But little slow in scanning file. A thing I do not like is GUI: others AV sw are more lovable. :thumb:

    Best Regards.
    Mike
     
  10. corkee

    corkee Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Posts:
    9
    Thanks for all your replies, I really appreciate it. =)

    Yeah, I'm not much of a fan of it's updater. I think it is really annoying and cause my machine to lag. I'm just going to finish my trial of BitDefender and see what I'll do.
     
  11. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    IMO BitDefender is pretty good. The scan speed is a bit slow but I've seen slower ones in the past. The heuristic engine is powerful, and the program itself is decent - not very light but not very heavy either.
     
  12. jlo

    jlo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    UK
    I use Bitdefender on my wifes laptop and found it to be excellent. As said before excellent heuristics, regular updates and good support.

    Cheers

    Jlo
     
  13. tec505

    tec505 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Posts:
    284
    Location:
    Romulus, class M planet
    I forget to say:

    support: simply the best.

    Mike
     
  14. JerryM

    JerryM Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2003
    Posts:
    4,221
    I rsed BDfor over a year. It gave excellent protection. It took slightly over 40 minutes to scan as compared to 32 for NOD.

    I ditched it due to the conflicts with other security programs about the time 9.5 came out.Having tried NOD, KAV, and Avira plus Avast I would not again consider BD.

    Best,
    Jerry
     
  15. EsoxLucius

    EsoxLucius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Posts:
    125
    Location:
    Bucharest, Romania
    It is a natural thing for BitDefender or other security software to have conflicts with each other.
    Most developers warn you not to use more than one active shield, scanner whatever you want to call it. Also the scanning with another software that hasn't got an active shield can enter in a conflict with an active scanner.
    Maybe some security software doesn't have a conflict with a specific another one and BitDefender has, but this thing could happen the other way round.
    I've said before that the best thing is to test your top 3,5,10 choices you have before you buy it and then make your own oppinion. There are trials everywhere.
     
  16. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    Its rather not about active scanners in general but the incompatibility between BitDefender 9.5 and Spybot S&D that has bugged many users. Personally, I don't have this problem as I trust BitDefender's antispyware performance, but regardless it did bug a lot of users because Spybot did not have any active shield of any sort which could conflict with BitDefender.

    As far as I know, BD10 has solved this issue to an extent, but still there is a bad taste left in people's mouths.
     
  17. Peak

    Peak Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Posts:
    38
    Location:
    China
    Weak in rootkit detection
     
  18. Firecat

    Firecat Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2005
    Posts:
    7,927
    Location:
    The land of no identity :D
    How do you know this? o_O
     
  19. EsoxLucius

    EsoxLucius Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Posts:
    125
    Location:
    Bucharest, Romania
    Yes, I'm curious too how did you came to the conclusion that BitDefender has a weak rootkit detection. Any testing from you? Any tests on the web?
     
  20. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    my 2 cents on the matter....

    its good software :)

    simple as that, although not the 'smoothest' at times.
     
  21. jmschwartz

    jmschwartz Guest

    I liked it, too . . . but it did cause my system to "sputter" from time to time ( Pentium w/3.0 & H/T).
     
  22. one111

    one111 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Posts:
    92
    I wouldn't go near it!
    I used to use it until it allowed a virus that destroyed my computer
    completely

    Stick with Norton or Kaspersky
     
  23. C.S.J

    C.S.J Massive Poster

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2006
    Posts:
    5,029
    Location:
    this forum is biased!
    i highly doubt this,

    plus if the virus was 'that bad' maybe you were doing something you shouldnt have.
     
  24. DVD+R

    DVD+R Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    Posts:
    1,979
    Location:
    The Antipodes
    I just switched back to BitDefender v10, I was using NOD32, NODS memory consumption was a little over 43,278k BitDefender is running smoothly and only consuming 18,146k Enough Said! :isay: and thats with HTML scanning activated too :thumb:
     
  25. The Hammer

    The Hammer Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Posts:
    5,619
    Location:
    Toronto Canada
    NOD's memory consumption shouldn't have been so high. It should be more in line with what your reporting for BitDefender. o_O
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.