Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Software for Windows' started by berryracer, Nov 9, 2012.
I can't seem to find MS security essentials in there.
NOD32 is the best hands down
Norton is noticably absent as we'll.
Also, after reading these charts, I still can't fathom why anyone with common sense bothers to pay for AV when AVG and Avast perform so well.
I use that together with Malwarebytes Anti-Malware.
Symantec/Norton products are the actual virus themselves. MS Sec. Essentials and Super AntiSpyware works great on Win 7/8. No need to pay subscription fees.
Because MSE is not an antivirus. It is an upgraded version of the crappy Windows Defender
Here is a test about MSE by another Virus Testing Company:
I have said it many times but noone believes, MSE is one of the worst antivirus programs out there! Yes it is light on resources but it sucks big time in protection!
I have had 2 viruses crawl twice on to my system even though I am a safe user. Furthermore, it sucks in deleting any threats
AV-TEST - The Independent IT-Security Institute: Jul/Aug 2012
Symantec refuses to enter in any of these Virus Tests since ages
Hmmm, I wonder why :whiste:
Me Either. I use it. Dumped others.
I use MSE and Malwarebytes but if someone I know wants to pay for anti-virus for whatever reason I always tell them Kapersky. Good to see it holds up well.
Norton is still tested by others. Here is AV Tests latest: http://www.av-test.org/no_cache/en/tests/test-reports/?tx_avtestreports_pi1[report_no]=122694
This one puts Kapersky and Norton on par with AAA rating. And Bitdefender next at AA. Avast is not tested but AVG paid program gets a C. http://www.dennistechnologylabs.com/reports/s/a-m/2012/DTL_2012_Q3_Home.pdf
Is Kapersky hard on resources?
Kaspersky Internet Security is, But the AntiVirus is very light
I use KAV and its very light and effective
looks like my McAfee sucks by those test
-but I have no issues with it ,never had a false positive that I know of. never had to shut it down for any software loads , no issues with any games.
-but the av is only half the package as they don't rate the firewall that comes with it,
- and I put more value on data leaving my machine than having a trashed os.[have backups]
-also once a monthish I get software updates ,
-and definitions usually once a day , it'll wait till I shut down a game -download then notify me.
-so it might not be the best , but I have no reason to change at this point.
-norton back in 2000ish had to start in safe mode once a month and uninstall it ,before I could boot to the os. LOL
not surprised. the company i work for sells symantec heavily. i hate the everloving hell out of it. we run into a major sep manager issue pretty much every month at one customer or another, and ive lost count of how many customers want to know why theyre paying for AV software when they keep getting infected
/some of them click the shiny buttons, but not all of them
there we go! another live proof! thanks for sharing that info! even though you work for a company that sells their products, you are actually honest about them!
What do you personally run?
If you use the dropdown menu, you'll see that Symantec was there for the last 2 year (2011, 2010) and ranked in the top three. I don't/won't use a paid AV myself anymore, but don't think it's fair to say they suck either. Years ago, Norton was a HUGE resource hog, dragging down any computer. Not sure if that's the case anymore, but one tag I think they will always be stuck with.
Non-enthusiasts continue to pay for AV, often Norton. Simply because it comes on the computer and they have "heard of them".
MSE. but i dont really engage is risky browsing behaviors so the risk of my machine getting infected is pretty low.
i liked the mcafee console better when I used that at my last job (sort of), but the agents had a LOT of issues and ate up a huge amount of resources when running a scan.
norton may have been a huge hog, we dont really use it, we stick to symantec endpoint protection which doesn't seem to take up that many resources. we sell norton to home customers for some reason but i dont really do much support for those. id rather see us sell symantec cloud since we order media for norton (no, i dont know why, its 2012 and my company is full of idiots). would make more sense for the company since they could manage subscriptions for customers and just shoot an email link to download a client but eh...whatever. im not going to suggest it because i dont want to have to manage it
These tests are run on samples that are old, when you conduct these tests with malware that is new detection rates drop drastically, down to around 30% for stuff less than a week old. So my concern with AV is its behavior based detection, and unfortunately a lot of the big names have taken the "install and forget it" approach. They don't inform the user of possibly malicious activity because they might accidentally block something benign and useful.
Of course, I don't download crap or visit shady websites or run Java or keep out of date stuff, so I'm not concerned that much. But for those that aren't very careful, I hate to see so many people run AV that's just not sufficient.