• 0

Your favourite Antivirus?


  

2295 members have voted

  1. 1. Your favourite Antivirus?

    • Avast!
      193
    • AVG
      306
    • BitDefender
      42
    • Kaspersky
      261
    • McAfee
      154
    • NOD32
      633
    • Norton/Symantec
      435
    • Panda
      29
    • Trend Micro
      81
    • Other
      161


Question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Switched to BitDefender... Very good protection, BitDefender is second best after Kaspersky. NOD32 is nice but not so good as everyone lets you think it is...

Personally I would rate the engines like this:

1) Kaspersky

2) BitDefender

3) McAfee

4) NOD32

... ... ...

Ofcource the NOD32 fanboys will say NOD is the best, it't good but defenitly not the best! But people should just use what they like, it's personal preference... I won't recommend Symantec tho (also not corporate) because it has slow updates to big threats (like MyTOB now)...

  • 0
Switched to BitDefender... Very good protection, BitDefender is second best after Kaspersky. NOD32 is nice but not so good as everyone lets you think it is...

Personally I would rate the engines like this:

1) Kaspersky

2) BitDefender

3) McAfee

4) NOD32

... ... ...

Ofcource the NOD32 fanboys will say NOD is the best, it't good but defenitly not the best! But people should just use what they like, it's personal preference... I won't recommend Symantec tho (also not corporate) because it has slow updates to big threats (like MyTOB now)...

586018665[/snapback]

You have and opinion, it is however not based on facts.

Check this list out and then compare to the products on your list.

NOD32 - Result summary: 31 passes / 3 fails

McAfee - Result summary: 19 passes / 18 fails

BitDefender - Result summary: 7 passes / 6 fails

Kaspersky - Result summary: 26 passes / 13 fails

  • 0
You have and opinion, it is however not based on facts.

Check this list out and then compare to the products on your list.

NOD32 - Result summary: 31 passes / 3 fails

McAfee - Result summary: 19 passes / 18 fails

BitDefender - Result summary: 7 passes / 6 fails

Kaspersky - Result summary: 26 passes / 13 fails

586022685[/snapback]

Actually, if he was rating on overall protection, NOD32 wouldn't be first at all. NOD32 is a little weak with scripts, and good, not great trojan protection.

They are extremely good with ITW malware however as shown by the VB100% (what most normal users get). And the heuristics are something to be wrecken with (but will decrease as it gets more popular due to pre-checking).

I wouldn't say KAV, BitDefender, and McAfee have better engines. It would really more be like they have a better signature databases, which usually puts them above NOD32 on large malware tests with exotic code.

  • 0
You have and opinion, it is however not based on facts.

Check this list out and then compare to the products on your list.

NOD32 - Result summary: 31 passes / 3 fails

McAfee - Result summary: 19 passes / 18 fails

BitDefender - Result summary: 7 passes / 6 fails

Kaspersky - Result summary: 26 passes / 13 fails

586022685[/snapback]

Well it's based on facts, vb100 does not cover a full product test. It only included viruses, but the biggest risk now a days are Trojans, backdoors ect ect.

If you don't believe my ratings I would like to invite you at the wildersecurity forums to find it out yourself, and have a look here http://www.av-comparatives.org/

(note that BitDefender almost doubled their signature database since the last test, and now seems the best after Kaspersky in on-demand scan results)

  • 0

I'm glad to see BitDefender mentioned at last, it's unknown to many - but I've tried just about all AV products, and BitDefender is the most impressive for low oveheads and ease of use.

The fact that BitDefender comes as a complete package (Anti Spam, Firewall and AV) appeals to me too.

  • 0

McAfee

I only used Norton and that one was too slowwwwwwwwwwww

I tried Grisoft and another free AV--I couldn't download them successfully

When I saw on Hotmail that Microsoft used McAfee to detect virus, I thought McAfee was something only Microsoft used.

Now I am using McAfee, it turns down its auto-protect function automatically from time to time...But it does work for me.

Chances are ANY AV software will work for me. I might be like Microsoft: I don't care about security or virus or adwares. As long as my PC is still usable and my docs are not deleted I won't consider that problem.

PS: Earlier this year the most pretty girl in my class asked me to mix some tracks for her and... I didn't have AV that time and her flash disk was infected with obvious virus. That's when I got a McAfee. I also gave her the McAfee 8.0 to kill her virus but..she hasn't been able to know how to use it. Does pretty girls have to be a bit dumber!?

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!