• 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

cold14: I would suggest something that can protect against changes to your registry instead of another antivirus running. A program such as "RegDefend" would protect those important Registry files from being modified. I'd stick with NOD32 and A-Squared combo though. You could try BitDefender as an on demand scanner along with NOD32... Hope that helps!

Something called Sand Boxie ( believe thats what its called), is another barrier of defense, to protect from infection.

  • 0

i used to not have one, then i used avast!, then went anti-virus-less for awhile again, then went to kaspersky, which i really liked, but decided to take a chance on nod32 since everybody seems to like it. i like kaspersky's menu layouts better, but nod32 looks pretty cool so far.

  • 0

After some test on antivirus

-avast!

-norton/symantec

-mcafee

-nod32

-panda

I realized that Nod32 was doing a great job without a lot of problem

but like everyone know viruses can be modificated to be undetectable and nod32 still kick ass :D

for all the others here some result

avast! = detect some viruses but take too much memory

norton = bull**** :blink:

mcafee = same old crap :blink:

nod32 = KICK ASS

panda = problem with firewall and viruses stay on computer

avg = not the worst not the best

NjOi

  • 0

I mean does anyone prefer one. There is absolutely no need to protect our systems from viruses. They do no harm, and won't cost us a dime if they do anything. But we like the style of them, and thats why we have them.

-----

(Sarcasm) - the effect doesn't transfer too good into text. :(

  • 0

I prefer to not use any type of AV on my system, but my school requires McAfee for access to the internet.

And they provide it right? McAfee VS 8.0i Enterprise? VS Enterprise is pretty good. The only AV to stop the WMF exploit without an update due to its Buffer overflow protection.

McAfee actually has one of the top three databases (of course, they have crap programmers for consumer retail division though).

I'm surprised AVG is so high, it didn't detect over 100 variants of malware utilizing the WMF exploit in the first 48-72 hours, while almost everyone else did.

  • 0

Here are the December 2005 Comparative AntiVirus Testing results from Virus.gr. Here is the direct link. Enjoy! :)

Rank

1. Kaspersky Personal Pro version 5.0.390- 99.46%

Kaspersky 2006 beta version 6.0.15.222- 99.46%

2. F-Secure 2006 version 6.10.330 - 96.92%

3. CyberScrub version 1.0 - 96.62%

4. eScan Virus Control version 2.6.522.9 - 95.21%

5. McAfee version 10.0.27 - 94.80%

6. BitDefender version 9 - 90.75%

7. Nod32 version 2.50.41 - 88.79%

8. AntiVir Personal version 6.32.00.51 - 86.55%

9. MKS_VIR 2005 - 86.16%

10. Norton Professional version 2006 - 85.17%

11. F-Prot version 3.16d - 84.96%

12. Dr. Web version 4.33 - 84.68%

13. Panda Titanium 2006 version 5.01.00 - 82.02%

14. Virus Chaser version 5.0a - 79.37%

15. AVG version 7.1.371 - 77.97%

16. PC-Cillin 2006 version 14.00.1341 - 77.84%

17. Avast version 4.6.744 - 76.93%

18. BullGuard version 6 - 74.02%

19. UNA version 1.83 - 69.83%

20. Norman version 5.83.07 - 69.13%

21. Sophos Sweep version 3.99 - 67.76%

22. VBA32 version 3.10.5 - 63.36%

23. Zondex Guard version 5.3.3 - 56.81%

24. Vexira 2005 version 5.001.32 - 51.62%

25. ClamWin version 0.87.1 - 48.45%

26. E-Trust version 7.0.6.7 - 47.84%

27. ZoneAlarm with VET Antivirus έκδοση 6.1.737.000 - 47.70%

28. Digital Patrol version 5.00.08 - 47.02%

29. Ewido version 3.5 - 46.31%

30. V3Pro 2004 - 44.16%

31. Solo 4.0 version 3.1.0 - 42.45%

32. Fire version 2.7 - 38.38%

33. Protector Plus version 7.2.H01 - 38.06%

34. A Squared Personal version 1.6 - 35.31%

35. Quick Heal version 8.00 - 33.76%

36. ViRobot Expert version 4.0 - 32.37%

37. AntiTrojan Shield version 2.1.0.14 - 26.45%

38. PC Door Guard version 4.2.0.35- 26.05%

39. Trojan Hunter version 4.2.908 - 11.53%

40. VirIT version 5.2.53 - 10.33%

41. Tauscan version 1.70.1414 - 7.21%

42. Trojan Remover version 6.4.4 - 7.19%

43. The Cleaner version 4.1.42.52 - 5.97%

44. CounterSpy version 1.5.82 - 5.87%

45. SpySweeper version 4.5.7.642 - 2.99%

46. IP Armor version 5.46.0703 - 2.46%

47. Hacker Eliminator version 1.2 - 1.77%

48. Spyware Doctor version 3.2.2.453 - 1.55%

49. Abacre 1.3 - 0.00%

50. SpyHunter 2.0 - 0.00%

I'm pretty pleased with AntiVir's results. Not bad for a free solution! :)

  • 0

PCWorld magazine have just run a Anti-Virus test for the March 2006 edition of the magazine.

The results are almost perfect to what I've found myself (I've done my own testing as I install AV software on a lot of machines for clients), and at last BitDefender is at the top (a product I've used personally for a couple of years now).

http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,124475,00.asp

Note: if you buy the pro version of BitDefender then you don't need Firewall & Spyware software because it does it all, so not only is it the slimest AV product for overheads, but it's a firewall and spyware killer too!

  • 0

Currently, I'm using Norton Internet Security 2006. The only reason I'm using it is because it has a 'Parental Control' function which filters inappropriate web sites. Besides NIS 2006, which softwares offer the same function? Thanks. :)

PS: I'm trying to get rid of NIS because it slows down my computer and my surfing speed. I'm thinking of installing avast! Home Edition and ZoneAlarm. Is it a good combo? Of course, I still need the web filtering software but couldn't think of any alternatives.

Edited by ps89
  • 0

Currently, I'm using Norton Internet Security 2006. The only reason I'm using it is because it has a 'Parental Control' function which filters inappropriate web sites. Besides NIS 2006, which softwares offer the same function? Thanks. :)

PS: I'm trying to get rid of NIS because it slows down my computer and my surfing speed. I'm thinking of installing avast! Home Edition and ZoneAlarm. Is it a good combo? Of course, I still need the web filtering software but couldn't think of any alternatives.

have a look at BitDefender Internet Secuirty, it does all of that, but a lot better than any other product and very little memory (certainly less than Norton).

plus, it's the top rated product these days (see my post a few further up from here).

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
    • I'm not sure how old the school is, but they've been doing this since GTA 3. Back in those days we'd be lucky for game companies to release on the PC at all. And with the current state of Sony (or Microsoft) their gaming wing won't be getting a penny from me.
    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation 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.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
  • Recent Achievements

    • 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
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!