• 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

    • 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
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!