AV Test certifies 17 out of 22 security suites for Windows 7

[Guest]

that's nice you posted the results of your security suites tests

but you didn't disclose if they were 32 or 64 bit security suites protection or there a combination of both
you also didn't point out if they were resource hogs
or what kind of system you ran them on to get these results

 

[Per Hansson]

We did not run the tests, the site we linked did. (This is also clearly stated in the first paragraph of the article).
If you follow the link you will see it was Win7 x86 and that there you can also sort by the performance impact to get to see who are the resource hogs (and not)

 

[captaincranky]

I was very surprised by the results of Avast vs AVG, in my mind they where reversed...
I guess I must start considering going back to recommending AVG again then...

I've used "AVG Free" for about 4 years. Never had a problem with it. In fact, not so much as a tender offer to to install malware for free.

The industry, (and individual), darlings, "Avast" and "Avira", have both failed on me.

Avira in particular, caused me to reformat my interned computer.

With that said, one of our former "gurus", insisted that I should pull it, and reinstall Avira anyway. My necessity to do this was illustrated in various colors, italic, and very bold typeface. This former "guru", was particularly, strident, forceful, obsessive-compulsive, and omniscient on this topic.

My anti-virus software gets a lot of help from other programs: Spybot SD16, CCleaner, Advanced System Care, and my favorite, "NoScript" for FF. Snug as a bug in a rug, we are.

 

[matrix86]

p51d007 said:
LOL...I thought McAfee WAS a virus

It is, lol. I tried removing it once...had to do a complete rentallation of my OS to completety remove everything. Turned out you had to download a McAfee removal tool...i now slap people when they tell me they just bought McAfee, lol.

 

[Guest]

BitDefender Internet Security 2011 is also the only one of the top three AV solutions that passes Matousec's firewall test, making it even more desirable.

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php

 

[Guest]

Regarding my previous post on BitDefender doing great in the Matousec Firewall tests, I would also like to mention that AV-Comparatives gives it an Advanced + rating with few false-positives.

http://www.av-comparatives.org/images/stories/test/ondret/avc_od_feb2011.pdf

F-Secure is also in that group.

I use and recommend MSE, but recently I've cleaned computers with Malwarebytes' Anti-malware and SuperAntiSpyware to get rid of rogue av programs which MSE failed to stop and detect.

 

[Guest]

You guys dont think weird that the test compares the free version of Avast with the paid version of AVG? i think this test was not fair to Avast. It is obviously that the paid version will be better than the free...

 

[captaincranky]

You guys dont think weird that the test compares the free version of Avast with the paid version of AVG? i think this test was not fair to Avast. It is obviously that the paid version will be better than the free...

In reality, there's probably not much reason to buy a paid version of AVG Anti-virus product by itself, or for that matter any AV only "solution".

Most free AVs ostensibly perform up to the level of their paid counterparts with respect to their success with virus only issues.

Most companies that offer Free AV, are counting on "complete internet security packages" as their profit item.

It stands to reason, if the free product doesn't perform well it its niche, then they stand little chance of stepping you up to their paid product.

Speaking to my personal experience with Avast (free). I had it installed on my son's computer, and my daughter in law managed to have it rendered useless by malware from Facebook. Avira (free), is the only* product that allowed malware into my internet computer. So, I pulled that, and went right back to AVG Free.

(*) Well, there was the trial version of "Norton 2004", which was less than useless.

 

[Arris]

Had to suffer both Sophos and now Kaspersky at work.
Kaspersky often quarantines our jabber based work chat system on some PCs and in the past has told me Lotus Notes was performing suspicious behaviour when launching IE from an emailed link. Sophos was the worst for hogging CPU and memory, causing machines to appear locked up if it launched a "background" scan.

 

[Arris]

Guest said:
You guys dont think weird that the test compares the free version of Avast with the paid version of AVG? i think this test was not fair to Avast. It is obviously that the paid version will be better than the free...

Avast recently published information that they had detected over 750,000 people using one license key.

http://www.infosecurity-magazine.co...750000-alleged-pirates-of-single-license-key/

In the original article I read (not the one linked above) Avast's makers also stated that the licensed "Pro" version only really differed by providing a sandbox feature to allow testing and troubleshooting virii/infected files. With that consideration I don't think it is particularly unfair to have tested Avast free version along with paid versions of other software.

LOL...I thought McAfee WAS a virus

Had that experience too, found it causing my gf's old laptop to run even slower than it should. Hogging resource, CPU cycles and being a royal pain to try and uninstall cleanly. Sounds very virus like to me

 

[NeoFryBoy]

What's an anti-virus program? Never used one before.

 

[Guest]

I want to know who funded the study. I also would like more details on the study. I have a HUGE, sneaky suspicion that Symantec or another "vested" interest of Symantec funded the study and left out some data. Symantec SLEEPS on the job just as bad as McAfee and its always prone to attack.

Example: I would like to know all of the details of the study. I am betting bad data was left out... OH, like Symantec making sure viruses tested were ones that Symantec could remove already.

I do my own tests all the time.. KASPERSKY and BIT DEFENDER are always more robust. Symantec, Bulldog & McAfee all sleep on the job..

Also, malwarebytes, used with Bit Defender & Kaspersky... ROCKS!

-- I.T. Professional

 

[Guest]

"AV Test, in Q2 2011, will focus on security products for Windows XP."

Why is anyone still running XP?

 

[captaincranky]

"AV Test, in Q2 2011, will focus on security products for Windows XP."

Why is anyone still running XP?

Well, because they're waiting for you to buy them a copy of Windows 7. Don't forget the hardware drivers, very important.

 

[tipstir]

Touchy subject again with AV who's the best and what works.

Layer 1
Rock soild Gig/N300 firewall router

Layer 2
All latest updates for OS + Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit SP1 FW + MSE + DEP All products + UAC + HOST MVP with own stuff

Layer 3
Chrome + Adblock + Flash block + Personal Block + Vanilla + Click & Clean + disconnect + Select out

Layer 4
Auto - ADSC Pro + Manual MAM + Manual SAS

 

[Guest]

From: Luiz L. Marins
http://luizmarins.wordpres.com

Free and Paid should be separate.