Avast or Bitdefender?

[David R]

I run XP. I want to swap my AntiVir for another antivirus package.

I don't want to try AVG 7 just yet so I am down to a choice of either
Avast or Bitdefender.

Which is the better of these two?

 

[Russ]

I run XP. I want to swap my AntiVirus for another antivirus package.

I don't want to try AVG 7 just yet so I am down to a choice of either
Avast or Bitdefender.

Which is the better of these two?

--
I used Avast! and presently use a Linux version of BitDefender that also
checks my complete XP environment even though the are totally separated
except for the boot sector on C. I know it will find a virus on both since
I have the Ecair Test virus installed on both OS's.

I have used Avast and had no problems with it in a Win ME environment.

Russ

 

[Frank Slootweg]

Which is the better of these two?

I can not compare, because, besides avast!, I have only used Norton
AntiVirus 2002, but I'm a happy avast! user since well over a year (15
months). Never got an infection. (I *did* get infected while still using
NAV2002, but that was a very recent virus (W32.Blaster.Worm, discovered
on August 11, 2003 and infected on August 12), so I wast just unlucky.)

 

[badgolferman]

I run XP. I want to swap my AntiVir for another antivirus package.

I don't want to try AVG 7 just yet so I am down to a choice of either
Avast or Bitdefender.

Which is the better of these two?

I was under the impression Bitdefender lacks a real-time scanner. If
this is true, would that make the choice easier?

 

[Peter Seiler]

David R - 07.12.2004 18:30 :

I run XP. I want to swap my AntiVir for another antivirus package.

I don't want to try AVG 7 just yet so I am down to a choice of either
Avast or Bitdefender.

Which is the better of these two?

after some experiences with other programs (AVG, AntiVir etc. too) I
decided for BitDefender (actually using vers. 8 Pro). I'm very happy
with this for several individual reasons: updates daily (sometimes
several a day even on weekends), no such (technical?) update problems as
discribed for some other programs - see the postings!, firewall
features, no problem working together with Netscape-browser/Client
email-scan, perfect service etc. etc..

 

[Ian Kenefick]

I was under the impression Bitdefender lacks a real-time scanner

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

 

[badgolferman]

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

I was referring to Bitdefender Free version.
http://www.bitdefender.com/bd/site/products.php?p_id=24#
Is that what you are talking about? Regards to you too, Ian.

 

[xmp]

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

this thread was multi-posted (not cross-posted) to the freeware group.
TTBOMK Bitdefender 7 free version lacks a resident scanner, and serves
only as an on-demand scanner. obviously the paid versions of
Bitdefender have a resident scanner.

i like Bitdefender but i'm not sure how well it does in comparative
testing. $30 for AV, or $40 for AV + FW as i recall. pretty cheap.

michael

 

[Bashar]

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

Ian, I beleive he is referring to the fact that Bitdefender Free Edition V7
is an on-demand scanner as opposed to AVG, for example, that has a Resident
Sheild which mitigates infections "real-time". Am I mistaken?

Bashar

 

[optikl]

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

I think he may be referring to the freeware version. Isn't that just on
demand scanning?
http://www.bitdefender.com/bd/site/products.php?p_id=24#

My, you're in a polite ****ing mood today.

 

[blkjak]

What the **** are you talking about?. Bitdefender _has_ a real time
scanner..... Are you sure you know what you are talking about?

Regards,
Ian Kenefick
http://www.IK-CS.com

Nice tone Ian Kenotfuck

blkjak

 

[Max M.Wachtel III]

I run XP. I want to swap my AntiVir for another antivirus package.

I don't want to try AVG 7 just yet so I am down to a choice of either
Avast or Bitdefender.

Which is the better of these two?

I have been using avast for over a year also and have had no infections.
The latest build has some new features,"Network Shield",better package
scanning and easier mail setup.And they have a good forum for support.
-max

--
Keeping Windows Clean: http://www.geocities.com/maxpro4u/madmax.html
Virus Cleaning+Fixes: http://www.geocities.com/maxpro4u/TechPros
Change nomail.afraid.org to neo.rr.com so you can reply by e-mail
(nomail.afraid.org has been set up specifically for
use in Usenet. Feel free to use it yourself.)

 

[Thagor]

I have been using avast for over a year also and have had no infections.
The latest build has some new features,"Network Shield",better package
scanning and easier mail setup.And they have a good forum for support.
-max

For what it is worth, I had AVG for years then got a virus because the
update servers weren't working for several days. When I did finally get
the update, AVG promptly identified the virus and removed it. I then
dumped AVG and loaded Avast and it immediately found 2 more viri. Avast
has since saved my hide several times. I will not recommend AVG under any
circumstances. Other than that, they are both fine products.

 

[Rick M.]

I can not compare, because, besides avast!, I have only used Norton
AntiVirus 2002, but I'm a happy avast! user since well over a year (15
months). Never got an infection. (I *did* get infected while still using
NAV2002, but that was a very recent virus (W32.Blaster.Worm, discovered
on August 11, 2003 and infected on August 12), so I wast just unlucky.)

A worm that is detected *before* it infects you, and *still* infects you
a day later? That's a tricky worm indeed!

(sorry, just couldn't resist)

-Rick

 

[Frank Slootweg]

A worm that is detected *before* it infects you, and *still* infects you
a day later? That's a tricky worm indeed!

(sorry, just couldn't resist)

I didn't say "detected", I said "discovered" [1]! I think you assume
that *I* discovered/detected it (on August 11). Of course I didn't (If I
did, I wouldn't have gotten infected, would I?). (Of course,) Symantec
did. That is why I said "but that was a very recent virus". A simple
check on the Symantec site [1] would have confirmed that.

So I assume that it wasn't so funny after all.

[1] "discovered" is the term Symantec uses [1] and hence I used that
term:
http://securityresponse.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/w32.blaster.worm.html
"W32.Blaster.Worm
Discovered on: August 11, 2003
Last Updated on: February 26, 2004 11:37:19 AM"

 

[Theo]

A worm that is detected *before* it infects you, and *still* infects you
a day later? That's a tricky worm indeed!

(sorry, just couldn't resist)

I sent those guys a new variant of some worm they hadnt seen yet (so they
told me). Took Symantec about 2 weeks before one of their multiple updates
actually detected it, despite the email that they told me that the next
update would include it. However the online bitdefender scan found it as
soon as I ran it. My opinion of NAV dropped considerably after that ;o)