a different "best" question

[badgolferman]

I read on this group a lot about how Kaspersky and NOD32 or even
Bitdefender are the chosen AV products that stand above the rest.
However I have only seen one site that provides actual test data and
gives numbers that can be read to see how these AVs compare to others.
That site of course is http://www.av-comparatives.org/ although I
assume there are others around that you all know about.

If I look at the latest data on that site it seems there are better
choices than those mentioned above, at least in the on-demand test.

Other than affect on system resources, what criteria do you use to
determine what is the "best" anti-virus package?

 

[Art]

I read on this group a lot about how Kaspersky and NOD32 or even
Bitdefender are the chosen AV products that stand above the rest.
However I have only seen one site that provides actual test data and
gives numbers that can be read to see how these AVs compare to others.
That site of course is http://www.av-comparatives.org/ although I
assume there are others around that you all know about.

If I look at the latest data on that site it seems there are better
choices than those mentioned above, at least in the on-demand test.

Both AVK and F-Secure use the Kaspersky scan engine in multple scan
engine schemes. They have heavier footprints than KAV alone, for one
thing. They also tend to make more of a performance hit, and scanning
is slower. Some of us think it's not worth the penalties for a
miniscule increase in detection rates over KAV alone. Oddly enough, I
remember comparatives at the uni Hamburg VTC where F-Secure actually
had slightly lower detection rates than KAV alone even though it
used the KAV engine in addition to other scan engines.

Other than affect on system resources, what criteria do you use to
determine what is the "best" anti-virus package?

Lack of bloat, lack of serious reported problems, scan speed, a decent
GUI, a good updating scheme, and powerful detection capabilities.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg

 

[optikl]

I read on this group a lot about how Kaspersky and NOD32 or even
Bitdefender are the chosen AV products that stand above the rest.
However I have only seen one site that provides actual test data and
gives numbers that can be read to see how these AVs compare to others.
That site of course is http://www.av-comparatives.org/ although I
assume there are others around that you all know about.

If I look at the latest data on that site it seems there are better
choices than those mentioned above, at least in the on-demand test.

Other than affect on system resources, what criteria do you use to
determine what is the "best" anti-virus package?

You have to be careful not to just look at one instance, but at how
well a product performs over time. KAV and NOD tend to be at the top of
most all comparative lists, when viewed over time. What does this mean
to you? Consistent quality of product and dedication to customer
satisfaction. Of course, if you don't need that type of quality
detection, then it's not to your benefit.

 

[Art]

Lack of bloat, lack of serious reported problems, scan speed, a decent
GUI, a good updating scheme, and powerful detection capabilities.

I forgot to mention fast releases of updates for newly dsicovered
malware, and scan engine heuristic capabilities (for detection of
"unkown" malware). Both, of course relate to the issue of new and/or
previously "unknown" malware. Insofar as the two most recommended
products here, Kaspersky is noted for its fast reactions to newly
doscoved malware, and NOD32 is noted for its excellent heuristics (and
light footprint and scan speed).

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg