[lotuseclat79]

Battle of the anti-virus: What is the best software?.

AV-Comparatives.org recently released the results of a malware removal tests with which they evaluated 16 anti-virus software solutions:

* Avast Professional Edition 4.8
* AVG Anti-Virus 8.5
* AVIRA AntiVir Premium 9.0
* BitDefender Anti-Virus 2010
* eScan Anti-Virus 10.0
* ESET NOD32 Antivirus 4.0
* F-Secure AntiVirus 2010
* G DATA AntiVirus 2010
* Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010
* Kingsoft AntiVirus 9
* McAfee VirusScan Plus 2009
* Microsoft Security Essentials 1.0
* Norman Antivirus & Anti-Spyware 7.10
* Sophos Anti-Virus 7.6
* Symantec Norton Anti-Virus 2010
* Trustport Antivirus 2009.

-- Tom

[BodyworkeR]

Thank you for pointing out this site. The information is quite useful.

[Frank4d]

Originally Posted by lotuseclat79

Battle of the anti-virus: What is the best software?.

Does this mean the issue is now settled and we won't be seeing anymore "What's the best antivirus" threads?

[SIR****TMG]

Yea Right, no more best threads. Good Read

[Cheeseball81]

Good read Tom

[SIR****TMG]

DefenseWall beats all av's

[Phantom010]

Don't mean to be negative nor sarcastic here but you won't find two similar reviews on anti-malware software. Each website has it's own opinions, sponsors..., etc. This website puts Norton on top... Please ! Looking at HijackThis logs every day here on TSG, those using Norton are just about the ones with the most infected PCs.

[BodyworkeR]

Norton users may have the most infected PCs but that probably just means Norton is the most popular scanner amongst Techguys posters. Foolish practices can overcome the best virusprotection so I wouldn't hold it against Norton that their users have the most infections.

[Rich-M]

I have to agree with Phantom. If you read the industry standard which is VB100, there really are no tests against each other simply whether or not the the software passes standards and I clean pc's for a living and most of what I see are Norton, Macafee, pc Cillan, Avg and Avast on pc's still working while little else does. I have never seen a pc destroyed that had Nod32, Kaspersky or Bit Defender installed. I always wonder who is payuing for these studies and whether or not they began with a preconceived impression of best and worst. These companies mostly share information so the ability to spot virus is somewhat the same, it's their methods that stand out and make the three very different in my eyes.
No question it is had to compare overall use as the skilled user could use the worst program and remain clear of issues.

[Noyb]

If I read this correctly ..
This was a comparison of the ability to remove a virus once infected.
I thought the purpose of AV was to prevent becoming infected ??

[jack8]

Thanks for the link an interesting article.

[Rich-M]

Originally Posted by Noyb

If I read this correctly ..
This was a comparison of the ability to remove a virus once infected.
I thought the purpose of AV was to prevent becoming infected ??

Yes precisely as that is where the greatest difference occurs IMHO!

[Phantom010]

Originally Posted by Noyb

If I read this correctly ..
This was a comparison of the ability to remove a virus once infected.
I thought the purpose of AV was to prevent becoming infected ??

That's the most important thing in my opinion, you said it!!! That's where we can see the real performers in action... Unfortunately, the ones on "top of the list" for malware removal don't necessarily do good to stop malware at the gate, where it counts...

So, when looking at the HijackThis log of an infected PC using Norton, I can't help but wonder why the hell did Norton let the malware go by without warning!?! So far, this hasn't happened to me with ESET's NOD32. But of course, I do practice safe browsing too...

[Noyb]

I never worry about Removal.
With the proper backup procedures, an external HD and Acronis ..
I can recover my computer back to a fully loaded, mostly updated, Fresh install ..
in less time than one can scan for a virus.

This will fix anything .. except a root kit in the BIOS.

[ComfortGroup_IT]

Originally Posted by Noyb

If I read this correctly ..
This was a comparison of the ability to remove a virus once infected.
I thought the purpose of AV was to prevent becoming infected ??

Incorrect, it was a comparison of the ability to remove malware once infected, not a virus.

And the reason none scored "Very Good" was that they don't focus on malware (sure they have built in malware tools) they focus on Viruses (hince the reason they are Anti-Virus software, not Anti Malware software).

For Malware, I prefer Malwarebytes (and if they tested it, it probably would have gotten a "very good"), but try running a test on Virus prevention on Spybot S&D, Malwarebytes, ect and they won't score very high because that isn't their focus.

I'm sure everyone here would want one program that does everything very good (malware detection, malware removal, virus prevention, virus removal, popup blocking, spam filtering, ad removal, ect. The problem is, you will never find one, so let Anti-Virus programs do what they are designed to and use anti-malware programs for your malware problems.