Sunbeltblog comments
As much as I respect other AV companies and also do recommend them when someone asks for payware, but I have to say I find it very impressive that AntiVir is always ranked in top 5 AV programmes and offers a free version. I am a firm believer that these tests and the fact that you are provided with a free programme, will lead many users to fork out an extra 20 Euros to buy the payware version in the long run.
Keep up the good work my fellow Germans 
.
Thanks. But that is a very hard chart to read. Any chance of some grids or something?
Can you link to something without PDF files, my computer crashes when it tries to read them.
I'll put up the Excel spreadsheets.
Sounds good.
These are all file level real-time scanners, is that right? Have you done the same tests for e-mail antivirus applications/agents?
Is this only for client software, or does it also include email AV software and gateways?
William, Rod,
There are a couple of gateway scanners in there. But these are engines that cover AV for both email and otherwise.
Alex
Well, it turns out the version of Adobe was out of date and had issues with Vista.
Great Work!
I was glad to see BitDefender do better than I thought it would.
Ive heard complaints from users lately about BitDefender being a resource hog.
Im using it on Vista right now with no problems.
Hi,
our test was indeed focussed on desktop/retail products this time. However, we did include Fortinet (FortiGate) and WebWasher (by Secure Computing), too, even if these products cannot be directly compared with the others.
cheers,
Andreas Marx
CEO, AV-Test.org
mommi
I am a common individual PC user. I had tested the Norman Security Suite ver 7.0 and found it highly satisfactory as compared to earlier experience with other products among your top 10 rating. I am currently using the Norman Virus Control v5.9 and love its hassles free application.
Lately, I came across with two interesting press release reporting the test findings from PC World Magazine Norway (dtd Nov20/07) and ITpro.no (dtd Jan 14/0
. Both rated Norman as Best in Test. However, your test results had placed Norman in just an 'above average' position.
I would like to be enlightened of the difference in the evaluation. I am confused. Thank you.
Hi All
Hi Charlie C
This is the only truth behind all the punch and judy. Tests do not show the same results, sometimes they even alternate a lot more. If people would make up their minds, they would probably start to disbelieve. Do that and you do not only get back some more freedom, you also start to be safer in the internet.
In fact the test reflects 1 Mio samples collected over the last six month. That would mean, the persons behind did collect an overwhelming 5500 new malicious codes (viruses, trojans, rootkits etc.) in 180 days.
Enjoying these numbers, I wonder why my computer still works?
Have fun out there!
Presshead
Presshead, there were over 5 million unique malware variants last year. Doesn't mean 5 million new pieces of malware. But plenty of variants.
Good assessment ... But won't the quality of a good antivirus also include stability and low footprint. Unfortunately these results say nothing about these two parameters. It would be great if these are included in future tests. Also the list is kind of difficult to understand in case you want to analyze say the top 3 antiviruses. It would be awesome if the testers sort the antiviruses based on overall performance and sort the list accordingly.
Hi Alex,
5 Mil / 365days about 13698 variants each day
before we had 5500 / 180 days about 30,5 variants each day.
What now?
Cheers, Presshead
Rishi, you're right. There are other tests that have been done that address those types of concerns.
In the end, though, it comes down to real-world testing -- downloading all the trial versions and really running through them.
Many thanks to Andreas Marx for providing this very valuable service. I would find it even more helpful if, along with the rating on how well the product protects your PC, there were also some scores in terms of how significantly it loads your system down and stability, as Rishi pointed out.
I have this mental image of AV software. For any of you that have seen the movie "A Christmas Story" (better known as "Red Rider BB Gun") there is one scene where the little brother is being bundled up by his mother before going out to play in the snow. She puts him in several sweaters, a jacket, some kind of full-body snow suit, a hat, a hood, and one or two scarves. He ends up with so much clothing on that he can't put his arms down to his side. When he goes outside, he falls down in the snow after a few minutes and can't get up again because his mobility is so constrained by his "protective" clothing.
That's how it is with AV software. You may be protected, but at what price in terms of performance? I imagine the AV software itself as a sort of intrusive virus that spreads itself into every registry key, directory, nook, and cranny of my PC and I keep thinking "there must be a product that optimizes the balance between protection and performance degradation."
As such, these reviews would be absolutely perfect if that additional information were added. I realize it is somewhat subjective, and highly dependent on system configuration, but a relative figure of merit, such as the ++, +, 0, etc. scores would really be helpful. I have a sense that the security suite I am currently using but hate (Norton Internet Security 2007) would score a -- with regard to performance degradation, and a ----- in terms of technical support. The Norton answer to most everything is to reinstall the software, reboot, or reload the operating system. All delivered from someone in India that claims they have "...never heard of that problem before" when you know full well that thousands of people are having the problem, as can be ascertained by a simple Google search.
As a result of Andreas Marx's test results, I am switching to AntiVir. We'll see how much it impacts my system performance. Hopefully, with the removal of NIS 2007, performance will increase under AntiVir.
Thanks. But that is a very hard chart to read
sameh, try this:
http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/...ts-
from_23.html
Thanks. But realy that is a very hard chart to read
Commenting by HaloScan
