Anti-Virus Basics
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: 2009, antivirus, test | Themes: Software
- 1. One-Stop Comparison for 14 Anti-Virus Titles
- 2. Anti-Virus Basics
- 3. Comodo Internet Security v3.8: The Newbie
- 4. Avira Antivir Personal Free Edition v9.0.0386: The Best of the Freebies
- 5. Clamwin Free Antivirus 0.94.1: Open Source Protection Software
- 6. Avast! 4.8 Home Edition Free: The Classic
- 7. BitDefender Total Security 2009: A Balanced Choice
- 8. F-Secure Internet Security 2009: A Disappointment
- 9. Trend Micro PC-Cillin Internet Security Pro 2009: A Reasonable Option
- 10. McAfee Internet Security 2009: Very Complete
- 11. Norton Antivirus 2009: The Choice For Ease and Simplicity
- 12. Panda Global Protection 2009: An Outsider Who’s Left In The Dust
- 13. G-Data Total Care 2009: The Heavy Weight Of Security
- 14. ESET Smart Security 4 (Nod32 Antivirus 4): A Positive Evolution
- 15. Kaspersky Antivirus 2009: A Half-Colored Version
- 16. AVG Internet Security v8.5 (paid version): An Insufficient Evolution of What You Can Get For Free
- 17. The Verdict
- 18. The Test Protocol
- 19. More on this topic
2. Anti-Virus Basics
You first have to remember that all of the different threats that are often lumped together under the common term of “virus” are constantly changing and evolving. This is why, rather than comparing the threat databases that are indexed in each system, we’ve chosen to look at the quality of their respective modes of detection. It is the capacity of the program to detect a threat according to its own code, signature, or behavior that we have chosen to evaluate.
Secondly, the quality of software is not limited by its own power. What’s the point of having a killer program that’s too complex for the average person to use correctly or that slows down or freezes up other programs? The only other parameters taken into account in this article are the price of each brand of software, how easy it is to use, and the amount of memory it takes up on your computer.
One final thing that you should know: while testing and writing about these anti-virus systems, we took into account the fact that while certain offerings that we tested are free, commercial versions of anti-virus software generally offer a supplementary series of security tools. Thus, a paid-for system will get a higher score than those that you can get for free because of the added benefit of the additional tools provided.
Relation Between Protection and Price
Our comparison puts an emphasis on the link between the protection you get and the price you pay. If you have other, more specific needs, it is possible that our conclusions won’t necessarily correspond with your particular case. For example, if you have a machine that’s more than three years old that you don’t use for anything except for word processing and email, you’ll need to get anti-virus software that’s better geared for those applications. In short, this article is intended to help you to make your choice according to your needs.
One final note: we weren’t able to get review copies of the latest versions of some of the commercial products in time for our tests, so for some of the reviews, we had to make do with the trial versions that were available on the manufacturers’ Websites. While the trial versions we used are, of course, the same anti-virus packages that are sold commercially, but with limited options, they do allow for a user to evaluate a program before he or she decides to buy it.
- Previous page One-Stop Comparison for 14 Anti-Virus...
- Next page Comodo Internet Security v3.8: The...
And here I thought AVG Free was the best free antivirus.
Kaspersky internet security/ anti-virus does not look like that.. what the heck
No NOD32?
What about Microsoft's own Oncecare
These guys sound like they don't know what they are talking about. They claimed that Avast skips text files even though "they are a classic refuge for malevolent programs." Text files cannot be executed and therefore cannot contain viruses. The pictures they have are different as well. In any case I am a happy user of Avast and prefer it to McAfee and Norton but have not tried the others.
the picture they use for Avast is with a different skin. You can switch the skin at anytime.
I m using avast home too. I think the scanning for HD is bit longer and taxing a lot on my P4 2.6. But its free..no complain...
what about Kespersky ??? lol so much missing good antivirus software
Spanish Kespersky = norman?
French... T_T?? not english there we go
KASPERSKY Ftw ...
what I used to like on Tom's site was the use of graphs... can't find any in this round up. More over how the can you judge resident scan performance just on start up time? What about disk R/W after all services have been initialized?
Anyway quite poor article
I use Norton NIS 2009, and have had problems that made me look for another. When I saw this article, I said "Great timing lol !"
Unfortunately, there is nothing in this article that inspires confidence in either the comparisons or the conclusions. There are comments about Norton that my personal experiences tell me are incorrect (at least in the US).
And, as said before, no tables, etc.
Very disappointing.
@Shadow703793: NOD32 is in page 14
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/2009-a [...] 15-14.html
@romain_75: Kaspersky in page 15
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/2009-a [...] 15-15.html
@shurcooL: So do I, use AVG for last 3 years thinking it was best one.
May be good time for change ...
eset smart security 4!!!and zone alarm extreme security 8
I'm very surprised to hear that Norton is not a resource hog. It is the reason I switched to free AV software like Avast and AVG. I'm not going back to Norton even if they paid me...OK I might consider it.
Why do you have pictures of Kaspersky on the page with AVG antivirus?
haha kapersky became norman.. avg became kepersky.. lol
Was this review bought or something? For Norton to get such a good review I am leaning towards it being bought. I mean c'mon, Norton not being a resource hog and stealing your system. How do you expect us to believe that?
Why not review Kaspersky Internet Security, instead of just the Antivirus, when the Internet Security package for other brands were reviewed?
Also, The KAV Internest Securitiy is $54.99 at Walmart. The review stated it was double.
I seriously have my doubts and found myself shaking my head after reading the reviews for several of the products in here.
I'm surprised you didn't give a "Best Value" award... I'd say for best value go with Trend Micro, for less than $20 you can get protection for 3 PCs for one year (Look online you will find it). I use it on all my computers and no complaints.