Av-test Final Results
Read here the av test final results : http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02
AVK 2008 and AVK 2009 have very interesting results.BD engine is a plus over KAV.
Enjoy!
crysty2k5' EDIT: http://www.security.nl/image/1737 
Comments
-
Maybe it's me. BitDefender sure has quite a few applications rated better including the always despised Norton.
Is this supposed to make me happy???0 -
Read here the av test final results : http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02
AVK 2008 and AVK 2009 have very interesting results.BD engine is a plus over KAV.
Enjoy!
crysty2k5' EDIT: http://www.security.nl/image/1737
Although the AVK seems reflect the engine with BD is performing better, but I don't think this is the true factor as Avast also improves slightly in the latest release, you can find the proof according the standalone package. What a surprise and disappointing are, BD2008 and BD2009 are no longer act as top of the list performer. Neither BD2008 nor BD2009 has the performance matching Avast, Kaspersky and Sophos. I think BD R&D should pay more focus on the core functionalities but not value-added features.0 -
It seems that in malware on demand BD is ok ,its 97%+,but they have to improve the antispyware.The Proactive detection is over 98%(++) which is also a good thing.
Antispyware can be compensated with a dedicated antispyware and there are a lot of them free.
Lets hope that in the next test BD will improve the spyware detection once they solve the bugs of the new version and they focus on the product enhancement.
Indeed Avast is one of the antiviruses that seems to get better with every new antivirus test.0 -
I have my doubts for AVG,at least for the freeware.It happens that 2 weeks ago i was fixing a computer megainfected(a computer of a relative with around 60-70 samples trojans that came from the web).Guess what antivirus software it had?It was AVG freeware.AVG detected at a safe mode scan around 60 percent of the trojans infections, but it seems than in real time scan the trojans were living(even detected) without problems in the system,they werent quarantined or deleted.With BD installed those trojans would have been neutralized instantly.
Also AVG failed in curing some of the infections.That computer had an XP installed and was using the included firewall.After this scans i also runned SpyBot Search & Distroy, wich also found new infections and installed Avast 4.8 free that also found rootkits which i left alone to prepare the system for a clean installation.So a real life experience with an antivirus is totally different from a sintetic test.AVG failed on that computer and this was 2 weeks ago.All the infections came from the wild, navigating on the web and using Yahoo messenger .
As another example i have to say that im using a dual boot with XP,on a partition i m using Avast 4.8 free and on the other bootable OS my favourite BD(curently testing BD 2009).This BD and Avast combination was used for almost 6 months(its like having AVK 2009).None of them finds new infections in the area where the other one performs but Avast had some false positives versus BD.KAV control scan also doesnt identifie new threats.
Conclusion is that you need to find yourself the best antivirus having in mind where you live,what usually you are doing and what threats are "moving" in the area.
BD 2008/2009 is still a top antivirus(98% is quite a good score) and will continue to be.Can you imagine people changing the antivirus software at every month, when some antiviruses happen to be better for few days or weeks.
An antivirus software demonstrates its class during months in day by day real life usage and BD does that every year.0 -
Just read this review written in terms that a non-techie like me can understand. This sounds great and is encouraging. It is one of the first BD 2009 reviews I've seen.
http://anti-virus-software-review.toptenre...der-review.html0 -
Hey every site has different view it depends on u if the AV solves ur prob then its the best AV for u
0 -
No, you cant trust them 100%.When you choose your antivirus you take this tests into account, because they already have a reputation, but not blindly.
0 -
LOL!
Ok, then i will continue to use my fake knowledge if any0 -
David G, please stop attacks on other users.
What Sm3K3R said is absolutely correct. Antivirus tests shouldn't be followed blindly. It's not about whether the test is made is correctly or not, but it's about whether the results are 100% accurate. Detection rates change every day, so the test made by one company yesterday might not reflect at all the reality today (of course, detection rates don't actually change this much this fast, but in a few weeks/months, the situation could differ a lot since the original test).
Also, no matter how large the number of tested samples is, there's a high probability that some AV product has some detection flaws for those exact samples (but it might perfectly detect all other untested malware). So unless you find a test that tries all AV products against ALL malware in the world (a test which will actually give a tru, 100% accurate statistic), these tests are just meant to give an idea about how good an AV is, and don't really offer the true perspective.
Also, detection rates are not the only thing that you have to judge an AV after. Even on av-comparatives, on the main page, it's written:Even if quite important, the data provided in the test reports on this site are just some aspects that you should consider when buying Anti-Virus software.
Cris.0 -
Is one thing switching from Norman to Avira or switching from ClamAv to KAV and a totally different scenario when changing from KAV to Avira or Avira to BD.While the first ones switch because the level of detection is weak, the last ones, i can assure you, change the antivirus software because of the price ,the software options ,support or compatibility, detection gaps beeing very small and oscilating during a day or a week.You really cant compare ClamAV with a top antivirus(95% plus malware detection).
By the way David G ,what antivirus are you using now and what have you used before?0 -
I for one have relied on the mentioned ratings to get an idea of which application is doing it's job. I never take the ratings 100%. I then pick an application using my best judgement. So much depends on the configuration of each PC both in hardware and software specs. Some applications will work beautifully on one machine and not on another.
I think I am like most people. When I find something that protects me and runs well on my PC I stick with it. I check the ratings periodically to make sure it is still effective as advertised. They perform tests that I either don't know how to perform or don't have the time to perform.
My goodness, if everyone switched to the number one product we'd all be switching every month! Plus in reality most people don't need the protection that the number one product offers. Depends on how you use the internet. If millions of people change their AV based on these ever changing parameters then they are like sheep being led to the slaughter no?
If you are truly only trying to tell the truth and not attack people perhaps you should not change what you say buy how you say it. You are coming off as pretty aggressive. Share your thoughts without being so defensive then people will listen to what you have to say instead of how you say it.0 -
Why fight for AV
its anyone's choice and why to complain abt particular AV product if u don't like it just remove it and by the way I am quite happy with BDTS 2009 
very good product just has some cons but i hav no complain abt it as long as i m protected 
0
