Test of anti-virus programs

[inconnu]

I'd always heard AntiVir was good;  I think it was one of the main two or three I was considering before switching to avast about a year ago.  Maybe I'll try it one day.  For now, I think I'll stick with BitDefender as my backup a-v.  It seems to be doing okay, so far.   

I do consider my anti-trojan software as critical, though.  FreewheelinFrank, you're right, Ewido's scans, in terms of time, do approximate an a-v scan.  I guess I just accept that as normal;  and, as I said, I don't mind the extra time it takes.  An Ewido scan is available from the right-click context menu in explorer, so that makes it easy to do a quick check on downloaded files.

It's very rare that either Ewido or a-squared find anything.  But, since they're free and also don't cause any problems for me, and are specifically designed to detect trojans, I feel they're valuable tools (along with anti-spyware, etc) in my security toolkit.  Maybe I'm kind of paranoid, but I'd rather be paranoid than infected!

[FreewheelinFrank]

Yes, indeed! Amen to that.

But AntiVir Free's servers are really rubbish: I haven't been able to get an update. They make AVG Free's servers look good!

I guess I got used to avast!'s updates coming in a flash!

[Lisandro]

Ewido's speed is more comparable with an anti-virus program as it scans for Trojans and not just spyware: it seems to take about as long as avast!

Yeah... the two speeds could be almost the same...

I have also used ClamWin as a double check anti-virus, but after the last update it threw a wobbly and only a system restore would remove it.

Have trouble with it email scanner if avast is used in the same computer. The MS Office pluggin cannot be 'removed' as well (or I can't find a way to do it).

Oh, by the way, meanwhile AntiVir update has crashed...

Works well for me, not that trouble. Unfortunatelly, the updates are not incremental: too long, too big 
Also, a lot of macro false positives.

Scanning may not be all that fast, but I don't find it painfully slow, either.  In any case, the protection is worth the time spent scanning -- although, they rarely find anything.

Ok, I just comparing and not blaming agains a freeware application.

As for Spybot S&D, why "weak"?  Because of scanning speed? I'm under the impression that it's one of the best anti-spyware programs out there, especially after the debacle with Ad-Aware.   I guess scanning speed isn't that much of a priority with me.

Yes, for me it does not detect as much as the others... The updates and the signatures are rare and weak compared with others, imho.

Spybot 1.4 have shown alot of improvements for speed, but the updates are just too blasted long.  It's averaging about one update per month or maybe longer. 

Yes, that's the problem...