| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Systemizer
Trooper

 Joined: Jun 05, 2004 Posts: 24 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2004 6:07 pm Post subject: What's better? AVG or Antivir? |
|
|
Hello,
I've got a really important question. I need a good free virusscanner. Right now I have AVG running on the background. But I also heard Antivir is very good. Now, which one of those is better?
What I think is important is:
+ A good resident shield which doesn't slow down pc performance
+ Must recognize a lot of virusses
+ Good updates and that they are available quickly
+ It shouldn't eat too much system resources
+ Duration of the scans
That's it. The last note is because I used to do scans with Kaspersky which took 8 hours to complete. I don't like that very much... Must be me
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rancid_ilike Warnings : 2 Sergeant

 Joined: May 28, 2004 Posts: 131
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2004 7:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'm prefer antivir..my final download
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Systemizer
Trooper

 Joined: Jun 05, 2004 Posts: 24 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2004 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You tried AVG too? Why is Antivir better?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rancid_ilike Warnings : 2 Sergeant

 Joined: May 28, 2004 Posts: 131
|
Posted: Sat Jun 05, 2004 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AVG=The installer seems to disagree with my computer
AntiVir=heuristics were included in the free version
It's availeble in the on-acess (guard) & on-demand scanner.
Seems, that Antivir is getting stronger day by day now.... _________________ AntiVir Ad Blocking Resources Ad-Aware Spybot-SD
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NAMOR
Captain
 Premium Member
 Joined: Dec 23, 2003 Posts: 365 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | + A good resident shield which doesn't slow down pc performance |
both AV have this, but I think Antivir might be a little stronger due to a couple of false positives that it gave me. Nither seemed to slow my PC down at all.
| Quote: | | + Must recognize a lot of virusses |
I think both have good detection rates.
| Quote: | | + Good updates and that they are available quickly |
I feel that Antivir updates more frequently than AVG
| Quote: | | + It shouldn't eat too much system resources |
While both AV's are nice on resources, I feel that AVG is slightly lighter..
| Quote: | | + Duration of the scans |
Doing complete scans of my system Antivir was faster..
one big plus is that Antivir has 2 official support forums... Just something to think about. I honestly don't think one is better than the other....
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Systemizer
Trooper

 Joined: Jun 05, 2004 Posts: 24 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok then I'm going to try that one.
I need a really good free virusscanner because AVG just didn't detect a dangerous keylogger. It's gone now (kaspersky demo) but I don't want it to happen again, you know?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Systemizer
Trooper

 Joined: Jun 05, 2004 Posts: 24 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 7:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | both AV have this, but I think Antivir might be a little stronger due to a couple of false positives that it gave me. Nither seemed to slow my PC down at all. |
False positives? Sorry, but I don't really understand, what do you mean?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
NAMOR
Captain
 Premium Member
 Joined: Dec 23, 2003 Posts: 365 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
By false positives, I mean during a scan Antivir detects files that are up for grabs (suspicious looking). Such files can be determined to be legit or not be sumitting them to an online virus scan, such as Trend Micro's House Call. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ikeb
Special Response Team Forums Admin
 Joined: Apr 20, 2003 Posts: 16536
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
AntiVir doesn't run on the Win2K Server platform. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prince_Serendip
Site Moderator
 Joined: Sep 07, 2002 Posts: 17542
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ikeb
Special Response Team Forums Admin
 Joined: Apr 20, 2003 Posts: 16536
|
Posted: Sun Jun 06, 2004 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Except that AVPE documentation specifically warns against installing if another AV is in place.
Sure would be good if AVPE were to allow Win2K Server. I have to use Win2K Server 'cause it allows multiprocessor operation. I think most AV vendors assume that a server implies a networked computer environment where the server is handing out AV licenses, not the case for me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prince_Serendip
Site Moderator
 Joined: Sep 07, 2002 Posts: 17542
|
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2004 2:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Except that AVPE documentation specifically warns against installing if another AV is in place. |
Yes, that is correct. It's like in an engineering manual. They always write them conservatively, erring on the side of caution. "Warp 9" is the limit, or is it? Running two AV's at the same time often causes conflicts. Running one while the other is "asleep" has always worked for me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prince_Serendip
Site Moderator
 Joined: Sep 07, 2002 Posts: 17542
|
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2004 2:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have an update for Ikeb, on your Win2K Server woes. Apparently, you need to get AVPro, the payware version but that is for the general server issue. I am waiting for an answer to an inquiry I made at the Antivir Support Forum on your particular issue.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ikeb
Special Response Team Forums Admin
 Joined: Apr 20, 2003 Posts: 16536
|
Posted: Mon Jun 07, 2004 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know!! I checked it out. $700US! That includes 10 client licenses but I only need one for the server itself. Thanks for inquiring about this PS!
BTW, not that it's of any use to me at this point but just how do you put one AV "to sleep"? Kill the TSR?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Prince_Serendip
Site Moderator
 Joined: Sep 07, 2002 Posts: 17542
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|