25 anti-virus scanners for Windows 8.1 tested – Kaspersky achieves perfect score

vbimport

#1

We’ve just posted the following news: 25 anti-virus scanners for Windows 8.1 tested – Kaspersky achieves perfect score[newsimage]http://static.myce.com//images_posts/2014/05/myce-av-test-org1-95x75.png[/newsimage]

The German AV-Test.org has tested 25 consumer virus-scanners and Internet Security Suites for Windows 8.1. Only one of the products achieved a perfect score. During the tests the testers focused on ‘real world’ scenarios like protection, usage and performance.

            Read the full article here: [http://www.myce.com/news/25-anti-virus-scanners-for-windows-8-1-tested-kaspersky-achieves-perfect-score-71655](http://www.myce.com/news/25-anti-virus-scanners-for-windows-8-1-tested-kaspersky-achieves-perfect-score-71655)

            Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

#2

360 is delivering some consistent scoring, for the free one you’ve never heard of


#3

“Earlier we reported that the European CyberCrime Centre recommends paid software, as free antivirus software would not be sufficient.”

Like I said in my previous post. In my experience, just because you paid good money for something, doesn’t mean it’s a truely great peice of software. Heck, if you don’t believe me, look at THIS rant, which proves money doesn’t always equal better results.


#4

[QUOTE=TSJnachos117;2728356]“Earlier we reported that the European CyberCrime Centre recommends paid software, as free antivirus software would not be sufficient.”

Like I said in my previous post. In my experience, just because you paid good money for something, doesn’t mean it’s a truely great peice of software. Heck, if you don’t believe me, look at THIS rant, which proves money doesn’t always equal better results.[/QUOTE]

I think is more true. I can say for one thing M$ has going for it is the for Windows 7 and MSE it turns the update to auto updates thus providing another level of security if the user forgets to turn on the auto update for windows. This is something none of the other A/V can do or even begin to achieve. A/V is only good if the O/S is uptodate otherwise A/V is a wasted program. Also MSE doesn’t hog system resource just to do its work. But the A/V is only good as the user and if they allow a Virus/Malware to run your A/V is pretty worthless and Kaspersky can kiss itself goodbye. Those testers aren’t everyday users that click on anything and everything maybe they should use those users to test the software and get real world usage results not a Control group that already knows what to do and how to stop it. Then we can have some real results to go over and digest how good is the A/V against a Virus.


#5

The main reason I suspect Microsoft Security Essentials / Defender does so poorly is that it comes preinstalled with Windows 8 and comes as a Windows update for Vista & 7 (if no other AV installed), so it is likely the most widely used free antivirus. This basically means that Malware creators are going to make sure that their infection gets past it.


#6

[QUOTE=Seán;2728375]The main reason I suspect Microsoft Security Essentials / Defender does so poorly is that it comes preinstalled with Windows 8 and comes as a Windows update for Vista & 7 (if no other AV installed), so it is likely the most widely used free antivirus. This basically means that Malware creators are going to make sure that their infection gets past it.[/QUOTE]

True but if turned around all those others are in the same firing line as well. Take Norton, Macfee those are the two most nailed by A/V and Malware and if I recall MSE late addition to the software and hasn’t been around as much as the others out there. I have it installed and it has been more then able to catch Virus/Malware but also we need to consider your A/V is only good as the person clicking on the computer if they allow the malware through no amount of good A/V will protect them and that happens more often then we like to admit. Maybe if the testers clicked on these Virus/Malware we can see how good those programs are stopping and catching the Virus/Malware. That is what I like to see but will never happen cause then you will see how good is that A/V program that claims to be good as they say it is.


#7

[QUOTE=Matth;2728337]360 is delivering some consistent scoring, for the free one you’ve never heard of[/QUOTE]

360 is a Chinese program. It used to use the BitDefender engine as well as at least one other AV engine for detection. My g/f has used this on her computer and its done a piss poor job of detecting threats, causing me many hours of trojan, virus, and other malware removal. It’s also very, very hard to remove from a computer when you try to uninstall it.


#8

I used to use Kaspersky but found it bogged down my system, I use Eset Smart Security now , with Malwarebytes and I have been golden for years.


#9

I think you will find that peoples opinions on Anti-Virus applications are as varied as any other piece of software or hardware, and people will choose what works best for them.

Up until a few weeks ago, I was quite happy with the Windows 8.1 Defender. It worked for me, but my concerns were much the same as Sean’s. Its free, very popular, and built in, and therefore more likely to be targeted.

A few weeks ago I started looking for a security suite. The data on my PC is very precious to me, and I use online banking and purchasing a lot.

I tried many, BitDefender, Norton, Kaspersky, and many others. BitDefender was my favourite, but it won’t play with the Asus utility suite, or any other software that can take direct control of the PC hardware in real time.

I finally went for [B]Kaspersky Pure 3[/B], basically because it had what I wanted in terms of security features. It doesn’t hog the system, in fact I’m blissfully unaware that its even running.
What swung it for me though, was they had 30% off the purchase price.

So far I like it a lot.