09-23-2010 11:41 AM
It is true that Comodo is a bit harder than Norton for the average people BUT comodo follows every step you take and gives you tips what you should take for action! Comodo has now cloud-based protection besides the traditional AV. The Sandbox is BIG plus and it is automatized! I rather have more pops up that gives me more or less 100% protection than non and less protection.
and more thing... most people know what software they need and which they use.
I don't say Norton is **bleep** but i think comodo is better choice (at least for me, my needs and my system).
09-23-2010 12:42 PM - edited 09-23-2010 12:44 PM
every1 has their own preferences...... I've been with norton for 2 or 3 years now, and I'm happy with what I get for my money. The products are updated regularly. I haven't been infected since........ if you prefer comodo or other free av - that's your choice.... don't mess up the tests and make other av look bad..... norton keeps getting high marks in the independent tests, there are no f ups like getting some bad defs (happened to some av few months ago or so) which detect system files as viruses. Therefore I myself am confident in norton and that it can protect me .....
an av can't give you a tip, if you don't know what you're doing then no tip will help you, at the same time having 10 popups because a av detected something is just unacceptable..... eitherway, do a fair test and come back with the results
09-23-2010 12:55 PM
One comparison that I find interesting, since I use both products, is that while Norton products may be placing too much reliance on the cloud technology when internet access may be iffy with a serious infection, Comodo places too much reliance on the sandbox. One weakness causes heuristic detection problems, while the other seriously impairs performance allowing things to run that should have been blocked entirely. The sandbox should be a failsafe, rather than taking the place of definitive action.
09-23-2010 07:51 PM
This thread has no meaning, there's nothing of use for people seeking help. This is a user forum.
For A vs. B we have several certified testing organizations such as AV-Comparatives, too bad Comodo never participates.
In the end, it's their loss. A good result in a certified testing enviroment is the only credible proof of performance.
It's a shame Melih avoids the questioning about a real test from a certified testing body and instead rehashes the same argument. I would actually look forward for a real qualified test with Comodo.
So far it has been all promises but no results. A couple of AV-C tests just came out and Comodo is nowhere to be seen.
09-24-2010 01:53 AM
09-24-2010 10:03 AM
Hey people,what are U talking about?
Comodo beat Comodo in two tests...
In first one where the signitures were 24 hours old(in that test,pc was destroyed in Norton's case,and clean in Comodo's case)
In second test both of them were fully updated and norton signitures found only 1 malware out of 15...
Comodo found 7 or 8 out of 15 and the rest was caught by Defense + and Sandbox...Malwarebytes and Hitman pro found nothing,and after Norton test,Malwarebytes found 16 infections and hitman pro found more then 10!
This is big failure for Norton...Embarrassing...