Kind of speaks for itself, doesn't it? Definitely problems here when a freebee Avira Personal beats out Norton AV.
On the other hand, I tired Avira Personal a while back and I had problems with it from a run standpoint. Updates often failed and other like operational problems that unfortuately the AVTest labs seem to totally ignore.
BTW - Avira has a free bootable recovery CD that you can download and use as second scanner when your infected. I have them all; AVG, F-Secure, Bit-Defender, Kapersky. If one doesn't find anything, try try again!
If not for You then it is not means not for all. It is for Symantec employees, as only they can fix it, if you saw some topics.
For Norton users to write a problems why it is so.
Problem is not in what some freebee antivirus beats out Norton AV, it is only shopping cover of problem.
Root of the problem is whay this is so - in products tactics and behavior on users computer. I just trying to bring into light the causing Norton problems (as I think).
Here everyone can post somethat about why this test results are bad.
No. It appears to be a mixed bag from the reviews I have read on it.
I am leaning more each day toward Comodo. It is as close to 100% effective in blocking that exists today software wise and it's free. Now it down right sucks at malware removal but if you don't get infected in the first place, there is not a need for removal - right?
And if you do get infected - go to Bleepingcomputer - right?
And if you get infected using NIS 2011 - Go to Bleepingcomputer - right?
One thing I have noticed over the months/years of reading AV-Comparative reports is that the fortunes of the products vary. So you could read a report and think you'll change to an AV program that betters the one you already have. The next report along, it could quite easily happen that the AV Program you dumped gets a better report than the one you changed to.
Unfortunately, it seems no AV program is perfect. Go to the forums of any of the popular names in security and type into their search box terms like: 'false positive - failed - not working - failed to detect'. Plenty of hits are likely to come up. So I'll be sticking with NIS for the coming year because I believe that, on balance, it's as good as any other top AV program ..and because it has some features I like. It's a wonderfully 'quiet' program too.
The only thing I wonder about is how any of the AV programs keep up with threats. It's the suspicion that they may not be able to that makes me use Sandboxie as the first line of defence.
I am leaning more each day toward Comodo. It is as close to 100% effective in blocking that exists today software wise and it's free. Now it down right sucks at malware removal but if you don't get infected in the first place, there is not a need for removal - right?
Right. But Norton actually scores extremely well in blocking threats in the first place, according to AV-Comparatives. The point you are making is reasonable and correct, but it is actually more related to the Whole Product Dynamic Test than to the On Demand Test. While on demand detection rates are important, there are many other components of security software, all of which contribute to a product's ability to block malware. The On Demand Test, unlike the Whole Product Dynamic Test, does not specifically evaluate a product's overall effectiveness in this regard.
I downloaded the entire test results .pdf today and read it cover to cover. In fact, it's front of me now as I type.
Like all AV lab tests, the summary overall ranking disguises many details that may be important depending on what matters to you most. The results for detection are illuminating. G-Data scored 99.8% detection rate - wow! Avast free was ranked third with a 98.4%. Microsoft SE scored 95.8% higher than NAV 2011 at 95.5%. What the @*$#.! NAV was ranked 12 out 18. Oh, my ....
Now for the test mix. 79.2% was Trojans. Actually, this syncs with my experiences with Symantec AVs. They are just not that great at finding Trojans on your PC. It took me a week of running Emissoft Anti-Malware and Sophos's AntiRootkit to remove Trojans and hidden files on my PC after I installed NIS 2011. I have been clean since but I attribute that to my "beefing up" NIS 2011 default firewall rules and not letting anything into my PC to infect it.
I bought NIS 2011 to prevent me from getting nailed from Internet exploits and so far, it has done a great job in that area. If I was Symantec, I would unbundle the firewall and IPS plus the other online goodies and sell it separately from the AV. Hopefully at a lower price. This would allow individuals to use the AV of their choice; probably a free one based one these results.
There is one glaring contradition in this test report.
Compare AV-Comparatives test results for McAfee versus those given by AV-Test. In the AV-Test results, McAfee totally bombed but in the AV-Comparatives test, McAffee's score was respectable; even higher than NAV. Humm...............
On-demand tests are not that important. more important is the whole product test. Forget about avira and the others... Only Symantec and COMODO can protect the system 24/7, while malwarebytes, hitman pro and Norton Power Eraser can clean it up from infections.
Berzerk wrote...... its about prevention not detection and thats where norton excels.
I couldn't agree more.....I have just come back to Norton Security products after deserting the Norton scene a few years ago !
After some bad experiences with "bloat " and some painful registry issues in the early Symantec days.....I spent ages studying AV-Comparatives listings and recommendations on the performance ratings of the numerous offerings available !
The major thing I noticed over a period of years was the fluctuation of the detection rates...scanning speeds ...update frequencies etc; between the various programs went full circle on many occasions ...Todays winners often lagged behind in future report data ...and so it still goes !
The one thing that was apparent then , and still is today...is the simple fact that the fortunes of the various programs change in one area or another ..After trying AVG...Avast.....Trend...Kaspersky etc: in both free and paid for versions......I decided to give Norton another whirl by purchasing NIS 2011 !
Best move I've made in a long time .........Up to now...the protection has excelled in all areas ...the amount of info available from the dashboard is one of the best ........There are some more sleek looking info screens in competitors programs...but in the end...a lot of the choices we make as individuals are totally down to personal taste...I like the GUI just fine...the info that is provided in the "info tabs" suits me fine! As a long time web user...the amount of info available and all the links to further data , helps keep me up to speed with security trends !
The fact that the default "out of the box" settings also offer a good level of security for those users who are baffled by Firewall "permission queries" is a big plus for "newbie's" now that the naughty boys out there are getting more devious by the day !
Sure...there is a definite "niche" for sites such as AV-Comp etc; ........but I can only add ...that until Norton gives me reason to doubt its' efficiency.....Any negative reports from any "comparison site " will have to go the "extra mile" to prove to me otherwise!
Norton is ahead of the field at present in my opinion!
Results of a much more comprehensive test just released covering first quarter of 2011 by AV-Test....
"During the 1st quarter of 2011 we have tested 22 security products in the areas protection, repair and usability. The "Protection" covers static and dynamic malware detection, including real-world 0-Day attack testing. In case of "Repair", we check the system disinfection and rootkit removal in detail. The "Usability" testing includes the system slow-down caused by the tools and the number of false positives."
Out of the 22 major products tested, NIS 2011 was just barely nosed-out by Bit-Defender for the overall highest score by .5 points (NIS = 15; BD = 15.5)
The correct url for the main site is http://www.av-test.org/ . The comprehensive test was done by AV-Test. The narrow On-Demand test in the OP was done by AV-Comparatives.