Anti-Virus Overall Reviews & Downloads

Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010

Product summary

The good: Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010 offers very fast threat detection and it disinfection based on virus definitions and system behavior.

The bad: The interface is decent enough to navigate with, but that most basic of security suite features--the scheduler--is inexplicably buried and unnecessarily hard to get to.

The bottom line: Kaspersky Anti-Virus 2010 offers pricey antivirus protection. The 2009 version scored well on independent antivirus detection and removal tests, but be prepared to pay a premium for what you're getting.

Norton AntiVirus 2010

Product summary

The good: Norton AntiVirus 2010 treads lightly on your CPU, while bolstering last year's reputation-based detection engine with a new behavioral detection system.  
The bad: Despite dramatic performance improvements in the past two years, Norton still doesn't leave the smallest footprint on your CPU, and new efficacy results show that while it continues to be in the top five at detecting malicious software, it still doesn't have the highest rate of detection.  
The bottom line: Norton AntiVirus 2010 builds on the immense progress made in last year's version, maintaining a low system profile while strengthening its security framework. It's not perfect, but even Symantec's detractors should check it out.  

Avast 5.0 Professional 

Product summary

The good: It can be easily and  quickly as it takes only 39 seconds to install and 1 reboot.Avast Anti Virus uses 20.1 MB of memory.It requires 88.3 MB of hard-drive space for installation. Top-rated of the 10 Antivirus programs tested. 

The bad:Avast Anti-Virus is very frustrating program to handle. Just getting Avast to start scanning is a chore with its confusing user-interface. Navigation is difficult due to Avast's image-orientated display. Avast offers the following support options: a Knowledgebase (although not all that extensive or "knowledgeable"), an online support Forum, as well as Email support. Unfortunately, Avast doesn't offer any type of Chat support or Phone support - not even paid phone support.

The bottom line: Avast Antivirus Pro performs very well and is effective against Viruses and other Malware. However, Avast has a poor user-interface that is difficult to use and its software support is one of the worst we've seen. Avast does provide good Virus protection, but we have a hard time recommending it with its other drawbacks - especially its cumbersome user-interface.  

ESET NOD32 3.0 Antivirus System 

Product summary 

The good: Eset NOD32 3.0 offers a new interface, faster scanning, and thorough technical support 

The bad: Eset NOD32 3.0 doesn't include firewall protection. 

The bottom line: Eset NOD32 3.0 finally gets its interface right and, along with high-rated performance among independent testing labs, deserves consideration on your desktop.

AVG Antivirus 8

Product summary

The good: AVG Anti-Virus 8 includes anti-drive-by download protection along with antirootkit, antivirus, and anstipyware protection.

The bad: AVG Anti-Virus 8 tested in the middle or even to the slow end for scanning and boot time performance.

The bottom line: AVG Anti-Virus 8 is solid at finding and removing viruses and spyware as well as blocking Web threats, but could be lighter on system resources and provide more technical support options.

Avira AntiVir Personal 8

Product summary

The good: AntiVir Personal 8 has great test results for performance and effectiveness.

The bad: AntiVir Personal 8 is expensive and lacks security and utility features found in comparable products.

The bottom line: AntiVir Personal 8 provides more than adequate malicious-software protection, but for the price, we expected more features and polish.

BitDefender Antivirus 2010

Product summary

The good: BitDefender Antivirus 2010 protects against viruses, spyware, phishing attacks, and rootkits, and performs well on third-party, independent antivirus tests.

The bad: The application configuration options are often either "enable" or "disable"--we'd like more options.

The bottom line: BitDefender Antivirus 2010 has greatly improved since last year; we'd like more access to configuration options beyond simple enabling and disabling features.

Panda Antivirus 2010

Product summary

The good: Panda Antivirus 2008 includes antispyware protection.

The bad: Panda Antivirus 2008 has not been reviewed by many independent antivirus test sites, making it hard to say how effective it is; it tends to be slower than the competition; support is light, with almost no documentation and a requirement that Panda own any personal information sent via e-mail technical support.

The bottom line: Panda Antivirus 2008 is slower than the competition and lacks independent, third-party antivirus test results, and thus doesn't receive our recommendation.

McAfee VirusScan 2010

Product summary

The good: McAfee VirusScan offers more than three user licenses at $10 per seat, the ability to scan links in IM messages, and the ability to watch movies or play games uninterrupted.

The bad: McAfee VirusScan uses the same interface as last year, lacks hourly updates, and remains somewhere in the middle of pack in our 2010 testing results.

The bottom line: McAfee VirusScan's protection keeps up with the changing threats on the Internet, but the product itself doesn't excel.

Zone Alarm pro 2010

Product summary

The good: ZoneAlarm Extreme Security 2010 is bursting with features and offers one of the most customizable firewalls we've encountered. It also installs very politely.

The bad: This isn't the security program for people who dislike small fonts. The design requires a lot of extra clicks to get to most of the options settings, and the trial is shorter than that of most of the competition.

The bottom line: ZoneAlarm Extreme Security 2010 isn't necessarily the best suite around, but it's definitely effective and should appeal to those who like making granular adjustments to their protection.

 

Panda Antivirus 2008

Product summary

The good: Panda Antivirus 2010 includes antispyware protection.

The bad: Panda Antivirus 2010 has not been reviewed by many independent antivirus test sites, making it hard to say how effective it is; it tends to be slower than the competition; support is light, with almost no documentation and a requirement that Panda own any personal information sent via e-mail technical support.

The bottom line: Panda Antivirus 2010 is slower than the competition and lacks independent, third-party antivirus test results, and thus doesn't receive our recommendation.

F-secure Antivirus 2010

Product summary

The good: F-Secure Anti-virus uses multiple antivirus engines; includes a disk utility feature; and has an online tutorial.

The bad: It costs more than the competition; hides its disk utility feature; has a noisy firewall; and suffers from some uneven system performance and antimalware effectiveness in third-party testing.

The bottom line: While offering roughly the same features and performance as its competition, It is about $20 too expensive.

Dr.Web Antivirus 2010

Product summary

The good:The real-time protection intercepts every unauthorized attempt to access files and hard-drive system areas and checks any object trying to penetrate the local file system.You can specify which folders or types of files to check as well as actions to perform on infected objects. The program checks e-mail messages before the mail client processes them.

The bad: We found that the interface was not very convenient for picking several folders for scanning. Also, you have to use command-line parameters to schedule automatic runs.

The bottom line:  The small amount of memory consumed and this program's reasonable price give it a boost.