Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 135954	2014-01-01 21:00:00	Vipre - 20 months later .....	Misty (368)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1364119	2014-01-01 21:00:00	Just read this article which was a link from PC World to PC Antivirus Reviews www.pcantivirusreviews.com It gives Vipre the "Gold Award" and rates it higher than Bitdefender (Silver), Kapersky and Nod32, etc, etc. Do you think that PC Antivirus Reviews are no good at judging ? PC Av Reviews have a vested interest ? Vipre has improved considerably in the last 20 months (have read the thread to which PcTek, PC User42 and Wainuitech contributed --- and Chilling Silence watched :D ) ? Vipre still has the same faults as 20 months ago ? Very interested in the replies as am thinking of changing from free Microsoft Security Essentials. Misty :2cents:	Misty (368)
1364120	2014-01-01 21:29:00	Antivirus review by magazines are useless, One test will say product XX is the best, yet another will say something else is better. Real life results will win hands down every time. Microsoft Security Essentials has fallen behind to far these days, its not working as good as it once did. A lot of peopel say Avast is good -- I had a computer from a client the other day, picked it up on the 30th, it was slow and crashing, removed avast, and ran several malware programs removing infections, then installed Nod32, it found a further 8 trojans. NO Antivirus is perfect and never will be. Those reviews are a joke, just look at the titles for example "2014 Best Internet Security Software" Heelllooooo its only the 2nd Jan 2014 -- yet those reviews are saying the best of 2014 -- Wait for Norton to bring out their products Norton 2015 in about a month ;) If I get time, I've got a Drive in the workshop that is BADLY infected, I'll do a simple test - clone it, then scan with Nod32, and Vipre on sperate drives, see what picks up what and how many. Then post back the results. Just reading teh Vipre Review, under updates it states: Since updates are downloaded during installation, it's one of the few programs that gives immediate protection. Future updates are downloaded hourly and upon reboot. Full update controls are also included, which is rare and which can let you know that updates are actually happening as expected. :groan: Just about every Antivirus does that these days -- They need to get some real results.	wainuitech (129)
1364121	2014-01-02 00:07:00	Magazine reviews tend to reflect more on who is paying them for advertising or providing free products for testing than the value of the product they are reviewing. As Wainui said real life results are what matters.	CliveM (6007)
1364122	2014-01-02 01:38:00	[QUOTE=Misty;1185919] Do you think that [LIST=1] PC Antivirus Reviews are no good at judging ? Yes PC Av Reviews have a vested interest ? Probably not	pctek (84)
1364123	2014-01-02 03:59:00	Just doing the second part of the before mentioned test. :nerd: Lets just say, I'd like to ask the people who did those published tests, why I'm getting the results so far-- Vipre is FAR from the best, ;) Results with Pictures to follow soon.:D	wainuitech (129)
1364124	2014-01-02 08:23:00	To carry on from above the test is done and to answer Misty -- I wouldn't bother buying Vipre, spend your $$ on better software, and DONT believe what you read in those magazine articles. DISCLAIMER: No computers were harmed in the following tests, BUT many infections were Killed :p Part 1> Heres what was done - A real simple and basic test, no rocket science required ;) Made a copy of a known HDD that was badly infected. Installed a fresh copy of windows 7 on a PC. Attached as a slave drive the infected drive. Downloaded and installed Vipre 2014. 5434 It did a quick scan on install and found Nothing ( hmmmmmm) Went into the settings and set it to its maximum scanning capabilities. 1st disappointment - couldn't set it to scan only a slave drive, the only options were the whole computer. OK-- Did the san, C drive didn't find anything ( as expected) E drive ( infected drive) found and removed plenty, see results below: 5435 OK not to bad I know the drive was badly infected and the number was roughly correct -- WRONG. :groan: Turned PC off, and disconnected slave drive. Turned back on, wiped drive clean, dropped a new W7 image back on the drive. Attached the slave drive back to the PC. Installed Nod32 ---BINGO !!! While Nod was installing -- (It hadn't even fully installed or updated yet): Two active infections ( later found it was actually 4) 5436 5437 OK - Vipre missed those - not a good start for Vipre being "The Best" :D Set Nod32 as I normally would, scanned the Slave Drive, within a few seconds found more missed by Vipre :groan: at 36 % Hmmmmmmm 5438 End of Part 1 -- Only allowed so many Pictures:	wainuitech (129)
1364125	2014-01-02 08:31:00	Part 2 Let it finish scanning, and the final result (circled) 5439 So VIPRE MISSED all those, :horrified And this is from a test that claims its better than any other AV tested -- :tui: Heres just a sample of what Nod32 detected that Vipre MISSED: 5440 So the Conclusion: Vipre is No where as good as that Mag test suggests. The Question I'd like to have answered by the people who did the tests is this: Why is it that a simple scan of a Hard Drive with Nod32, which is meant to, according the THEIR test is not as good, detect and remove 68 infections as well as FOUR active infections that Vipre missed ? Just as well they cant be held responsible for their BS reports.:D No Antivirus is perfect but missing that many is wrong.	wainuitech (129)
1364126	2014-01-02 20:16:00	I'd have been interested to see how MSE would have done, not that I expect you to test every anti-virus around just that it's still the most common free one. I think if you want to compare using reviews you have to read the whole thing and not just skim for the results, and also use several different sites. The thing is you need to understand why they rate things how they do and what the testing methods are. Many of them use similar lists of test viruses that contain a lot of theoretical infections not usually found out in the wild then rate software down for not finding the things you'll never get infected with. Other times you read the full review on one of the poorer performing ones and find they may have rated it down for something you consider unimportant. Also it's worth noting what the difference in detection rates are because sometimes it's a very small difference that gets one the top position. I tried Kaspersky last year because I got a 1 year licence free with some hardware and reviews rated it as one of the best consistently. No Idea if it worked well as an anti-virus but it slowed down my browser to the point of annoyance so I removed it. I think tempering online reviews with some user feedback might be wise. Nod32 gets recommended so often around here I think If I was going to pay for an anti-virus I'd have to consider it. I just use defender and MBAM and really haven't had any problems (touch wood), I also installed Avast on another machine because reviews say it's better then defender but can't tell if it's any better.	dugimodo (138)
1364127	2014-01-04 00:46:00	Many thanks indeed, Wainuitech. I had not expected such a very thorough response, but you have certainly done that. Just been doing quite a bit of reading of your findings. Nod32 is certainly still impressive. I did buy a copy a number of years back and then renewed a couple of times. Then I thought our surfing tends to be so boring, Herald, BBC News, Guardian, Huffington Post, that I decided MSE would be sufficient. Am now strongly leaning the other way now. Thinking Nod32, in which case will be in touch -- just talk to SWMBO first ! :) Thanks again Jim	Misty (368)
1364128	2014-01-04 01:29:00	Generally I find most AV reviews by resellers about as useful as magazine reviews. (was even told by a 15-16yr old toaster sales person the other day they sell Nortons because it was the only 100% effective AV available - lol) These reviews are more often biased because of the greater reseller profit margins and advertising profits! Personally I only use a free antivirus which I have researched & used 'in the wild' along with a good free malware and spybot program and cryptoprevent. Not being tied to the FBI, Fort Knox, CIA or even the Green Party I don't consider myself a target for hackers etc, etc. So having had 20+yrs of almost virus free computer use I'll stick to what I've got. Remember NO ANTIVIRUS, paid or free is completely 100% effective... make your own mind up!	BigBadBob (14963)
1 2