Re: Antivirus comparisons

I'm not a great fan of 'independent' lab tests - *none* of them are
able to reproduce a real-world environment accurately - and most
magazine-published ones operate under commercial constraints/realities.
That said, NOD32 has consistently performed at the top or near-top of
such tests, both in terms of effectiveness and speed, which I guess
counts for something.

NOD32's proponents are often very zealous in their support, and I am
one of those ;-) I have put NOD32 in place on a number of SBS
installations, and countless clients, and as far as I am aware not one
of those machines has ever experienced a virus or worm infection, or
any 'issue' with the software itself. I can't speak more highly of it.

Of course, the same can be said of a lot of Trend Micro installations,
and of some others, so if it works for you (and your clients), there is
little incentive to change, I suggest.

For a somewhat different view on why you maybe should turn away from
one of the top players (Symantec, McAfee and TM), though, can be read
here:

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Eighty_percent_of_new_malware_
defeats_antivirus/0,130061744,139263949,00.htm?ref=search

and

http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/security/soa/Antivirus_software_is_being_de
feated_/0,130061744,139257227,00.htm

These articles really address the performance of AVs against zero-day
viruses, and NOD32's heuristics, while by no means perfect, are
unparallelled in this respect.

--
Regards,
Steve.
.