View Full Version : NOD32 vs Kapersky
jameson_uk
03-03-2007, 14:00
OK, whilst waiting for Vista to turn up, I have my machine running XP. I can't activate the damn thing but have got it up to SP2. Was planning on installing NOD32 as AV software under Vista so downloaded the 30 day trial.
Gave me a warning on boot that some DLL was in the startup and deleted it. Ran a scan and several other bits found in temp and temp internet files (not really using IE either so not too sure how they got there) This got me thinking that although NOD32 had registered the DLL being in startup and picked up the other dll / exe files, it has let them on the PC in the first place. Now I guess I could see this as it it picks up threats when they become a threat but not too happy about that ....
A quick search of the net and whilst it looks like the nasties are relatively new (45AD9FCA.DLL seems to have first been seen 24th Jan 2007) this is a whole month
Anyway this thread was meant to be about whether to got for Kapersky or NOD for Vista :o
Both seem to get good reviews for AV detection etc and NOD uses few resources. KAV is available with a firewall and what seems like better malware detection where as NOD does not.
Any comments on the NOD32 vs Kapersky debate ??
jacobzcoool
03-03-2007, 14:03
NOD32 FTW :D
I would use it but I don't have that kind of money.
nicky munchkin
03-03-2007, 14:14
Whats wrong with norton...
Nope couldnt keep a straight face and say that :p
Noddy32 it is.
re-enter
03-03-2007, 14:32
NOD32 :) tried both and NOD32 ftw
Fireblade
03-03-2007, 14:34
I bought the three year licence for NOD32, which works out at just £18.00 a year, for what (IMO) is the best AV protection currently available :cool:
Tried NOD32 and KAV under XP and prefer KAV!
Running all my systems using KAV, bar the free laptop from Uni which runs Sophos!
Something like this is more about personal preference as opposed to which is better. Both products have their associated fan base and each will swear by that product. Regardless of which you decide to go with you will be assured of having one of the best AV programs available at the moment.
I would suggest making the most of the free trial period for both and making up your mind based on that.
With regards to the Firewall, it may also be worth considering other third-party software (i.e. ZoneAlarm etc.), although it will result in a slightly higher price tag it may provide you with a slight edge over the all-in-one solutions. The question is whether or not it is worth it.
redswipe
03-03-2007, 16:53
I used Kapersky for the last year with XP and had no probs at all but because of all the recommendations I read I now use Nod32 and am still problem free.
The only real difference I've noticed is that the scans seem less of a system slower than the KAV ones.
jacobzcoool
03-03-2007, 17:36
NOD32 is very fast and uses few resources and does slightly better in detection tests, but this is a case of best against 2nd best really, either way you do well.
I went through this a while back, it was a toss up between nod32 and kav6 for me too. I eventually settled on kav6, but as others have said I don't think there will be any issues with either.
jameson_uk
03-03-2007, 18:36
Something like this is more about personal preference as opposed to which is better. Both products have their associated fan base and each will swear by that product. Regardless of which you decide to go with you will be assured of having one of the best AV programs available at the moment.
Guess I am not really worried on the virus side as both have great reviews. More interested in comparison of the two. My initial throughts seem to be that KAV does more than NOD on the pro-active side but takes up more resources. My initial thought on this is that KAV actually does more in depth checking where as NOD only checks when it needs to.
I was kind of thinking that if I use NOD as AV then I might still need a pro-active malware scanner.
Cost is not really an issue here (£20 extra for a clean PC for a year is worth it) and I realise that with KAV I dont have to get anything else but with NOD I would need a firewall. Still use Adaware and Spybot but these are both reactive and was hoping for something more pro-active on this side of things
KAV doesnt come with firewall as standard, you need the internet suite for that
jacobzcoool
03-03-2007, 19:50
I use everything separately, partly for more protection and partly because I am cheap :o
Fireblade
03-03-2007, 21:03
Still use Adaware and Spybot but these are both reactive and was hoping for something more pro-active on this side of things
There are quite a few FREE firewalls available - i.e. Ashampoo Firewall, Ghostwall Firewall, Comodo Personal Firewall, Jetico Personal Firewall, and SoftPerfect Personal Firewall .
If you want a FREE pro-active/real-time anti spyware program, try Spyware Terminator ;)
Whats wrong with norton...
Nope couldnt keep a straight face and say that :p
Noddy32 it is.
definately nod32! norton is intrusive bloatware. Even some stores refuse to stock it.
jacobzcoool
04-03-2007, 12:50
IMO Norton is malware.
It wastes system resources, is very difficult to remove, and removes other security software (http://safer-networking.org/en/news/2006-09-29.html)
jameson_uk
04-03-2007, 13:19
IMO Norton is malware.
I think Norton is good in some respects. My dad for example uses Norton and it updates itself, is easy to configure and generally does most things out the box.
The downside of it is resources. Peeps on this forum are therefore unlikely to be using it.
The KAV sutie is quite nice but some of the options are things like "scan HTTP traffic" and "monitor POP/IMAP/SMTP traffic" Norton removes all of this and just does it all by default.
most av software have auto updates these days but half the footprint.
re-enter
04-03-2007, 20:09
There are quite a few FREE firewalls available - i.e. Ashampoo Firewall, Ghostwall Firewall, Comodo Personal Firewall, Jetico Personal Firewall, and SoftPerfect Personal Firewall .
If you want a FREE pro-active/real-time anti spyware program, try Spyware Terminator ;)
I never understand why people don't reccomend Zonealarm? :confused:
http://download.zonelabs.com/bin/media/images/homepage/v3/awards_en.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/i/product-slant.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/i/gld-mtx.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/
nicky munchkin
04-03-2007, 20:34
Avast Free with Windows Defender and Windows Firewall is what I use (although I have a good hardware firewall too). I find Avast Free better than AVG because it has more protection and actually seems to catch the viruses. AVG takes little memory though and is still better than Norton.
Even if you dont have a hardware firewall I'd still just use WF and schedule a boot scan with Avast every week or so.
I never understand why people don't reccomend Zonealarm? :confused:
http://download.zonelabs.com/bin/media/images/homepage/v3/awards_en.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/i/product-slant.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/i/gld-mtx.gif
http://personal-firewall-software-review.toptenreviews.com/
For me at least ZA is like Norton and dont always believe what you read in mags :D .... Out of the ones in that list sysgate 5.5 pro was the best until Norton bought the company although it is still available for download .... Outpost is pretty good but I always suggest people go check out http://www.wilderssecurity.com/ and do some reading and then make your own choice :)
Regards
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.