And this the same Kaspersky that was rated Standard behind avast rated Advanced on av-comparatives and also on a recent AV test (reported in the forums) I can’t recall which one.
Kaspersky V7 heuristic detected 35% with few FP and also rated Advanced on av-comparatives…
I’m looking at the av-comparatives, Retrospective / ProActive - Test May 2007 and shows an overall rating of Standard. Kaspersky was also rated Standard in the previous Retrospective / ProActive - Test.
However these Retrospective / ProActive tests throw up some anomalies as the signature database is three months old I believe so I’m not sure exactly how this works or its worth other than to point out that you should keep your AV up to date. Outside of these Retrospective / ProActive - Tests Kaspersky does very well frequently rated Advanced+.
Yes it does but the ProActive Test( I think), is a test meant to test for antivirus’s possible detection of new and undetected malwares. So its basicly a test to see which AV uses heuristics or generic detections.
Al968
Sorry, I did not make myself clear in the previous post. I was referring to the good detection of normal infections by Kaspersky signatures, and not a pro-active or generic behavior. As far I know I could say Kasperky detection is very good, couldn’t I? Was Kaspersky in a low position in the detection rate right now?
If you think that Avast is a resource hog, then you haven’t been running Norton. I ran Norton for years until switching to avast, and i have to say im very impressed! My lappy ran Norton with an 80gb drive and 2GB of ram, and when i uninstalled and went to Avast, my lappy went from a mustang to jet fighter! My system became a lot more responsive.
But what struck me as odd is that you want lower disk space usage for the updates, but you also want them to include Rootkit? Think before you post.
How Avast! is better Kaspersky?
Have you see in AV-comparatives Kaspersky version 7 results?
In this test Kaspersky have 35 % an few FP-s too…
May I ask what you mean by "AV-comparatives Kaspersky version 7 " ?
And could you also explain this "In this test Kaspersky have 35 % an few FP-s too… " ?
Thanks
Al968
OK 
After tests, av-comparatives testes Kaspersky 7 too (both AV and IS) and how I see you can’t find this result, so there is link http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse/kav7.pdf
Thanks for the link, Actually I wonder why They didn’t use the version 7 in the genera report ???
With that said Kaspersky with heuristic beats Avast but without its heuristics Avast is the Winner. So once Avast gets some type of Heuristic or Improved Generic Detection Avast will be able to beat Kasperky with heuristics.
Al968
emm sorry ;)…actually wich AV is the best AV according to the AV comparative???is that NOD32???may i give some opinion,i ever use the KAV 6(kapersky)b4 and the detection is quite good same as what Tech have wrote but avast also with good detection too ;D…and it is more easy to use if compare with KAV6…KAV 6 is quite complicated…sorry if i had say something that make anyone unhappy…
On the main page, there is a Comparatives link and then select the Retrospective/ProActive Test May 2007, Online and that is the one which I have been talking about, the latest av-comparatives test.
@ andy214ever
Best is a very subjective word, what may be best for some might not meet others requirements, system resources, doesn’t support their software, etc. so detection rates are only one (an important one yes) category in the overall process of selecting an AV that suits your requirements.
ooo…thanks…is there any different between avast home and avast Pro?i means different in detection rate or some kinds else…
No not at all, its the level of configurability and more scanners
Al968
Click here to see the differences between avast Home & Professional versions.
Like al968, Pro version has Script Blocker provider and other configurable features: automatic managing infected files, scheduling for on-demand scannings, Enhanced user interface, etc.
To Tech:
I’m not exaggerating. NOD32 is way better than avast. Get your facts right, please. According to av-comparatives.org, only NOD32 had the highest certification level for Retrospective/ProActive tests with 68% overall. Avast has only 26%!
To al968:
Did you even bother to read the tests? Correct me if I’m wrong, only 6 AV had the highest certification level (AntiVir, AntiVirusKit had the highest overall, eScan, F-Secure, Kaspersky w/c I think is better than AntiVirusKit, and TrustPort AV)
[quote author=DavidR link=topic=28634.msg234517#msg234517 date=1180806315]
I agree with that. That’s the reason why I decided to post this…post. Anyway, even as technology continues to progress, people who do not have the money are not capable to follow with the times. That’s why I’m still stuck here with my Windows ME… my hard disk space is a mere 27GB(lower than iPod video) and 128MB RAM. It would be better if avast updates with smaller bytes for definitions files without obstructing it’s ability to detect the viruses. Everday it updates my CPU and slows it to a crawl, causing CPU freeze, etc.
First, you can’t base your opinion just on one test. For example, in the recent AV-Test.org test, NOD was way below avast!, if I remember correctly. Second, the latest av-comparatives.org test was pro-active - i.e. something very artificial; the normal user won’t use 3 months old virus signatures, right? So, it’s an interesting test, but certainly not the one to base your opinion about real detection capabilities on.
Sorry, but we can’t affect the number of appearing viruses. So my guess is that the number/size of updates will more likely grow in future, not the oposite.
I think say that Avast! is better that NOD32 it’s not true. It’s because NOD32 durring long times have:
-
self defence, Avast! haven’t.
-
Heuristic detection, Avast! have poor heuristic or generic detection, we all know that 26% it’s not a good result.
-
Ability detect rootkits, according these test Avast! have very poor detection of polimorphic viruses.
-
Speed, NOD32 on-demand and realtime speed is super fast, while Avast! speed is average.
When Avast! will have these abilitys we may can say Avast! is better than NOD32 and according av-comparatives NOD32 is best product of 2006, it always get advaced+ ( Avast! very rarely, I don’t remember such case ??? ). So, Alwil must work harder to make Avast! better than NOD32!
Well said.
@occultdestroyer
Please can you try to be a little more possitive about this issue.
Please do also note that Antivir for example got a good detection rate but had also a very high number of false possitive 
Al968