Quick Heal vs Fortinet vs K7

[Daniel Hidalgo]

Hello to all the community mt
Of these three products what is the best? and why that choice ?. Here again alternative solution is accepted

 

[Piteko21]

I think your idea was to escape a little to commonly used programs...
according some tests, that I watch, Fortinet is the best option.
Has "good" signatures...and a very good web blocking.
the others 2, QuickHeal and K7 aren't know by the "best results"... are weak in many points.
but I only test Fortinet years ago, so my opinion is just ... My Opinion.

Avast free is a good choice, Its a more reliable and consistent product.

 

[jamescv7]

If I will pertain based on numerous observations + test conducted by many users.

When it comes to features accumulate then I will go between Quick Heal IS and K7 Internet Security.

Quick Heal: Consist of their DNA detection capabilities which is combined as behavior detector/blocker + Browser sandbox besides to their AV core.

K7 IS: The difference here is it incorporates HIPS and other banking protection that usually common at all.

Meanwhile Forti Client Lite is well known for business type, other complex features are located on other higher version.

__________________________

In such protection capabilities :

Forticlient: As a really good web blocker and a factor that its more on business type concern which primarily focus on all threats as possible.

Quick Heal: Typically another pretty fine tune against web based threats for zero day and if everything bypass then DNA component should help to solve it.

K7 IS: Well let's say the consistency varies, sometimes it did well done or not likely but if you use their HIPS then surely no worries at all.

____________________________

When it comes to user interface:

In simplicity then Forticilient (1st), next Quick Heal (2nd) and lastly K7 (3rd).

____________________________________

Overall it depends since these are considered to unusual products even though they are exist, well their protection are wise but really depends against zero day.

 

[Rajat]

Forticlient has excellent signatures but no Behavior Blocker or HIPS(i've used forticlient lite a while ago so i'm not sure about the latest one). It is fairly lite & user friendly as well.
K7 is a parallel product to eset. Both have decent signatures, less FP, no behavior blocker, HIPS for proactive protection & are lite on system as well. K7 is definitely one of the most underrated products of all time.
Quick Heal consist of many other features that the above two security solutions doesn't provide. It is little bit heavy on system. Can't say about signatures(i've tested it earlier on virussign samples & sometimes it did good sometimes it didn't).

For me k7 is best among these 3 but if you aren't willing to pay then Fortilite isn't bad at all.

 

[ravi prakash saini]

I have not used Forticlient but K7 is better than quick heal in all department as i have used them both. k7 provides solid protection and it is light on system

 

[Rishi]

None of these have a zero day component so running them along with an anti-exploit or anti-executable would be a good option.I had tried K7 long time back and found it to be satisfactory. Fortinet's signatures and web filter are very good and it can be used as a companion to the other main AVs.Quickheal has more features in their Beta release, but an anti malware is a must to accompany it as it's detections dip compared to it's removal abilities.