Stranger said:Which is best in terms of protection and usability according to you?
woodrowbone said:Maybe WSA, due to malware tend to disable the big guns the first thing they do if they pass the first line of defense.
I have seen Norton 2012 uninstalled, but the icon in the bottom right corner were still there to make you think Norton were still active.
I think Languy99 have a video on youtube showing the same thing if you care to browse his vids.
/W
Biozfear said:To be honest, based on the few tests I did with all 3 products (aside from the videos I have uploaded), all have their pros and cons.
If we are to look at what type of users each product is targeted, then Norton wins hands down due to their Install and Forget approach.
Sure there has been infections that makes Norton fail, aside from Languy99 tests, however one is to note that Avira is not perfect either and although its detection rate is within the highest DR solutions, it also has some downfalls. Languy99 Webroot test was also with a bad result.
Webroot on the other hand lacks on Detection and some other components, it still has great potential. I personally like the fact that it can be paired up with another Solution, as well as their version of process explorer.
In a nutshell:
Usability and UI Friendly: Norton/Webroot
Additional Features: Norton/Webroot
Default settings potential: Norton
Zero day protection: Tie between Norton and Avira
Detection Rate: Avira
Performance: Norton/Webroot
Customization of settings: Avira
That being said, I am unable to vote due to the fact that what could be best for me might not be best for other users.
woodrowbone said:BTW, did you test WSA and it´s rollback feature when you tried it out?
I have seen a lot of tests but never this feature in action, it sounds to good to be true:
"Unlike traditional security solutions which can leave behind damaged files or traces of malware after an infection, Webroot SecureAnywhere – Endpoint Protection includes a rollback feature that restores the system to its previous safe state. This can eliminate the need for reimaging every infected computer, which eats up more than 17 hours of an IT manager’s time every month."
If I understand the feature correctly WSA could miss a threat day 1, but as the program is unknown it is monitored until considered safe.
Lets say it is detected day 2, it should in theory clean and rollback all the changes that has happened since it first infected the computer day 1.
Do you think this can be tested?
/W
Biozfear said:woodrowbone said:BTW, did you test WSA and it´s rollback feature when you tried it out?
I have seen a lot of tests but never this feature in action, it sounds to good to be true:
"Unlike traditional security solutions which can leave behind damaged files or traces of malware after an infection, Webroot SecureAnywhere – Endpoint Protection includes a rollback feature that restores the system to its previous safe state. This can eliminate the need for reimaging every infected computer, which eats up more than 17 hours of an IT manager’s time every month."
If I understand the feature correctly WSA could miss a threat day 1, but as the program is unknown it is monitored until considered safe.
Lets say it is detected day 2, it should in theory clean and rollback all the changes that has happened since it first infected the computer day 1.
Do you think this can be tested?
/W
I have not tried Endpoint Protection version.
I tried Essentials and reviewed (text based) the Antivirus version.
Heres the comparison between the 2 versions I tested. Also I did run the AV version for some time along with ESET.
http://www.webroot.com/En_US/consumer-compare.html
I am not sure if it can be tested.
I will look into the endpoint version, but can't promise anything at the moment.