Bitdefender vs Products Using Bitdefender Engine Explained

[Chromatinfish 123]

Bitdefender is a great program, but with still some cons with it. That's why people started releasing AV with Bitdefender's native engine but with different UI. Most come with dual-engines, one being the company's and one being Bitdefender's. The most popular ones are: F-Secure, Emsisoft, and Bullguard. You might ask, "Hey, but why won't people switch to these instead of using Bitdefender, since they come with Bitdefender's essential protection added with their own security options?" A big con of these alternatives are that they are usually outdated, because Bitdefender updates its own products first, then push it out into the other vendors.
So...
Pros of Bitdefender:
-More staff and faster updates
-Always up-to-date
Pros of Other Bitdefender-Based Products:
-Generally more features
-Generally slimmer (less bloated)

 

[Littlebits]

BitDefender develops all of its real-time protection features, they only lease their scanning engine to other vendors which is usually an older version but has the latest signature updates. F-Secure, Emsisoft, Qihu 360, Bullguard and others develop their own real-time protection features and implement the scanning engine.

The most bloated part of BitDefender's own product is its real-time protection features that is why other products that using its engines have less bloat and bugs. Just because they use an older scanning engine doesn't mean that the detection is inferior since the signature updates are the same. Newer engines are also much heavier, older engines are more stable.

BitDefender also is known for poor custom support and resolved bugs another benefit for using another product with the BitDefender engine.

Enjoy!!

 

[antreas]

iobit advanced system care ultimate have bitdefender engine too

{the ultimate version no pro}

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

BitDefender develops all of its real-time protection features, they only lease their scanning engine to other vendors which is usually an older version but has the latest signature updates. F-Secure, Emsisoft, Qihu 360, Bullguard and others develop their own real-time protection features and implement the scanning engine.

The most bloated part of BitDefender's own product is its real-time protection features that is why other products that using its engines have less bloat and bugs. Just because they use an older scanning engine doesn't mean that the detection is inferior since the signature updates are the same. Newer engines are also much heavier, older engines are more stable.

BitDefender also is known for poor custom support and resolved bugs another benefit for using another product with the BitDefender engine.

Enjoy!!

After reading a few posts on their forum, I knew that the technical support wouldn't cut it for me. Some staff seemed rude and closed the thread for no reason.

 

[Manzai]

Bitdefender : AVC is awesome
F-Secure : DeepGuard
Emsisoft : Hight detection rate
BullGuard : Proactivity and light RAM Usage

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

If somebody took Bitdefender's Active Virus Control, Comodo's Firewall, Sandboxie's Sandbox, and VirusTotal's 52 engines for cloud on-demand scanning, that would be an antivirus that would be the best!

 

[Littlebits]

If somebody took Bitdefender's Active Virus Control, Comodo's Firewall, Sandboxie's Sandbox, and VirusTotal's 52 engines for cloud on-demand scanning, that would be an antivirus that would be the best!

That sounds like the false alert king from hell.

Thanks.

 

[Jaspion]

If somebody took Bitdefender's Active Virus Control, Comodo's Firewall, Sandboxie's Sandbox, and VirusTotal's 52 engines for cloud on-demand scanning, that would be an antivirus that would be the best!

That sounds like the false alert king from hell.

Thanks.

Sounds like Tiranium?

 

[PVA_BR]

Bitdefender's Active Virus Control

In my own use of Bitdefender Total Security, It has never got a FP. Usually, I keep this feature in permissive mode.

 

[Deleted member 178]

Bit Defender = high FPs ratio and many bugs
Emsisoft = BD high FPs ratio - Emsi own engine = less FPs than BD

 

[conceptualclarity]

BitDefender develops all of its real-time protection features, they only lease their scanning engine to other vendors which is usually an older version but has the latest signature updates. F-Secure, Emsisoft, Qihu 360, Bullguard and others develop their own real-time protection features and implement the scanning engine.

The most bloated part of BitDefender's own product is its real-time protection features that is why other products that using its engines have less bloat and bugs. Just because they use an older scanning engine doesn't mean that the detection is inferior since the signature updates are the same. Newer engines are also much heavier, older engines are more stable.

BitDefender also is known for poor custom support and resolved bugs another benefit for using another product with the BitDefender engine.

Once again, very useful info from Littlebits.

i cast my vote for Advanced System Care Ultimate since I enjoyed it when trialing it. I plan to trial Emsisoft on my next system.

 

[omidomi]

emsisoft is good .
because it fast and powerfull!

 

[cooldoctor2007]

Sounds like Tiranium?

 

[ForgottenSeer 19494]

Bitdefender or Emsisoft. The one i use is below.

Emsisoft has a good HIPS and an antimalware network. Bitdefender has Active Virus Control and B-Have and Intrusion detection system. You can't go wrong.

 

[souhrid]

I believe ashampoo av also uses bitdefender scanning engine. But I didn't find any major bugs for a new software like ashampoo compared with age old bitdefender products.

 

[Raul90]

I choose Emsisoft hands down Why? Bad Support! Lot of promises but just promises and not only in the BD forums but also with their tech support. Have not gotten over when I tried BIS / BAV Pro sometime ago and the help was pffffft.....

 

[Nico@FMA]

Personally i understand that BD is making a ton of money by selling AV engine modules and such.
Yet the market is flooded with hybrids and such.
Which IMO gets out of control, look at virus total like sites.
Out of the 50+ engines at least 6 or 7 are BD.
There is no point scanning the same file with 6 the same engines and signatures.
Also what i do not like is some brands boosting kickass detections and such while they only made the GUI as the rest is scrapped together from other vendors.
But ill guess everyone is trying to make a buck or 2.
However for the end user it is really wild wild west out there.
Thats just my opinion, yet i think BD is a respectable brand which is being brought down by these wannabe antivirus brands.
Granted there are a very small amount of AV vendors that use the BD engine and made it better or make it work nice alongside their own product..

 

[FlimFlam]

I'll take Emsisoft over Bitdefender any day.

 

[Nikos751]

BitDefender 2015 seems a lot better to me than previous versions.

 

[Rus Anca]

Bitdefender is a great program, but with still some cons with it. That's why people started releasing AV with Bitdefender's native engine but with different UI. Most come with dual-engines, one being the company's and one being Bitdefender's. The most popular ones are: F-Secure, Emsisoft, and Bullguard. You might ask, "Hey, but why won't people switch to these instead of using Bitdefender, since they come with Bitdefender's essential protection added with their own security options?" A big con of these alternatives are that they are usually outdated, because Bitdefender updates its own products first, then push it out into the other vendors.
So...
Pros of Bitdefender:
-More staff and faster updates
-Always up-to-date
Pros of Other Bitdefender-Based Products:
-Generally more features
-Generally slimmer (less bloated)

If you are really interested in reading this article, following an opinion endorsed:http://securitywatch.pcmag.com/secu...-antivirus-protection-test-winners-and-losers