- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
FortiClient V5 Free Test(MalwareDoctor)
- Thread starter MDTechVideos
- Start date
It is advised to take all reviews with a grain of salt. In extreme cases some reviews use dramatization for entertainment purposes.
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
MalwareCenter said:
I made this yesterday when the site was down. Can't let a minor glitch shut me down right?
Though I would have to say the samples here are some of the best I have run across. Hope it has been alright that I have incorporated some of the samples here in my test.
InternetChicken
New Member
- Jul 16, 2012
- 519
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
tapoo said:looks like new version?? where can i get it?? their website still showing screenshot of old version
Are you sure you are looking at the correct forticlient.com?
http://postimage.org/image/txrxmekw1/
*Posted link because embedding image does not seem to be working properly for me.
- Oct 23, 2012
- 12,527
appreciate the time and effort put in by you to test these softwares for the members.Informative and unbiased!!!!!!!
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
Malware Maniac
Level 1
- May 14, 2012
- 673
- Jan 21, 2012
- 639
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient-Lite/3000-2239_4-75532356.html
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient/3000-2239_4-75755299.html?tag=mncol;2
i am too much confused now, its the same company with 2 different versions of free software???
please enlighten me.....
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient/3000-2239_4-75755299.html?tag=mncol;2
i am too much confused now, its the same company with 2 different versions of free software???
please enlighten me.....
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
tapoo said:
From my understanding Forticlient is the brainchild of Fortinet. Forticlient, the product I tested, appeared to be entirely free in my opinion. Starting on their website, the first sign that it is free is that it says FREE DOWNLOAD(no free 30-day trial or anything like that) right on top of the downloads section of their homepage where I initially downloaded the product for testing. Now, some may argue that this is a free download to a trial for their product,as some sneaky companies try to pull of stuff like that,which is fair enough. But when I opened up the detailed settings (av engine version, etc.) of the product at 0:16 into the review, I didn't see any indication of a trial running, which would be included on most trial programs in hopes of pestering the user enough to purchase the product. Lastly, I received no pop-up alerts that I should purchase the "full" version. I know they offer an Endpoint suite, but that is not what the review was. Maybe they do offer other paid products(which is the only way they could stay in business
), but the one I tested, from all the signs I saw, was free.
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient/3000-2239_4-75755299.html?tag=mncol;2
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient-Lite/3000-2239_4-75532356.html
http://download.cnet.com/FortiClient-Lite/3000-2239_4-75532356.html
MalwareDoctor said:
I am trying the 4.3 version (no firewall) - download was 18MB, running 25 MB in memory. No noticeable slowdown at all. Running with PrivateFirewall without any conflicts. Didn't attach itself to the startup menu though. During download, it had a box to tic to optimize itself - said otherwise it would do it in memory, so I guess it needs less memory with that tic-ed? Thanks for the review.
- Jan 21, 2012
- 639
^^its web shield and po*n filter is quite good, used some months ago, good freeware alternative for household with kids, detection rate is also quite good....
another competitor for Avast / avira / avg....
more competition, more good free security products comes, users will get more benefit 8)
another competitor for Avast / avira / avg....
more competition, more good free security products comes, users will get more benefit 8)
- Aug 5, 2012
- 473
tapoo said:^^its web shield and po*n filter is quite good, used some months ago, good freeware alternative for household with kids, detection rate is also quite good....
another competitor for Avast / avira / avg....
more competition, more good free security products comes, users will get more benefit 8)
I wouldn't rely too heavily on these professional company results. Though some aspects of this and other results cam be very good at giving the user a rough idea as to proactive and reactive detection of a av(VB goes into a greater detail than the some of the other sources do) but I just do not see these test as a reliable source for information. On VB site it says they use "the freshest samples available at the time the products are submitted to the test". A problem for every av tester and company out there is that samples because outdated really quickly. Now I am sure they have a system in place to help in making the test as fair as possible, but it's impossible to have every test equal. Now, testing each product one-by-one and giving the user the look and feel of a product is much better in my opinion than throwing an av chart in a users face. Obviously the average computer user will look to the best performing av on the chart and conclude that av is the best one out there(which is silly in my opinion). I try not to think that companies like PcMag,VB, and av-comparatives fiddle with their results(I am fairly certain toptenreviews does this), but you just never know.
EDIT: Spelling revision
MalwareDoctor said:tapoo said:^^its web shield and po*n filter is quite good, used some months ago, good freeware alternative for household with kids, detection rate is also quite good....
another competitor for Avast / avira / avg....
more competition, more good free security products comes, users will get more benefit 8)
I wouldn't rely too heavily on these professional company results. Though some aspects of this and other results cam be very good at giving the user a rough idea as to proactive and reactive detection of a av(VB goes into a greater detail than the some of the other sources do) but I just do not see these test as a reliable source for information. On VB site it says they use "the freshest samples available at the time the products are submitted to the test". A problem for every av tester and company out there is that samples because outdated really quickly. Now I am sure they have a system in place to help in making the test as fair as possible, but it's impossible to have every test equal. Now, testing each product one-by-one and giving the user the look and feel of a product is much better in my opinion than throwing an av chart in a users face. Obviously the average computer user will look to the best performing av on the chart and conclude that av is the best one out there(which is silly in my opinion). I try not to think that companies like PcMag,VB, and av-comparatives fiddle with their results(I am fairly certain toptenreviews does this), but you just never know.
EDIT: Spelling revision
AC Comparatives doesn't like Forticlient, but it does better on AV-Test and it does even better on VB100 - go figure. It does good enough on all the recent YouTube reviews I've seen. It's lighter/faster on surfing on my machine than Kingsoft, Avast, MSE. YMMV!
I'm using this now and i have to say it's much improved over the other previous versions. It's web blocker is amazing but will block some legit sites but it can be easily disabled if needed. It's web blocker i think is as strong as trend micro's security atm in the way it just blocks all the urls.
Similar threads
