Battle Zemana Antilogger or Hitmanpro.Alert

[outlawxtorn]

Zemana Antilogger Or Hitmanpro.Alert to complement my set up?
I'm currently using voodoo shield pro, windows firewall control(paid), windows defender.

 

[mekelek]

i personally see no importance of this hitman feature.

if am paying hitman / zemana for their protection i am happy as long as i am protected.

previously zemana used to show the engine which detected the bug but that was making the user biased which is why they stopped it.

one scanner would detect most of the bugs & hence the end user would feel the other scanners are irrelevant / unnecessary.

i personally, used to feel that the Avira scanner is doing most of the work so what is the need for the other scan engines.

like i said earlier, i am paying zemana to guard my computers & i am only interested in the safety of my machines.

which engine inside the zemana software did how much work is not my concern as long as zemana on the whole is doing the job.

as for zemana telling the whole world about their scanner engines, why should they?

zemana is committed to protection from malware & loggers, how they do it is their business & nobody else's.

You really don't care to know which AV's deemed certain files unsafe? When you see a file detected by multiple engines, you can be sure it's unsafe. Plus I like to know which Engines the scanner is using, so I can know how effective it is.

 

[ispx]

@mekelek,

as an incentive i would like to have the additional information as to which engine detected the bug, but it aint a necessity for me.

to an average user it would make absolutely no difference as to who killed the bug, avira / bitdefender / clamav, as long as it is done.

may be for you as an advanced user it is essential to know which scanner engine did the job & i understand the importance for you.

zemana as a product will quarantine an unsafe file whether a single scanner engine detects it or all scanner engines detect it.

personally for me if even 1 scanner engine flags it as unsafe that is more than enough for me to keep away from that malicious file.

it is just a matter of what might be an essential necessity for you might not be that important for me.

whether or not the software discloses which engines it uses & which engine is more effective is not a comparison feature for performance.

 

[mekelek]

@mekelek,

as an incentive i would like to have the additional information as to which engine detected the bug, but it aint a necessity for me.

to an average user it would make absolutely no difference as to who killed the bug, Avira / Bitdefender / clamav, as long as it is done.

may be for you as an advanced user it is essential to know which scanner engine did the job & i understand the importance for you.

zemana as a product will quarantine an unsafe file whether a single scanner engine detects it or all scanner engines detect it.

personally for me if even 1 scanner engine flags it as unsafe that is more than enough for me to keep away from that malicious file.

it is just a matter of what might be an essential necessity for you might not be that important for me.

whether or not the software discloses which engines it uses & which engine is more effective is not a comparison feature for performance.

HMPA's anti-exploit is the best on the market, and now that they implement real-time protection into, it's gonna be even better. It's a nobrainer to me which is better but obviously everyone have their own preferences.

 

[ispx]

HMPA's anti-exploit is the best on the market, and now that they implement real-time protection into, it's gonna be even better. It's a nobrainer to me which is better but obviously everyone have their own preferences.

may be.

no offense, but dis-crediting zemana just because they will not tell you which scanner engines they use is a classic no brainer to me.

please try to understand, you prefer hitman, i prefer zemana, so be it.

all i am saying is, putting down zemana because they do not tell you which scanner engines they incorporate is not fair.

lol, by the way the OP has already decided & gone ahead with hitmanpro. it has been a pleasure debating with you @mekelek

 

[509322]

How can two products that provide completely different protections be compared ? The comparison is nonsensical. It is like comparing a ping-pong ball to a bowling ball - or is it trying to play ping-pong with a bowling ball ?

 

[Arequire]

Absolutely no reason to use Zemana with your setup. WD and VDS already provide more than enough protection against malware.
HMPA would be a good addition if you're that concerned about protecting against exploits but seeing as VDS will probably end up blocking whatever payload is dropped by said exploits I honestly don't see the need for it either.

 

[dinosaur07]

Zemana = Great Antilogger + Scanner.

Good antimalware solution also, plus fast scanning cloud engines.