how-to block ads
|
lawilson2
Premium
join:2001-04-30
Chicago, IL
| Why don't more people talk about Trend PC-Cillin?
I'm not trying to start a security suite war here, but I've used this in the past and am using it currently, and it uses low resources, and gets the job done for an all in one utility. Plus, it comes with a 90 day trial and is just $25 if you buy thru this site: »www.microsoft.com/athome/securit···ult.mspx
The school system I used to work for used Trend Enterprise which made me consider using it at home. To me, it's a great application that tends to get pushed aside in favor of McAfee or Norton, even CA (which I admit I like, but uses Zonealarm engine which gives my system problems). Any reasons for the diss?  | |
rotty97
join:2005-06-30
Australia
| I think that security software only gets talked about if it is perticularly bad (Norton) or perticularly exceptional (Kasperksy, Nod32, Comodo FW (recently becoming a matured and good firewall), Zonealarm Firewall, the antivirus is terrible). Otherwise they are not perticulary covered.
Bitdefender (Very good, still)
Panda (Very good, still)
Trend Micro etc (Updates are heard to be very big for dial-up users, of which i am one)
cheers, rotty | |
Mele20
Premium
join:2001-06-05
Hilo, HI
| reply to lawilson2
I think TrendMicro is not talked about much because its scanning engine is good but not exceptional. McAfee has a better scanning engine but the consumer version is bloated and not something most of us would use, whereas, the enterprise version that I am beta testing is quite good but consumers can't get it except perhaps through their employer for home use.
TrendMicro has had a great GUI ( I don't know about currently) and when I had it back in 2003 the free phone support was excellent (email support was not very good though). If I were choose from among the most well known AV in the USA, I would choose TrendMicro (since McAfee Enterprise is not available to consumers). But if I look about more broadly, then my choice would be Kaspersky, NOD32 or BitDefender with the new version of F-Prot and DrWeb being close runnerups.
Most AV miss 80% of viruses. Kaspersky nails almost all and NOD32 and Bit Defender are right up there too. Kaspersky updates 15-24 times a day and BD and NOD32 update frequently every day. McAfee updates once a day and I believe TrendMicro also updates once a day...it could be more but only KAV updates almost every hour.
From ZDNet:
"Why popular antivirus apps 'do not work'
By Munir Kotadia, ZDNet Australia
21 July 2006 04:38 PM
Antivirus applications from Symantec, McAfee or Trend Micro -- the three leading AV vendors in 2005 -- are far less likely to detect new viruses and Trojans than the least popular brands.
On Wednesday, the general manager of Australia's Computer Emergency Response Team (AusCERT), Graham Ingram, described how the threat landscape has changed -- along with the skill of malware authors.
"The most popular brands of antivirus on the market… have an 80 percent miss rate… So if you are running these pieces of software, eight out of 10 pieces of malicious code are going to get in," said Ingram.
Although Ingram didn't mention any of the leading losers by name, Gartner's figures for 2005 show that Symantec is the clear leader with 53.6 percent of the market. McAfee and Trend own 18.8 percent and 13.8 percent of the market respectively.
One vendor Ingram did mention was Russian outfit Kaspersky, which in the same tests managed to block around 90 percent of new malware.
According to Gartner, Kaspersky's market share is a lowly 0.7 percent."
Of course, Kaspersky's market share is rapidly changing now that AOL is offering AVS free to all which is KAV 2006 without some options.
»www.zdnet.com.au/blogs/securifyt···9,00.htm
--
"If you want to do DRM on a PC then you need to treat the user as the enemy." Ross Anderson in "`Trusted Computing' Frequently Asked Questions" | |
|
