Ok, curiosity got the better of me and I’m going to install it. Will be back to report how I feel about it lol.
======================
I just came from a malware forum and was trying to get a neutral review of AV softwares around. After seeing a moderator shout at someone for talking about comodo software I realized I wasn’t going to get a good neutral review of anything there, especially Comodo (which they hated). I was curious about the bad form Comodo Admins were apparently sporting (according to them) and after coming here I was impressed with the level-headedness and maturity as well as remarkably honest behavior of everyone here (ie discussing MSE’s outstanding detection methods and how Comodo needed that).
Therefore I hope that someone informed may help me compare KIS to Comodo for my situation.
I am a long time user of KIS and it works, but there is a slight problem… it’s version 6.0. As a modestly informed end-user using the latest threat updates I have detected and blocked every trojan or virus that comes my way for 3 years. Every time I try to install a new KIS version I detest the resource drain and go back to my staple. Also I do scans with hijack this as well as other programs (avira, MBAM) for secondary virus detection. Again KIS does a stellar job blocking virii and malware.
Despite this, I saw the videos on youtube about Comodo and how KIS actually allowed malware whereas comodo didn’t. This concerns me and I am curious what some of you here have to say in regards to KIS, especially in regards to the threat signatures and their old methods of custom, manually set permissions.
I realize I am running on old technology but since it worked (at least in my case) how much of a gain/risk would I be incurring if I migrate to Comodo?
Also how does it compare in terms of speed to the old version of KIS?
Thank you for your honesty as well as any reviews / comparisons of Komodo you may share as i only found 3 (the youtube reviews, the 100% rating from Matousec, and one review from brighthub)
I cant really comment on Kaspersky 6.0 but i did have 2009 installed on an XP Pro box a while back. From what i found just like you i found that version to be a resource hog :-TD It did seem to do its job and was fairly configurable. The AV section was fine but the trouble with the bigger vendors imo is that because these are installed on a lot of systems the first thing the malware writers do is make sure said avs dont detect whatever they produce!
When looking at reaction times Kaspersky does seem to be fair pretty well in tests such as AV-Comparitives, but at the end of the day to you want your security to be reactive or proactive? I wont tell you Comodo Internet Security is the be all and end all, it has its faults and foibles and does take a bit of getting used to (though this has greatly improved). As long as you know where to look if a program isnt working, give it a fair ■■■■■ i think you will be pleasantly surprised.
Not many nasties have got through CIS5.
Other factors that could influence your thinking. Do you download/install a lot of software, are you behind a router, do you like to tweak your security software so it informs you of most things or do you just want to install and forget? The only real proof is in the pudding, install it and give it a go for a couple of weeks, if its not for you then you can allways go back to what you had and are used to.
Comodos AV is still probably the weakest part of CIS, not in detection where its not bad at all (there are a lot of members who submit many wild/undetected malware samples kudos to them) but in the rate of false positives. This is becoming less of an issue as time goes on and normally if the fp is reported in the correct section it is dealt with pretty quick.
Yep, I don’t really understand the hate. Languy99 (who is a mod here) tests AV software on his youtube account. And some of these AV perform poorly while Comodo does a better job, thanks to the HIPS.
Most AV software lack this part (I think KIS doesn’t have it), the HIPS asks the user to take a decision if something strange is happening. It isn’t really user friendly, but Comodo improved it with the sandbox. An unsigned software will be executed with limited rights until it is identified as safe.
Hopefully LanGuy99 will speak up, because I know he is (was?) a Kaspersky user.
Obviously most of the regular forum users here like Comodo, but as it seems you’ve recognized, it’s not as fanatical as other forums. Most people here realize that you can’t be all things to all people, and as such, nobody really tries to discourage anybody from using any other security software. It’s your computer, and ultimately your choice in what you choose to run on it.
Matty_R’s post is a good example. People will often give their opinion about the operation of competing software, but ultimately tell you the decision is yours. Try it and see what you think.
Gonna edit this reply after I’m done installing but wow thanks for the incredible answers guys!
I see why people fall in love with these forums.
I am about to test it on my system, but coming from a decently computer literate standpoint I think I really like how CIS seems just as system (un)intensive as KIS 6.0.
I also don’t mind false positives at all. KIS 6.0 is riddled with “false positives” and popups and my paranoia is happy with it. Better safe than sorry.
