Other Antivirus Programs

Avast Pro Antivirus 5.0

Protection: Very good. Avast scored above-average results in all 4 of AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests.  Speed: Good. The program received an Advanced award in AV-Comparatives' performance test in 2009. False alarms: Good. Avast had a low level of false alarms in AV-C's August 2009/February 2010 tests. Ease of use: Very good. Version 5 has a very much improved interface that's modern and simple to use. Phone Support: None. The only means of support offered is submitting a ticket via the Avast website. Our experience: we have really only used Avast for testing, but have been impresssed so far.

Verdict: A very good program, which we would recommend if it had telephone support

Avast website

Symantec Norton AntiVirus 2010

Protection: Good. Norton had above-average scores in 3 out of 4 of AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests, and was joint winner of the "Dynamic" test. Speed: Very good. The program received an Advanced+ award in AV-Comparatives' performance test in 2009, and finished third in our startup tests. False alarms: Good. Norton had quite a low rate of false alarms in AV-Comparatives' tests in August 2009/February 2010. Ease of use: Good. The program design is simple and modern. Phone Support: Fair. The phone number is somewhat hidden on the website. We are not entirely convinced of support agents' expertise or command of English. Our experience: The firewall in the Internet Security/360 suites can cause network connection problems and cannot be selectively uninstalled. We have found the suites are also inclined to nag; the simple antivirus program is better in this respect.

Verdict: Mostly very good, but the firewall in the suites and getting support can cause frustration

Symantec website

Bitdefender Antivirus 2010

Protection: Very good. Bitdefender scored above-average results in all 4 of AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests.  Speed: Good. The program received an Advanced award in AV-Comparatives' performance test in 2009. False alarms: Very Good. Avast had a very low level of false alarms in AV-C's August 2009/February 2010 tests. Ease of use: Good. The 2010 version allows you to choose different interfaces for beginners, intermediate or advanced users. Phone Support: Fair. When you get to speak to an agent, support is good, but you have to log in to your account to find the phone number, and then wait a long time for your call to be answered. Our experience: we have done fairly extensive testing with Bitdefender. We noticed it is very inclined to nag, even to the point of making you install optional, non-critical Windows updates; we also had some reliability problems under Windows 7.

Verdict: Very good in many ways, but doesn't quite work smoothly enough for a recommendation

Bitdefender website

Webroot AntiVirus with Spy Sweeper 2010

Protection: Below average. The Sophos antivirus engine in Webroot AntiVirus used to be one of the most effective, but has not coped so well with recent threats. It got below-average scores in all of AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests, although the February 2010 test showed an improvement. Speed: Fair. The actual Webroot program is not tested by AV-Comparatives. In our startup tests, it was a little below average. False alarms: Variable. The Sophos engine had an above-average level of false alrms in AV-C's August 2009, but a very low level in the February 2010 test. Ease of use: Good. The program design is simple and easy to use. Phone Support: Very good. Telephone support is very good, and the number is clearly displayed on the website. Our experience: We have used Webroot AntiVirus extensively, and found it simple to use, if a bit slow.

Verdict: No longer offers optimal protection, though support is good and it's easy to use

Webroot website

AVG Anti-Virus 9.0

Protection: Average. AVG reached slightly below-average results in AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests; in each case, a small improvement would give it an above-average result. Speed: Fair. The program received an Advanced award in AV-Comparatives' performance test in 2009, but finished last in our startup tests. False alarms: Good. AVG had low levels of false alarms in AV-C's August 2009/February 2010 tests. Ease of use: Good. The program design is simple and modern. Phone Support: Very good. Telephone support is good, and easy to reach. Our experience: we have a fair amount of experience of the program, and have found it to be simple and reliable.

Verdict: Easy to use, good support, but protection not quite good enough to recommend

AVG website

McAfee AntiVirus Plus 2010

Protection: Average. McAfee got above-average scores in 2 out of 4 of AV-Comparatives' last 4 malware protection tests. Speed: Good. McAfee received an Advanced+ award in AV-Comparatives' 2009 performance tests. We believe the 2010 programs are faster than previous versions. False alarms: Poor. In AV-Comparatives' August 2009/February 2010 tests, McAfee had high levels of false alarms. Ease of use: Good. The 2010 programs have a new, simple and modern interface. Phone Support: Fair. Finding the number on the website and getting an answer from an agent is slow and bureaucratic, and very expensive at £1 per minute. Our experience: We have found that the firewall included with all McAfee antivirus programs/suites can cause problems, such as conflicting with other programs, blocking legitimate websites, and preventing access to other devices on the local area network. It is can be uninstalled separately, though we wouldn't recommend this to beginners.

Verdict: The 2010 version is faster and easier to use, but it's not the best at identifying malware

McAfee website