Best Anti-Virus Software For 2009

Best Anti-Virus Software For 2009

For better or worse, it is now required to have some form of anti-virus software on your computer.  With instant on internet and the massive amount of spammers, bots, bugs, trojans, and etc; its foolish not to use anti-virus.  With the massive amount of viruses, there are now many options to decide between for picking the right software to defend yourself.  I hope I can shed some light on what would be the right software for your specific computer.

Original article seen at http://www.pcworld.com

#1  Symantec Norton Internet Security 2009

Performance: Superior	Ease of use: Superior	Features: Very Good	Overall:  88%
Malware Detection:  98.9%	Malware Removal:  80%	Adware Detection:  96.8%	Unknown Detection:  48.2 %

Symantec Norton Internet Security 2009 ($70 for three users as of 12/24/08) came in as the clear winner in "Paying for Protection," this year's roundup of nine security suites. It pairs excellent malware detection and cleanup with a smooth, intuitive interface and a good range of features. Norton wasn't tops in every category we tested, and it is pricey--only one rival, the Kaspersky security suite, cost more. But if you want a solid product to protect your PC, Norton Internet Security is a great option, and it's our top pick.

Symantec Norton Internet Security 2009 remains a strong, well-balanced security suite--and its upgrades this year make it even better. Users angling for the absolute best malware detection, or people who need backup functions in their suite, might find a better fit elsewhere. But for most shoppers, Norton is a solid choice.

Bottom Line: This strong security suite costs a little more than most alternatives, but it's easy to use and good at blocking malicious software.

#2  BitDefender Internet Security 2009

Performance: Very Good	Ease of use: Good	Features: Very Good	Overall:  87%
Malware Detection:  97.3%	Unknown Detection:  55%

BitDefender Internet Security 2009 earned a respectable second-place finish in "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of security suites. Its low cost gave it a boost in our rankings--at $40 for one user (as of 12/23/08), it's the least expensive suite we tested--as did its strong showing in heuristic tests that simulate how well a suite can detect new and unknown malware. But while BitDefender fixed some annoyances that marred the previous version of the suite, the 2009 edition still has some rough edges.

If you want good protection that won't hit your wallet hard, and if you're willing to put up with some relatively minor annoyances as you use your PC, BitDefender may be appropriate for you. But if you're willing to pay more, Symantec's Norton Internet Security 2009--our top security-suite pick--is probably a better option.

Bottom Line: BitDefender's suite gives you good protection for a great price, if you're willing to put up with a couple of interface annoyances.

#3  Panda Internet Security 2009

Performance: Very Good	Ease of use: Very Good	Features: Very Good	Overall:  84%
Malware Detection:  95%	Unknown Detection:  45.3%	Spyware:  69%

Panda Internet Security 2009 boasts an extensive feature set and an easy-to-use interface, both of which helped it attain a third-place finish in "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of security suites, after Norton Internet Security 2009 and BitDefender Internet Security 2009. But its ability to block malicious software didn't rank as well, and the suite had some genuine difficulty dealing with some especially nasty malware, despite its new Internet-based scanning feature.

Bottom Line: The Panda suite covers all the bases with its features, and it scans quickly, but in tests it lagged some rivals in malware detection.

#4  McAfee Internet Security Suite 2009

Performance: Very Good	Ease of use: Very Good	Features: Very Good	Overall:  82%
Malware Detection:  97.4%	Unknown Detection:  13%

McAfee Internet Security Suite 2009 ($60 for three users as of 12/23/08) landed smack dab in the middle of the rankings for "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of security suites, ranking fifth out of the nine tested products. The 2009 version features Artemis, a new Internet-based malware detection feature. Offsetting Artemis and McAfee's otherwise generally good malware detection rate, however, were its slow scanning speed, its interface annoyances, and its very poor performance in proactive, behavioral detection tests.

Bottom Line: Its mix of pluses (such as good detection rates) and minuses (such as slow scan speed) lands McAfee's offering in the middle of the pack.

#5  Avira Premium Security Suite 8.2

Performance: Superior	Ease of use: Good	Features: Poor	Overall:  82%
Malware Detection:  99.2%	Unknown Detection:  55.3%	Adware Detection:  99.6%

Avira Premium Security Suite ($54 for one user as of 12/23/08) excels where it counts. This package beat the competition in "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of nine security suites, in detection tests, continuing Avira's long history of strong performance in such tests.

If you're a more technically inclined user willing to figure out a few things on your own, and you want the best malware detection available, Avira's suite might be a fine choice for you. But a number of other suites are easier to use. And if you fear that you already have a rootkit on your system, this is not the suite to buy.

Bottom Line: Avira's suite is a good choice for more-technical users who want the best detection but don't need phone support or parental controls

#6  Kaspersky Lab Kaspersky Internet Security 2009

Performance: Superior	Ease of use: Good	Features: Good	Overall:  81%
Malware Detection:  95.6%	Unknown Detection:  52%	Adware Detection:  98.1%

Kaspersky Internet Security 2009 was the most expensive security package we tested for "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of nine security suites ($80 for three users as of 12/23/08). That cost might be justified if the package delivered top-notch performance and a smooth user experience--but it doesn't. Its overall malware-detection rate was below average, and the suite proved aggravating to use in several different scenarios.

Despite an attractive program interface, in the end Kaspersky's package comes across as somewhat unfinished: It needs better default settings and much better descriptions and help, and it could also use improved malware detection. Factor in the steep price, and Kaspersky's suite has little left that distinguishes it from competitors.

Bottom Line: If Kaspersky wants to charge the highest price, the suite should have the best protection and a smooth, intuitive interface. It doesn't.

#7  F-Secure Internet Security 2009

Performance: Very Good	Ease of use: Very Good	Features: Poor	Overall:  78%
Malware Detection:  96.6%	Unknown Detection:  54.1%	Adware Detection:  99.5%

F-Secure Internet Security 2009 ($60 for three users as of 12/23/08) ranked an unimpressive seventh out of the group of nine in "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of security suites. It started with middling malware detection, and then it slipped further due to its generally slow scan speed and its lack of extra features, such as backup and antiphishing. The suite's reasonably intuitive and easy-to-use interface, as well as its useful startup wizard, weren't enough to outweigh its faults.

F-Secure's Internet Security 2009 did an okay job at detecting malware, and it's a generally easy-to-use application. But when it comes to keeping your computer safe, you'll want better than just okay.

Bottom Line: F-Secure's package provides decent detection and a clear, informative interface, but other suites offer stronger protection.

#8  Webroot Internet Security Essentials

Performance: Very Good	Ease of use: Good	Features: Poor	Overall:  77%
Malware Detection:  89.6%	Unknown Detection:  39.8%	Adware Detection:  90.4%

Webroot's Internet Security Essentials ($60 for three users as of 12/23/08) marks the antispyware company's first foray into security suites. This patchwork suite brings together an antivirus scanner from Sophos, a firewall from Privacyware, and online backup using Webroot's own servers. But it lacks parental controls, antispam, and browser-based antiphishing capabilities, and it fared poorly at the core task of identifying malicious software.

Webroot's second try at a security suite might prove much better, but a poor malware-detection rate, a lack of certain useful features, and other issues mean you should pass up this first edition.

Bottom Line: Webroot's first foray into security suites needs some work--and better malware detection--before it becomes worthy of consideration.

#9  Trend Micro Internet Security Pro 2009

Performance: Good	Ease of use: Very Good	Features: Good	Overall:  74%
Malware Detection:  69.3%	Unknown Detection:  N/A	Adware Detection:  N/A

Trend Micro Internet Security Pro 2009 ($70 for three users as of 12/24/08) fails badly at any security suite's most important task: Identifying malware before it can attack your PC. In tests for "Paying for Protection," our 2009 roundup of nine security suites, Trend Micro's newest offering didn't just come in last place in that crucial category--its dismal 69.3 percent detection rate was a full 20 percentage points behind the next worst competitor. In AV-Test.org's tests, which put each suite up against a huge array of bots, password stealers, and other malware, top performers tagged about 99 percent of the 654,914 samples--but Trend Micro's package let three out of every ten pieces of malicious software go by untouched. That just doesn't cut it for security software.

Trend Micro's suite has some good points, but there's no getting around the fact that Internet Security Pro 2009 fails at detecting malicious software, and therefore fails as a security program. We cannot recommend buying it.

Bottom Line: Trend Micro's latest suite fails at the most basic task of detecting and blocking malicious software. Not recommended.