IMF Free Review

[WinDefend]

A lovely review by Malwaretips user Biozfear:

 

malwaretips.com/Thread-Review- IObit-MalwareFighter-free

[Edit] My bad.

[enoskype]

Hi WinDefend,

 

This isn't one of those "agree to disagree" moments.

A lovely review by Malwaretips user Biozfear:

I don't understand the lovely part of it.

I hope the test is not for to start another known contraversy. It seems it has already started there.

 

It would have been better for comparison if the PRO edition (without the caution sign on tray icon that you don't like to see! :smile:) was tested. (Specially Malicious Action Guard and Process Guard turned ON)

 

I wonder what will be his test rating for ASC w A/V. :lol:

 

Cheers.

[WinDefend]

The lovely part is mostly a praise for his detail on text reviews. I have started to take an interest in them. I suppose the contraversy is better than the issues that arise on Wilders every time Iobit is mentioned.

 

The ASCwAV test will indeed be interesting. As for the tray icon, yes I dislike it a lot. Hopefully my feedback will get pushed up to the team!

[solbjerg]

Hi WinDefend

The curious part is that Malwarebytes is mentioned every time as a much better program.

Everytime I have tried Malwarebytes during the last year, Malwarebytes has NOT found a single item on my machine.

 

The "test" itself that you bring up is once again a "test" using a malware packet filled with virus definitions, which is an inappropriate method if one wants to test a program that specifically mentions that the program has to be run alongside a proper antivirus program.

 

A more appropriate test would be a malware packet cleaned by an antivirus program first.

It might be interesting to see the difference between the Free version and the Pro version of IObit Malware Fighter.

 

Cheers

solbjerg

p.s. about the notification that you are running the program without having full protection my view on that is that it should of course continue to show that you are running it without full protection.

 

 

The lovely part is mostly a praise for his detail on text reviews. I have started to take an interest in them. I suppose the contraversy is better than the issues that arise on Wilders every time Iobit is mentioned.

 

The ASCwAV test will indeed be interesting. As for the tray icon, yes I dislike it a lot. Hopefully my feedback will get pushed up to the team!

[Buddahfan]

Hi WinDefend

The curious part is that Malwarebytes is mentioned every time as a much better program.

Everytime I have tried Malwarebytes during the last year, Malwarebytes has NOT found a single item on my machine.

 

The "test" itself that you bring up is once again a "test" using a malware packet filled with virus definitions, which is an inappropriate method if one wants to test a program that specifically mentions that the program has to be run alongside a proper antivirus program.

 

A more appropriate test would be a malware packet cleaned by an antivirus program first.

It might be interesting to see the difference between the Free version and the Pro version of IObit Malware Fighter.

 

Cheers

solbjerg

p.s. about the notification that you are running the program without having full protection my view on that is that it should of course continue to show that you are running it without full protection.

 

Everytime I have tried Malwarebytes during the last year, Malwarebytes has NOT found a single item on my machine.

 

Same here. It might do better if you pay for it.

 

You can scan folders with IMF. It will scan the folder you right click plus every folder below it in the folder chain. Of course if you want to scan two folders at the same level you need to either go up one level in the folder chain and scan all folders on the level of the folder that you want to scan or else scan each folder at that level in separate scans. I little awkward but no biggie since I have never had to do it.

 

I think IMF Pro does a good job in catching critical changes to the Registry especially on new software installations.

 

Don't know how good Malwarebytes Pro is. I have never used it but Malwarebytes hasn't found any malware on my system in over a year and I run at least a Quick Scan with it at least once every two weeks.

 

Maybe if you have no AV program on your computer or any other anti-malware program Malwarebytes would have a higher detection rate than IMF Pro. Don't know and don't care. IMF Pro blocks changes to the registry and even according the review found malware located in the Registry. That is good and works for me. Each to their own.8:)

 

P.S. According to an article by a AV company that I recently read 17% of the world's computers running Windows have no AV software, That is not good.

[Toppack]

It mainly depends on how Careful you are when connecting to Internet,

as to wheather AV software is really needed,

so I suppose it is possible to 'Get away with not having AV',

but of Course, I also, do Not advise it.

 

Hey, the only way to be Sure to Never download any Malware

is to Never Connect to the Internet.:mrgreen:

We have a hardware & software 'Testing' computer that is never connected,

so there are a few that Never Do. ;-)

[StarPirate]

I Think that Iobit Malware Fighter needs some improvement to it's detection rate.

[WinDefend]

I'm not following this whole red text in bold thing. If a product finds absolutely nothing you must be clean, right? Unless you are implying that Iobit found a legit threat that MBAM missed?

 

I would only test MF with an AV if I was attacking a setup, but to zoom in on MF's detection capability I would test it by itself. The malware pack appears to contain not viruses but trojans and other forms. I like how IMF actually detected at least something throughout the entire test (in other words, it is an improvement from older versions), I hope the devs can further improve the product so that it does better than what it does.

 

Sure, all products have their bad days and nothing is perfect. But when a product detects barely anything (or nothing at all) in multiple tests, you would notice that maybe something is wrong. This is simply how I am thinking right now.

 

Edit: By the way, where do you post your security setups here? Do you guys have a thread already for that?

 

[Edit] by melvin_deal: You can search the threads using the search function in the top right quadrant of the main forum GUI. There you will find the information you seek.

[Melvin_Deal]

Hi WinDefend!

 

I apologize for my previous edit in your post #1.:oops: I have restored your link.:-D

 

I also think that my edit in post #8 was out of line as I should have just replied!!!

 

I hope you will have kindness within you to forgive these oversights Windefend?

 

Sincerely,

-Mel

Live long and prosper!

[WinDefend]

I hope you will have kindness within you to forgive these oversights Windefend?

Its cool, Melvin. :-)

[Toppack]

[Edit] by melvin_deal: You can search the threads using the search function in the top right quadrant of the main forum GUI. There you will find the information you seek.

 

Melvin,

 

We can Not read text in that 'Lime' color. :?

Not much contrast to White background.

I thought it was just me but I asked someone else to try to read it.

 

If we can't read them, we can't tell if you are 'Out of Line' or Not! :lol:

 

2. edit: True Toppack! But if you mark the line it shows up white on black - what I do if I can't read it :-)

 

Ah, I have to 'Work for it'!:idea: :lol:

[Buddahfan]

Unless you are implying that Iobit found a legit threat that MBAM missed?

 

That a fact. Sorry to upset you but you asked:wink:

[Melvin_Deal]

Melvin,

 

We can Not read text in that 'Lime' color. :?

Not much contrast to White background.

I thought it was just me but I asked someone else to try to read it.

 

If we can't read them, we can't tell if you are 'Out of Line' or Not! :lol:

 

2. edit: True Toppack! But if you mark the line it shows up white on black - what I do if I can't read it :-)

 

Ah, I have to 'Work for it'!:idea: :lol:

 

Hi Toppack,

 

I chose that color to identify my edits on sight and having been using it for awhile. At the time I didn't consider your point as I can readily read them ((I understand after your post that I made a poor choice, and I see why (pun)). I will choose another color for my edits... hopefully it will be a better. I thank you for this feedback!!!:-D

 

I will be much more conservative in my edits in the future anyway!

 

Sincerely,

-Mel

Live long and prosper!

 

[EDIT] Does this color work? I am open for suggestions as long as they don't lean toward red.

[Buddahfan]

Another Opinion or Should I Say Opinions About IMF

 

CNET review rates it a 4 star plus and CNET users rate it a 4 star which considering there are always a few Malwarebytes fanboys and fangirls who bash anything and everything having to do with IObit is not too shabby.

 

Current version has a couple of IObit haters comments lowering the rating of the current version which they jumped on right away given how short a time it has been out.

There are 11 reviews of IMF on Softpedia and the only two reviews there within the last seven months give it a five star rating.

 

I am not saying the product is perfect, but it works for me and does what I expect without any problems on my W8-RP computers.:-D

[Lyon275]

CNET review rates it a 4 star plus and CNET users rate it a 4 star which considering there are always a few Malwarebytes fanboys and fangirls who bash anything and everything having to do with IObit is not too shabby.

 

Current version has a couple of IObit haters comments lowering the rating of the current version which they jumped on right away given how short a time it has been out.

There are 11 reviews of IMF on Softpedia and the only two reviews there within the last seven months give it a five star rating.

 

I am not saying the product is perfect, but it works for me and does what I expect without any problems on my W8-RP computers.:-D

 

I fully agree with you IMF is a great program.

MBAM fanboys ( haters ) gonna hate :lol:

 

Cheers :smile:

[Toppack]

Many of the software-review "haters" are really employees of Competitor software companies. :evil:

[WinDefend]

Something that happened three years ago, yepyep... Adults that don't know when to call it quits. Sure isn't benefiting my generation any. :roll:

 

There are also fake user reviews that bump Iobit but meh. It is hard to tell between fanboys and employees so it really is hard to say that "many" without basing everything off of assumptions. I tend ignore the user reviews for software most of them anyways.

 

That a fact. Sorry to upset you but you asked:wink:

Okay..? :roll:

[Buddahfan]

I tend ignore the user reviews for software most of them anyways. Okay..? :roll:

 

Ever since I can remember I have used only user reviews in buying computer hardware and software unless there is a free trial available. Even then I usually rely quite heavily on user reviews.

 

Can't remember ever being steered wrong by them and I have purchased a lot of computer hardware and installed a lot of computer software.

 

Different strokes for different folks. Some folks love those lab reviews. Having worked with numbers for my entire career I know all too well how numbers can be manipulated. In fact I can't think of one area where numbers are not manipulated from companies financial statements, eg Enron, medical products, eg The Fugitive and the real world pharma studies, computer reviews, AGW etc, etc, etc.

 

Users reviews can be littered with garbage but you just have to learn how to filter those reviews out. Not so difficult.

 

Bottom line numbers can be manipulated really user experience is overall more genuine and reliable than one person's or even two people's laboratory analysis. Most of the major computer reviewers know each other either in person or through communication of one form or another. They rely heavily on their network to help them get their job done. So it is not uncommon for one laboratory reviewerer to communicate with their peers during the review process. It wouldn't do them much good to buck their peers if wanted to continue to maintain those relationships. For example ZDNet with the exception of only two regular contributors; i.e., Ed Botts and Mary Jo Foley, are blatantly anti-Microsoft. So much so that a lot of their stuff on Microsoft products is just a bunch of garbage. However, they have to stick together. The main reason ZDNet doesn't dump the pro-Microsoft writers could very be due to ZDNet not wanting to lose their Microsoft audience since it is large and generates tens thousands of hits on an article even the garbage ones.

 

You obviously feel different. Fair enough. I am happy with my network setup so I got no complaints.:-D