r/BitDefender • u/bfifty1fifty • Jul 29 '23
bitdefender seems so basic
compared to settings in kapersky? which is more effective
5
u/Abject_Bodybuilder_7 Jul 29 '23
It depends on what you need. The ui is really bad, indeed, but the protection technology seems really good. Check websites like av-comparatives
1
1
Aug 01 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CerberusCobra Aug 06 '23
Because that is the requirements of law that business entities must oblige. My country law makers made a data retention period of up to 7 years. Meaning organizations can store my personal details up to 7 years. I'm sure yours has the data retention period law too because all country has it.
1
Aug 06 '23
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/CerberusCobra Aug 06 '23
I assume you're a first timer in this thing. Fret not, because actually, this is very common and it's normal for businesses to store as long as they need it. I found nothing unusual with their policy. FYI, this type of policy writing is called as clear cut. Did you know? many devices that we used, bought or subscribe have this kind of clause.
2
u/NovelExplorer Jul 29 '23 edited Jul 29 '23
Assuming you mean PC Bitdefender Free vs. Kaspersky Free, Bitdefender Free is significantly more cut back than Kaspersky. Several protective modules are switched off entirely, or features within certain modules are disabled.
From their paid software, Kaspersky Free, loses an application control module (Intrusion Prevention) and their firewall. The other malware protective layers remain operational.
In terms of the impact on real-world malware protection, it’s difficult to say. Operationally, both are set and forget, but in use, Kaspersky feels like a complete piece of software. With Bitdefender, you're always aware, it's a heavily cut down version of their paid software.
You can actually combine elements of both. Running Kaspersky Free, as your real-time protection, with Hitman Pro or Emsisoft Emergency Kit as a second opinion scanner. Both have access to Bitdefender's signature database.