Let's ust say that BitDefender is more blotted that Kaspersky, yeah? If you consider Kaspersky to big a RAM hogger, regret it when you get Norton, unless they have improved in the latest version. From my experience, BitDefender is NOT number 1. It is very disappointing as it's scan speeds are way slower than Kaspersky. Cheers!

Fierce you are refnulf, LOL. Now, let me clarify this. I am talking about AVs, NOT Internet Suites. I never had any faith in them. That is why I "study" combos.

You mentioned about BitDefender's Hive System and Kaspersky's whatsoever System. I highly disagree. My rig has an equal balance of documents, data files, mp3s, compressed files, dll's and so on and so forth. I DON'T test them on only ONE file type. I make it almost the same. Unfortunately, Kaspersky v5.xx.xx took 0.5 Hours for 80 GB worth, BitDefender 9 Standard took 2 HOURS. This is not what I call "standard" scanning time. It is very disappointing. I always had some faith in BitDefender, but they really disappointed me.

Considering the fact that Spyware/Adware/Malware/all that jazz is on the rise(not recently though), We need Mulitple Complementary AntiMalware Programs. Depending on Webroot's Spysweeter and (whatever company, I can;t remember, LOL) Spy Doctor is not enough. Fine, I give credit for Spy Sweeper's RTM (Real Time Monitoring) Scanning Function. But then, you telling me that FREE versions of Spybot Search and Destroy and Ad-Aware can;t make the mark? You telling me that prevention programs like SpywareBlaster does not play a role? I really need to ask you to reconsider these possibilities.

Anyway, I don't exactly like to argue here(am I? LOL). If I oversaid anything, my apologies. Cheers!