Anti-Virus Software

[caver1]

Caver1,

I answered a question in this group a few days ago & from the version number
supplied by the OP it shows it was the corporate edition

Its like I said you get what you pay for. Home Products are adequate for the
general user, but not for me. I just prefer to pay the money to get the proper
kit

Yes you get what you pay for and the consumer versions are no good.
caver1

 

[Gary S. Terhune]

The "Trash Windows" side effects of Norton are well known. Note the number
of people here that resolve their issues by getting rid of Norton AV. WAIT!
What was it the OP said? "I use Norton which seems to work very well in
protecting my system except it seems to slow down my processing and web
browsing." And that's the least of the problems that Norton causes.

I see the same thing in private practice, also. First thing I do is get rid
of Norton and suddenly things a are a LOT better. McAfee is only slightly
better in this regard. IIRC, TrendMicro doesn't do so well, either. (I don't
even like their corporate version, but that's a different story.) Whereas I
don't think I've EVER heard of the other popular offerings recommended here
causing anything other than very minor problems for the system. Considering
that they all (including Norton) do approximately as well, though in
different aspects (no one suite covers all the bases well all the time),
that earns a big thumbs down for Norton.

Hey, if Symantec knows how to "fix" the multitude of problems Norton
generates, how come they don't build that fix into the app? You got a link
for that KB item (or items)? I'll save it and point users who refuse to dump
Norton to it. Lotta good it will do.

 

[Bruce Chambers]

I use Norton which seems to work very well in protecting my system except it
seems to slow down my processing and web browsing. I just saw an
advertisement for AVG anti-virus, ad-ware, spy-ware protection, etc. They
claim superior protection without system or browsing interference.

Anyone try it yet? Comments?

Thanks

You'll get nearly as many differing opinions as you will responses.

I don't think any security "suite" is a good choice. Use smaller,
less-resource-draining stand-alone products.

I used, and recommended, Norton Antivirus and then Norton Internet
Security, for many years, on Win98, WinNT, Win2K, and WinXP, all without
any significant problems. I had used McAfee prior to that. But it's
been several years since I've been tempted to try McAfee products. Their
quality seemed to take a steep nose-dive after they were acquired by
Network Associates.

However, when my subscription to Symantec's updates for Norton
Internet Security 2002 came up for renewal (at a cost substantially
higher than the preceding year's subscription), I decided to try less
expensive solutions. I downloaded and installed the free version of
GriSoft's AVG (http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php ) and the free
version of Sygate's Personal Firewall
(http://smb.sygate.com/free/default.php ). Both have proven to be
easily installed, easy to use, and quite effective. Additionally, I was
pleasantly surprised to see a small but very noticeable improvement in
my PC's performance, once I'd replaced the Symantec product.

Of course, since then, Symantec has purchased Sygate and ended the
distribution of the free firewall. Fortunately, there's still
ZoneAlarm, Tiny, Kerio, et al.

A recent comparison:

Retrospective / ProActive Test
http://www.av-comparatives.org/


--

Bruce Chambers

Help us help you:



They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -Benjamin Franklin

Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. -Bertrand Russell

 

[HeyBub]

I use Norton which seems to work very well in protecting my system
except it seems to slow down my processing and web browsing. I just
saw an advertisement for AVG anti-virus, ad-ware, spy-ware
protection, etc. They claim superior protection without system or
browsing interference.

Anyone try it yet? Comments?

When you do decide to remove Norton, be advised in advance that Norton is
the barnacle of the software world. You'll probably need the sooper-sekret
Norton removal tool available from the Symantec web site.

After which, it is prudent to search the registry for any residual mentions
of "Norton" "Symantec" and associated detritus.

 

[Leythos]

Exactly. You give a hearty recommendation to Norton based upon the corporate
edition which has no relationship to the consumer version -- and don't
bother to mention that delineation in a group that is primarily accessed by
the consumer market. Not the first time you've provided what I consider to
be deliberately misleading and incomplete answers and that bugs me.

I agree, the Norton line became crap several years ago. The corporate
versions, not the 3.x versions, but the 10.x versions are still reliable
and very efficient and good at detecting about everything.

Symantec lowered their min purchase qty down to 5 units, making Symantec
Antivirus Corporate Edition for Workstations and Servers a viable cost
for many home users also.

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy]

I agree, the Norton line became crap several years ago. The corporate
versions, not the 3.x versions, but the 10.x versions are still reliable
and very efficient and good at detecting about everything.

Symantec lowered their min purchase qty down to 5 units, making Symantec
Antivirus Corporate Edition for Workstations and Servers a viable cost
for many home users also.

10.x is too bloated though, and slows down the system.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with
legality."
- Linus Torvalds

 

[Leythos]

10.x is too bloated though, and slows down the system.

Maybe 10.2, but 9 though 10.1.5 are great. I've not seen any issues with
10.2 on workstations or servers, but the 10.2 reporting module for
servers does slow them down.

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)

 

[The poster formerly known as Nina DiBoy]

Maybe 10.2, but 9 though 10.1.5 are great. I've not seen any issues with
10.2 on workstations or servers, but the 10.2 reporting module for
servers does slow them down.

We used 7 and 8. Anything past 9 did just as good a job as the earlier
versions as far as protecting machines from nasties, but we felt it
slowed down machines too much. It seems to work for you though, to each
their own. We use Kaspersky 6 now.

--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html

"Only religious fanatics and totalitarian states equate morality with
legality."
- Linus Torvalds