A
Alias
I'm thinking of switching to a new AV program. Any suggestions?
Thanks,
Alias
Thanks,
Alias
G
Guest
A
Alias
ant said:
That's what I have
I am looking to buy one now. I am toying betweenKaspersky and BiTorrent.
Alias
V
Vagabond Software
Alias said:
Just out of curiosity, why do you want to switch? Personally, I think Avast
is one of the best anti-virus programs out there in terms of protection,
configurability, and resource usage.
carl
E
Eric
http://www.kaspersky.com/
You ca also use the excellent free online virus scanner from Kaspersky
-
http://www.kaspersky.com/virusscanner
You ca also use the excellent free online virus scanner from Kaspersky
-
http://www.kaspersky.com/virusscanner
G
Guest
I use and would recommend Norton Antivirus. I also use AVG, which is free, on
my "old" computer. It works OK, but it's slow. Keep in mind that all
antivirus programs are better than other antivirus programs.
Milt
my "old" computer. It works OK, but it's slow. Keep in mind that all
antivirus programs are better than other antivirus programs.
Milt
A
Alias
Vagabond said:
I hear that it is good, too, which is why I have it. I just thought a
paid one might be better. If not, so much the better as I like the
interface of Avast and the fact that it will do a boot scan. It also
found two viruses that TrendMicro couldn't find.
Alias
A
Alias
Milt said:
Norton is not on my list of possible programs, nor is McAffee.
Alias
C
CDO Must Go!
LOL! A CDO web interface poster recommends Norton!
Thanks for the laugh!
CDO posters should just ask their mindless questions, and leave giving
recommendations to those that actually know, at the very least, how to
set up a newsgroup in a real newsreader!
L
Leythos
aka@ said:
If you don't need DOD compliance, then KAP would be my first choice,
then Symantec Corp Edition 10, then Linux. AVG is not on my list
anywhere, not after all the compromised personal computers we've seen
running it.
W
Wolf Kirchmeir
Alias said:
AVG from Grisoft. But I also have ZoneAlarm, which is one of the best
software firewalls, and has in addition developed into a suite of
anti-malware programs. Both come in free versions for home use, and pro
versions. What you pay for with the pro versions is automatic real-time
updates - if you use these, be prepared for the appearance of update
windows at odd intervals (takes about a minute.) IMO, the real-time
updates are worth the cost.
You should have two or more AV programs on your system, and two or more
anti-spyware programs, etc. Run one program or suite at startup, to
monitor incoming and outgoing traffic. Run the others, esp. the
anti-spyware ones, about once a week. No one program or suite finds all
the baddies. Spybot is a free anti-spyware program and Counter Spy you
pay for. Both are excellent IMO. I average less than one infection a
week, which AFAICT is way less than most people experience.
"When it comes to computer security, there's no such thing as paranoia."
HTH
V
Vagabond Software
Alias said:
Well, paying for an anti-virus doesn't make it better as Norton and McAffee
have proven. The only decent argument for Symantec's anti-virus software is
if you MUST have an enterprise license and you can't get Computer
Associates' eTrust Anti-Virus and you know not to bother with Panda.
Again, you're currently using what is, in my professional opinion, the best
product on the market for personal use.
carl
G
Guest
My advice would be to stick with Avast 4.
I have had no end of problems with Norton AV and PC engineers in my area
will not install it on any machine.
I am currently using Mcafee which is OK, because it was bundled with a
motherboard but I will go back to Avast when the subscription expires.
I once tried Kaspersky but it took up so much resource that the macine was
almost useless.
I have had no end of problems with Norton AV and PC engineers in my area
will not install it on any machine.
I am currently using Mcafee which is OK, because it was bundled with a
motherboard but I will go back to Avast when the subscription expires.
I once tried Kaspersky but it took up so much resource that the macine was
almost useless.
A
Alias
HenryF said:
Thank you. I was wondering about that with Kaspersky.
Alias
A
Alias
Vagabond said:
Thanks, I'll stick with it then.
Alias
M
MAP
A
Alias
MAP said:
Thanks, I may try it out.
Alias
A
Anthony Buckland
Alias said:
A question that occurs to me considering free programs, in fact
all programs other than the big well-known commercial ones, is:
can we trust their virus definition updates? Do they draw on
a common source, or does each program's support group have to
do their own research, database building, etc? Without the
money and manpower that goes with enormous customer bases and
wide distribution, can others do as good a job?
B
Bob I
You mean the ones that only charge for commercial use? You are free to
do your own evaluation.
do your own evaluation.
M
Michael
I would avoid Symantec and McAfee altogether. Never use Panda. Try Nod32 or
BitDefender, they dont hog all your resources. I would avoid the free
programs, you get what you pay for
BitDefender, they dont hog all your resources. I would avoid the free
programs, you get what you pay for