XP With Which Antivirus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Prabhat
  • Start date Start date
P

Prabhat

Hi All,

I have Windows XP with SP 2 Installed (Slipstreamed) in my PC. I Don't use
the Windows Firewall Instead I use ZoneAlarm.

My PC Has NAV 2002 - With All Latest Updates (Using the Live Update). I Got
NAV 2005 Proff from My Friend. Does that worth Upgrading to 2005?

I have read some where that NAV 2004 Is very slow, So What about NAV 2005?

Also the main Difference between the NAV 2002 and 2004 :
"The only major difference between NAV 2002 and NAV 2003 is the ability to
protect users of instant messaging programs.
2004 adds limited spyware detection"

So WHat About 2005? Should I Upgrade?

Thanks
Prabhat
 
From 2002 to 2005 ?, several issues (1). Product Activation
(2.) Increased Memory footprint (3.) Potential Upgrade issues

Advantages: Worm detection, integration with Security Center.
Faster scanning engine, Better scheduling ( No Exit Code (65)).

Not sure how to counsel you on it. Symantec products don't
always upgrade cleanly and it's a convoluted process to remove
the previous version (RNav, Service remnants) If you do move
to 2005, configure Reports to disable the "Extensive Logging"
it does.

Currently, I'm at Nis-2004 and just can't decide whether to go
with 2005 or consider other options (Panda). They make it a
difficult decision since a subscription is $29.95 and the upgrade
product itself is just ~$10 more.
 
It is never a bad idea to use the latest version.. from what I have seen in
the newsgroups, NAV 2005 is ok.. no doubt somebody will challenge me on this
if I am wrong..
 
Hi,

I will not Upgrade. I will Install that when I will Do a Clean Install of XP
or I will Completely Uninstall NAv 2002 (All Options from Controol Panel -
Like Live Update etc, etc) Then I will Install 2005.

I have also found that the NAV 2004 or 2005 Starts So many extra Processes
Like:

ccApp.exe
SSC_UserPrompt
ccSetMgr.exe
ccEvtMgr.exe
navapsvc.exe

I Think the above are related to NAV Only, Also Don't know what for that
All?

And what About Panda AV?

Once I have tried Panda Titanium Antivirus on my Win 2002 Prof. System -
Which has SQL Server 2000 Installed.
Then the Clients (SQL Server Clinet and Application Software also.) could
not able to Connect to my System's SQL Server. Then I Have removed that
Panda and Installed NAV 2004. That worked Fine.

Thanks for any suggestions
Prabhat
 
Hi Mike,

Ok. I can also Understand that Symantec may have learnt a lot from the Slow
NAV 2004 and May made the Latest Ver Good and Efficient one.

But can we compare Panda with NAV 2005?

And What about the Problem that I told when I installed Panda Titanium on my
Win 2000.

Thanks
Prabhat
 
I realize this will sound alarming, but the Symantec
antivirus is a resource hog. It is not efficient enough
of a system protection to warrant the decline in system
performance. Take a comprehensive look at Trend Micro's
2004 Internet Security program. It includes a MUCH more
capable antivirus program that uses significantly less
resource. It also comes with a software firewall that,
combined with the stateful firewall protection of your
router, provides impressive protection of your system or
SOHO network. I am a network admin that laughed at this
same suggestion months ago. I took the time to research
it and test it..... and now I am confident in
recommending this to my technical acquaintences.
 
Hi, Prabhat.

We each have our own preferences and prejudices, obviously. I've been using
Norton products since Peter Norton actually wrote Norton Utilities.
Nowadays, the only Symantec/Norton product I use is Norton Internet
Security, which includes NAV along with their firewall and antispam
products. The bundle is not much more than NAV alone - and does NOT include
some of the maintenance utilities that now are about 10% useful functions
and 90% "eye candy".

My NIS 2004 subscription was about to expire anyhow when I needed to
reinstall WinXP and SP2 last month. NIS 2005 appeared in the stores just
then, so I bought that instead of extending my subscription. It cost only a
few dollars more and I get the newer interface plus, as someone mentioned,
the newer NAV "engine" in addition to the updated definitions. NIS 2005
seems to operate a bit more smoothly than 2004. I had to train it for some
programs, but its automatic configuration handled more of those smoothly
than 2004's did. After only a week of use, the "always block/permit?"
questions seldom appear now.

Of course, in spite of Norton's claim of "limited spyware detection", be
sure to use Ad-Aware and SpyBot or similar protection against malware types
other than viruses.

RC
 
Hi,

I am currently using XP + SP2 with NAV 2002. And ZoneAlarm for Firewall.
Also use "BPS Spyware-Adware Remover".

Now Planing to Go for NAV 2005. I am searching for more Information about
the Switch for NAV 2005.

Thanks
Prabhat
 
You can compare whatever you like..

If somebody tells you that Norton is good, there will always be somebody
else who tells you that Norton is NOT good ( I am one of these)

If somebody tells you that McAfee is good (I am one of these), there will
always be somebody else who tells you that McAfee is NOT good

I could continue copying that statement for all anti-virus products.. you
pay your money and take your choice..

If you have already had problems with Panda, why on earth would you want to
go back to it?
 
Hi Mike,

Thanks
Prabhat

Mike Hall said:
You can compare whatever you like..

If somebody tells you that Norton is good, there will always be somebody
else who tells you that Norton is NOT good ( I am one of these)

If somebody tells you that McAfee is good (I am one of these), there will
always be somebody else who tells you that McAfee is NOT good

I could continue copying that statement for all anti-virus products.. you
pay your money and take your choice..

If you have already had problems with Panda, why on earth would you want to
go back to it?
Click to expand...
 
Hi, Prabhat.

I'd just like to clarify one line in my first message. When I said of NIS,
"The bundle is not much more than NAV alone...", I meant that id does not
cost much more than NAV. The bundle contents are significantly more than
NAV alone. ;^}

RC
 
Back
Top