XP With Which Antivirus?

[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

 

[R. McCarty]

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.

 

[Mike Hall]

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..

 

[Prabhat]

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

 

[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

 

[Joel Jackson]

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.

 

[R. C. White]

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

 

[Prabhat]

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

 

[Mike Hall]

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?

 

[Prabhat]

Hi Mike,

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?

 

[R. C. White]

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