best current anti virus software?

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Jeff Levy, a local Los Angeles Computer guru on radio station KNX
continually disses Norton Anti Virus as being too cumbersome and
resources hogger.

Is this a valid criticism?   If it is, can anyone suggest another anti
virus program that would offer full protection?

best, Aaron


Re: best current anti virus software?

aaronep@pacbell.net wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

www.av-comparatives.org
www.virusbtn.com

Re: best current anti virus software?

The best AV software is the one you yourself can configure properly and
actually use (and not have to turn off to gain back functionality). Simple
as that.

-Frank

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: best current anti virus software?

I have used Norton Anti Virus and it was "ok" but I would go with AVG
if you can. They have a Free Edition which works really great and keeps
your computer in good heath.
~Andrew

aaronep@pacbell.net wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: best current anti virus software?

I used AVG for a few years and never had a problem with it.  Out of
curiosity I'm trying out Kaspersky now but AVG has been a good product for
my use.

Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: best current anti virus software?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

If you trying KAV 6.0 it is the best AV I have used in terms of resources
used. I have been a long time KAV user and this is the best yet. In
detection it seems to be on par with the other versions I have used. In my
opinion KAV has the best detection when it comes to trojans.

Re: best current anti virus software?

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yes.  It's KAV 6.0 that I am using now.  I gather from your post that you're
pleased with its performance on your system(s).  That's good to hear.  What
do you mean when you say it's the best in terms of resources used?  Do you
feel that it is lighter on the resources (eg smaller footprint) than
previouse versions of KAV or is that comment relative to other AV apps in
general?
Thanks.



Re: best current anti virus software?



Quoted text here. Click to load it

Smaller footprint than other versions.

Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

    I have currently installed Nortons, but not happy with various aspects
and would like to get rid of it & go with AVG, but have heard much about
problems getting rid of  Nortons entirely, so am hesitant to go ahead with
uninstallling, would appreciate any advice re uninstalling it, as am not
sufficiently experienced to deal with the sort of things that I might be
faced with. thanks any feedback.



Re: best current anti virus software?


whiteMemphis wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

I would like to switch to a free AV software like AVG too, the problem
is that my os is windows 2003, although I used it in my personal
computer, I still have to pay money to protect it because it's a server
OS.


Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Proper protection of a server requires a special type of AV - which is why
all the AV manufacturers charge for server AV's.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's


Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

Look here for instructions on hw to completely remove Norton
http://basconotw.mvps.org/SymRem.htm

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's


Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it
<snip>
Quoted text here. Click to load it
aspects
about
ahead with
not
might be

Good link!

Chas.



Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it

You can get a dedicated removal tool from Nortons website which will clean
it off your machine. Avast is a much better antivirus compared to AVG and
will offer you better protection

Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it
aspects
about
ahead with
not
might be
clean
and

The Norton Removal program doesn't remove everything but it does clean
out a lot of stuff that the Norton Uninstall Program misses. For example
a number of Symantec "features" like LiveReg and Live Update are usually
left in place... just in case you have other Symantec products
installed.

I used NAV on most of my PCs from version 2.0 up through 2002 plus I
tried 2003 and 2004. At times I only used NAV as a backup AV scanner and
eventually removed it from all of my systems except my Email PC.
Norton's proxy Email scanner blocked a lot of garbage during the Email
malware attacks a few years back saving me a lot of time having to
delete junk.

About a year and a half ago I switched that PC over to NOD32 and have
been very happy with it. I regained over 400MB of disk space when I
uninstalled NAV on that PC.

Do system searches for Norton and Symantec. Look for Symantec leftovers
in the Windows\Application Data\ and Windows\All Users\ folders in
Win98.

OT: Last night I uninstalled a 30 day trial of AVG on my test PC. The
AVG uninstall program removed everything except 2-3 entries in the
Registry and some empty folders in Program Files... impressive!

Chas.



Re: best current anti virus software?

That was supposed to be comments against norton but among the Anti
virus recently tested it was the one that did not exhibit a single
false positives which other antivirus wares including AV did.
Think about it an innocent files to be considered malicious?...
I think Norton has a better quality control than the other AV wares.


aaronep@pacbell.net wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: best current anti virus software?


Quoted text here. Click to load it


Might I suggest that you actually read a little more into what was written -
and what's written elsewhere - about Norton, and the particular version of
Norton, before commenting??

WHICH EXACT review did you read that so glowingly reported NAV? (how much
was the editor/magazine paid for advertising in that issue by Symantec??)

WHICH EXACT version of Norton was so glowingly reviewed?
WHICH EXACT PC was running that Norton?
could it actually run anything else (significant) at the same time???
would it withstand a System Restore without having to rebuild the system
(like you always have top after using NAV?)
....... complete after me

"NORTON AND WINDOWS ARE NOT COMPATIBLE in the long term"

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm on how to post messages to NG's


Re: best current anti virus software?

  You are so right that Norton and Windows is not compatible. It got to the
point that I couldn't even get to my e-mail in OE, I had to let them have 6
months that was paid for just to get it off my PC. I went with Avast this
time and it seems to be working well. I've also had AVG..
 Nel


Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: best current anti virus software?

Let's  get things clear....you had an axe to grind againts
symantec....thats  for sure!!

I don't think that Norton is the best  but in terms of errorrs and
false positives, the competitors had such serious flaws in what files
to consider as malicious or innocuos.

I just can't find the link that shows the edge of Norton against false
positives..
BTW
I have used Norton Antivirus for three years  in the Windows platform
and never had a problem from the 2004 to 2006 version!

Noel Paton wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it


Re: best current anti virus software?

Roy wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Everyone does. Except those who either fail to grasp logic, ie haven't had a
noticable problem themselves and think that proves the software doesn't
cause them, or are simply naive and still at the stage of needing to believe
they can rely on some brand name or other, or who have a vested interest in
defending it.

Everyone else believes that - at least from 2003-on - Norton Anti Virus is a
pos. Actually it goes for just about all Symantec software, because Symantec
caters only for the majority (who also happen to be the most gullible) so
only design software for high-RAM machines running XP. Unfortunately the
(did) continue to claim it worked on Windows 98 and ME, when actually all of
the background modules depleted resources to the point of crashing the
system.

Meanwhile, for years Symantec have been producing Norton System Check and
WinDoctor, which do much worse than you're claiming for non-Norton AV here.
It's an issue they never corrected (and no doubt still have not) any more
than they fixed the ability to delete a file or two and get another
year's-worth of free subscriptions.

And yet users have been defending System Check/WinDoctor the same way you
defend NAV, all this time (6 years and counting!), simply because they do
not know enough to test this software and think that, because they're not
aware of the problems it causes, there aren't any!

Unlike Noel, I use a certain amount of Symantec software. I used to use NAV
and if I saw any point in continuing to use a pre-2003 version, possibly
still would. I still use Norton Utilities 2000 - but only because I know
which modules are pointless, which *will* cause problems, and how to use
WinDoctor without hitting "Repair All". Hit "Repair All" and registry keys
and shortcuts all over will be redirected to wrong targets, or deleted. Odds
are the user won't find that out for weeks, possibly months. By which time -
not having used WinDoctor recently - they don't make the connection.

Same applies with false detection. A file may be in regular use or rarely
used. If the latter the connection will probably not be made.

But, if one study shows Norton doing better on FPing than rival AV, that's
just one study and a person would be a fool to base a decision on that.
There is so much evidence implicating Norton that it takes willful blindness
to continue recommending it. At the very least you should check the evidence
out. As it is you read like someone who thinks Pepsi is better than Coke so
everyone ought to drink Pepsi instead of Water.

Shane



Site Timeline