best current anti virus software?

  • Thread starter Thread starter aaronep
  • Start date Start date
A

aaronep

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
 
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
 
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
 
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.
 
Roy said:
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.
Click to expand...


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 on how to post messages to NG's
 
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.
 
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
 
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!
 
Roy said:
Let's get things clear....you had an axe to grind againts
symantec....thats for sure!!
Click to expand...

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
 
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Shane said:
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.
Click to expand...

Shane, for sure I don't have any vested interest on Symantec in the
same way Pizza hut had for Pepsi.
I have used Norton anti virus first then moved to Norton Internet
Security but so far had never caused me any problem.
If ain't broken WHY FIX IT?

Unless you people had vested interest on other branded AV then it would
make sense to me..
I don't understand what logic are you trying to point out but if a
certain product works for me then why should I keep up with the Joneses
and shift to other AV....?
 
Roy said:
Shane, for sure I don't have any vested interest on Symantec in the
same way Pizza hut had for Pepsi.
I have used Norton anti virus first then moved to Norton Internet
Security but so far had never caused me any problem.
If ain't broken WHY FIX IT?

Unless you people had vested interest on other branded AV then it
would make sense to me..
I don't understand what logic are you trying to point out but if a
certain product works for me then why should I keep up with the
Joneses and shift to other AV....?
Click to expand...

You said you think Norton has better quality control. It doesn't. It's not a
matter of opinion, it's widely recognised among those who research the
subject. Norton is bloody abominable. So it works for you...fine. But
Symantec have a bad, bad name and for a reason. You should be able to
understand that if you make a suggestion that, say, 99% of AV researchers
disagree vehemently with, you'll get the kind of response I gave. I wouldn't
even consider saying to you "Carry on using NAV if you want" as I don't see
I have any right whatsoever to tell you what you can or cannot do. I'm
simply responding to an assertion you made. Hopefully I was forthright but
balanced.

Shane
 
Gary said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
The only axe I have to grind against Norton is that it brings more business
to the NG's I frequent than any other piece of software (Windows not
necessarily excluded!)

I used to use it - and learned quickly about its severe problems with my own
OS (Win ME), and Symantec's absolute refusal to consider that they may have
done something wrong.

They care nothing for their clients - and less about truth. Bottom line is
all - and they're not that picky about how they achieve it.
They PAY OEM's to install their trials on the machines you buy - on the
basis that a large minority will be suckered into simply renewing their
subscription on the trial's expiry.... and again, and again....
They don't support customers unless the credit card is produced first (at
least, AIUI - never been in that unfortunate position)

Their Corporate AV is actually pretty good - and a LOT less intrusive and
invasive than the Retail crap they foist on people in the stores.
Unfortunately the magazine when they test these things seem to think that
they are the same beast, and play with the corporate edition, as a rule. -
many of the website 'experts' also fall into this trap - or don't disclose
what they test. (Check the name of the tested AV, if it's Norton it *may* be
the Retail version, if it's Symantec, then it's *probably* the Corporate
edition).


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

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

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read on how to post messages to NG's
 
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
Click to expand...

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.
 
whiteMemphis said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
eatfastnoodle said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 on how to post messages to NG's
 
whiteMemphis said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 on how to post messages to NG's
 
whiteMemphis said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
 
Back
Top