OK, I'm now using AVG??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pedro Sanchez
  • Start date Start date
P

Pedro Sanchez

Uh, since I went from Norton to this Free AVG ting, is there something
or someplace I can go on the net to see if this AV is up to snuff?

thanks,
pedro
 
Uh, since I went from Norton to this Free AVG ting, is there something
or someplace I can go on the net to see if this AV is up to snuff?

thanks,
pedro
Click to expand...


Rest assured that it's not. AVG is mediocre at best.
 
Rest assured that it's not. AVG is mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

OK, Then which AV would you suggest?
I tried the trial ver of NOD32 and couldn't tolerate the GUI.

thanks,
pedro
 
Kaspersky
Click to expand...

Kaspersky? Never heard of it but I will try it out.

I REALLY hate norton because it lags so bad..I swear the thing is
using 5gig swapfiles but I can't prove it.
 
Bill said:
Rest assured that it's not. AVG is mediocre at best.
Click to expand...

I disagree. It's been my personal experience that AVG has been top notch.
I've used it for years now.
 
mad said:
I disagree. It's been my personal experience that AVG has been top
notch. I've used it for years now.
Click to expand...

How do you know it hasn't been your safe computer usage and not the AV
that has kept you clean?

There are independant tests that show AVG not in the same class as
others, including Symantec which is maligned for its support and
resource hungry design.
 
I disagree. It's been my personal experience that AVG has been top notch.
I've used it for years now.
Click to expand...


It means nothing. I would rather rely on competent independent
comparative reviews. I've used Notepad for years but it doesn't make
it a decent virus scanner.
 
Pedro said:
Kaspersky? Never heard of it but I will try it out.

I REALLY hate norton because it lags so bad..I swear the thing is
using 5gig swapfiles but I can't prove it.
Click to expand...

Kaspersky consumes a lot of resources too, if not more, although I have
to admit, it is probably the most capable AV software available now, it
can search out even the oldest, most obscure viruses from your machine,
and it has pretty decent virus-cleaning abilities too, but it clogs
just like Norton, do Kaspersky's capabilities warrant its resource
hunger? Different people has different opinions.
 
'Pedro Sanchez' wrote:
| Kaspersky? Never heard of it but I will try it out.
|
| I REALLY hate norton because it lags so bad..I swear the thing is
| using 5gig swapfiles but I can't prove it.
_____

What do you mean by 'lags so bad.' Do you mean when you open the program to
do a full scan? How often do you do that? Once a week, once a month? And
you can set Norton Antivirus (and most other antivirus products) to do a
scan on schedule.

I agree that opening up Norton Antivirus takes a while, but it isn't
something that causes more than momentary irritation. As for the 'always
running' parts, the resources consumed are only a tiny part of what's
available on a modern computer. Using 'Task Manager' check out the
resources actually in use vs. the potentially used pieces that are, as they
should be, swapped out, and rarely swapped in.

Any of the recommended antivirus programs with good detection rates (and
Norton Antivirus is one) are a good choice; just take care that the user
interface operating characteristics suit your computer use style.

Phil Weldon


|
| >On Wed, 31 May 2006 17:33:53 -0400, Pedro Sanchez
| >
| >>OK, Then which AV would you suggest?
| >
| >Kaspersky
|
| Kaspersky? Never heard of it but I will try it out.
|
| I REALLY hate norton because it lags so bad..I swear the thing is
| using 5gig swapfiles but I can't prove it.
|
|
 
Bill said:
It means nothing. I would rather rely on competent independent
comparative reviews. I've used Notepad for years but it doesn't make
it a decent virus scanner.
Click to expand...

But if a review of Notepad said it was crap, would you swap to the one
that the review recommended? Nope, you live in the real world, not a
lab, you would carry on using Notepad because *you* know that it works
fine, despite what the review and people in the forums said. ;)

I can only speak from experience, using AVG for years browsing porn and
warez, online scanners have not picked up something missed by AVG.
After installing NOD32, it didn't pick up anything new either, so AVG
must have been doing something right or I have been very lucky (perhaps
I should do the lottery).

Reviews have their uses, but should be taken with a large dose of salt,
this forum appears to be obsessed by them. My AV is better then your
AV, yawn.

To the OP, give the free products a go, you'll be fine.
 
Kaspersky consumes a lot of resources too, if not more, although I have
to admit, it is probably the most capable AV software available now, it
can search out even the oldest, most obscure viruses from your machine,
and it has pretty decent virus-cleaning abilities too, but it clogs
just like Norton, do Kaspersky's capabilities warrant its resource
hunger? Different people has different opinions.
Click to expand...

Once people start using version 6 and realize that Kaspersky has
successfully addressed the "slowness" issues, the old stigmas will
fade away. I suspect that a moderately capable machine is required
though. I haven't run it on anything slower than my 1.6 ghz AMD cpu
machine with 256 meg RAM, so I dunno what impact KAV 6 has on
the older machines. But on mine, the impact is negligible.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
 
Bill said:
That would largely depend on who was doing the review.
Click to expand...

Personally I would still value my real world usage of a product much
more than a review. If there was no compelling reason to swap products
then I would not do so.

AVG was fine for me and I would use it again, I do feel that there are
some very vocal people here that don't actually use it and condemn it
out of hand based on reviews and, rather oddly, forum peer pressure.

It's the old "my willy is bigger than your willy" routine. Which of
course, it is :)
 
Art said ...
Once people start using version 6 and realize that Kaspersky has
successfully addressed the "slowness" issues, the old stigmas will
fade away. I suspect that a moderately capable machine is required
though. I haven't run it on anything slower than my 1.6 ghz AMD cpu
machine with 256 meg RAM, so I dunno what impact KAV 6 has on
the older machines. But on mine, the impact is negligible.

Art
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg
Click to expand...
I have purchased Kaspersky Internet Security 6.0 (never having used the
older version). This is just a brilliant facility with very low
resource usage in my view. The PC boots up more quickly than with NIS,
ZonealarmAV, AVG or any others I've used. I recommend it - and it seems
to be pretty comprehensive in what it tries to address in relation to
system security. I trialled it for some weeks and was really
impressed. Unlike Victor Kiam, I couldn't afford to buy the company,
but I did buy the product!
 
Back
Top