Which Anti Virus Works Best With Vista

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brandon Mahler
  • Start date Start date
Just wondering
Click to expand...


It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
matter of which is the best anti-virus program.

If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus program
is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.

And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are best
known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
 
Keith said:
I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all.
Click to expand...

Norton is a resource hog and causes more problems than it's worth. Best to
stay away from Norton.
 
I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all.
Click to expand...


Many people I trust have reported that NAV 2009 is considerably better
than earlier versions. Although they may be right, my view is still
that given Symantec's terrible products and terrible reputation in the
recent past, I will stay extremely skeptical of anything they do for a
considerable period of time.

Let me also point out that with almost any poor product of almost any
type, not everyone experiences problems every time they use it. In
fact, I used to be a NAV user myself (several older versions), and
since, like you, I had experienced no problems with it, I generally
pooh-poohed the advice of those who told me how terrible it was. But
when I saw others experiencing the problems with it, and started
having such problems myself, I very quickly changed my views on it.

I continue to recommend that everyone stay as far away as possible
from all Symantec/Norton products.
 
Just wondering
Click to expand...

Whichever one(s) you feel happy with . I use free Avast ( audio and
visual warning ) , used to use AVG but had trouble with the updates .
Avast has free registration , and it`s registration every year ( still
free though )
 
whs said:
I run Norton IS and Norton Ghost since several years on 4 systems
without any problems. Especially Norton IS09 is excellent. The Symantec
on-line support is also pretty good. If I were you, I would not go by
hearsay.
Click to expand...

Perfect. You continue to enjoy that Bloated pig Norton on your computer
which slows down everything and we will continue to alert others that Norton
is pure crap. No big deal.
 
You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing their
products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
<grin>

But I totally agree with you. They are worse than the malware they try to
protect you from - and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.
 
I am somewhat disturbed by your judgements. Both of you being MVP's I
would have expected a more balanced report.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I feel the same after reading a few MS newsgroups for a few
years.

In fact, I think MS should seriously review their MVP program and consider
if it's really necessary to reward any title to "volunteers".

If some people are reluctant to provide assistance because they have no
title, they wouldn't be a true volunteer as they always claimed, would it?

And I believe those who are willing to help will do it with or without any
title.

Overall speaking, the title is misleading to the general public so both
sides don't need to take any responsibility for misleading and false
information by simply claiming that we (or they) are not MS employees.
 
A balanced report?

I guess you have not been in these news groups for very long. Going back to
Windows 95 there have been 10's of thousands of complaints of people having
problems with the mentioned manufacturers home/consumer products.

People place them on their computers and find, after having nothing but
trouble, that they can't uninstall them. Symantec was the first company I
know of that had to come up with a special download just to get the crap off
of the computer. Even then it left a load of crap that you had to manually
edit out. Much like AOL, except AOL did not have a special uninstaller.

You can't balance McAfee and Symantec against others because the balance is
way tipped toward almost anything else.

Granted, the 2009 Symantec products "seem" to be a bit better but their
products are fighting about 15 years, or so, of miserable performance upon
being installed on peoples computers.
 
You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing their
products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
<grin>
Click to expand...


They probably are, but they don't get to control our opinions.

But I totally agree with you.
Click to expand...


Thanks ...

They are worse than the malware they try to
protect you from
Click to expand...


....but we disagree about that. I'd rather have NAV or McAfee than no
anti-virus software at all.

- and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.
Click to expand...


LOL! We agree again.
 
While I agree Norton is likely the worst AV product because everyone I've
ever known who used a Norton product had problems with it, I've never known
anyone who had problems with McAfee and would like to know why you hate it
so much and who appointed you MVP. They should not be giving MVP titles to
anyone who would post such biased slander with no references to support your
point of view.
 
There are a number of companies/organizations that review AV programs for
overall efficiency, reliability, memory use, guarantees and cost.

You might find it interesting that Norton and TrendMicro have been in the
top three for 4-5 years running now. Microsoft made it into the top 10
this past year with One Live Care this past year on two registers. McAfee
has dropped to number 5 or lower on 4 different registers in the past two
years.

A lot of people like to run to AVG, but it has gotten a number of bad
reviews by Information Securities groups due to their lack of reliability.
They reduce active scans and updates considerably to save resources, but in
the process sacrifice safety.

Personally, I have always preferred to work with the long term reliable
companies like Symantec, McAfee and TrendMicro. I also am willing to trus
CA/eTrust and Kapersky.

I have gotten into the habit of never running without an AV by one of these,
and I have never had an issue with any software. Some companies like to
have you turn off AV if you have issues with their software, even if the
system logs indicate that there is something else wrong.

I firmly believe, in form of analogy, that if I want my airconditioner to
work right after install, I am not going to unlock and open ALL of my doors
and windows to let someone check it out. I will unlock one door and keep
an eye on them while they do the work, or find a company that stands by
their product and guarantees it to work past all the security.

I feel the same way about software. I have refused to use some software
because the manufacturer told me I had to turn off my AV to let their
program work. No thank you. Apps or games, if it can't play well with
the top rated AVs (most secure) out there I have had to fix too many
computers for others that became a haven of malware and security issues.

Note that the US government only contracts to McAfee and Symantec
(Norton's). Many major companies use these, CA or TrendMicro.

"ShadoShryke"
(AKA James Walker)
Owner Proprietor of GC&D
Computer Support and Consulting business owner and MSPP Registered Partner
 
ShadoShryke said:
There are a number of companies/organizations that review AV programs for
overall efficiency, reliability, memory use, guarantees and cost.

You might find it interesting that Norton and TrendMicro have been in the
top three for 4-5 years running now. Microsoft made it into the top 10
this past year with One Live Care this past year on two registers. McAfee
has dropped to number 5 or lower on 4 different registers in the past two
years.

A lot of people like to run to AVG, but it has gotten a number of bad
reviews by Information Securities groups due to their lack of reliability.
They reduce active scans and updates considerably to save resources, but
in the process sacrifice safety.

Personally, I have always preferred to work with the long term reliable
companies like Symantec, McAfee and TrendMicro. I also am willing to trus
CA/eTrust and Kapersky.

I have gotten into the habit of never running without an AV by one of
these, and I have never had an issue with any software. Some companies
like to have you turn off AV if you have issues with their software, even
if the system logs indicate that there is something else wrong.

I firmly believe, in form of analogy, that if I want my airconditioner to
work right after install, I am not going to unlock and open ALL of my
doors and windows to let someone check it out. I will unlock one door
and keep an eye on them while they do the work, or find a company that
stands by their product and guarantees it to work past all the security.

I feel the same way about software. I have refused to use some software
because the manufacturer told me I had to turn off my AV to let their
program work. No thank you. Apps or games, if it can't play well with
the top rated AVs (most secure) out there I have had to fix too many
computers for others that became a haven of malware and security issues.

Note that the US government only contracts to McAfee and Symantec
(Norton's). Many major companies use these, CA or TrendMicro.
Click to expand...

Your experience is to be appreciated and respected.
You also didn't mention Avast, which I think is very well suited for Vista
H/P SP2, 32bit and 2 GB of memory.
Personally I don't have any problems whatsoever with the program and it does
the job.

Harry.
"ShadoShryke"
(AKA James Walker)
Owner Proprietor of GC&D
Computer Support and Consulting business owner and MSPP Registered Partner
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top