Aaron said:
I am ordering a new computer (Vista Home Premium 64 bit) that offers an
Internet Security Suite from Norton, McAfee, or Trend Micro in the
purchase price.
I am seeking recommendations on which of the three to get.
I am open to advice ranging from one of them being superior, to they all
are inferior, to which one sucks the least, or even the one easiest to
remove without hosing the system before installing a different suite.
I also have available Kaspersky 7.0 (which I know will update when
installed) with one more available computer on its license. It is
running fine on two Vista Home Premium 32 bit systems.
You'll get nearly as many differing opinions as you will responses.
I'll start by saying that I don't think any security "suite" is a
good choice. It'd be better to use smaller, less-resource-draining
stand-alone products.
I had used, and recommended, Norton Antivirus and then Norton
Internet Security, for many years, on Win98, WinNT, Win2K, and WinXP,
all without any significant problems. I had used McAfee prior to that.
But it's been several years since I've been tempted to try McAfee
products. Their quality seemed to take a steep nose-dive after they were
acquired by Network Associates.
However, when my subscription to Symantec's updates for Norton
Internet Security came up for renewal (at a cost substantially higher
than the preceding year's subscription), I decided to try less expensive
solutions. I downloaded and installed the free version of GriSoft's AVG
(
http://www.grisoft.com/us/us_dwnl_free.php ). It proved to be easily
installed, easy to use, and quite effective. Additionally, I was
pleasantly surprised to see a small but very noticeable improvement in
my PC's performance, once I'd replaced the Symantec product. Another
free (for personal use) anti-virus product is AVAST! 4 Home Edition
(
http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html), which is what I've used
without problems on both WinXP Pro and Vista Business.
For a recent comparison of anti-virus products:
Retrospective / ProActive Test
http://www.av-comparatives.org/
Stick with the Kaspersky, which is superior to any of the suites being
offered, and which you already own.
Vista's built-in Windows Firewall is adequate for most users, but
not particularly easy to configure. Vista's built-in firewall, although
superior to that of WinXP, is of a rudimentary nature, intended to meet
the simpler needs of most home consumers (or business/enterprise clients
already ensconced behind more advanced perimeter defenses).
One 3rd-party add-on (Sphinx's Vista Firewall Control
http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/) might make the Vista Firewall a bit more
useful to you, but nothing but a completely independent product will be
able to provide the detailed control you want.
There are two interfaces for Vistas built-in firewall:
1) A simplified one accessed through the Control Panel that is the only
one most people see.
2) And the more advanced "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security
(WF.msc)," accessed via the Start Menu's Administrative Tools folder,
for the experienced user who wants better control.
Having said that, it's important to remember that firewalls and
anti-virus applications, which should always be used and should always
be running, while important components of "safe hex," cannot, and should
not be expected to, protect the computer user from him/herself.
Ultimately, it is incumbent upon each and every computer user to learn
how to secure his/her own computer.
--
Bruce Chambers
Help us help you:
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/kb/555375
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. ~Benjamin Franklin
Many people would rather die than think; in fact, most do. ~Bertrand Russell
The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has
killed a great many philosophers.
~ Denis Diderot
\