which virus scanner is better norton or mcaffee?

[no one]

Hi,

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

 

[Frankster]

Hi,

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

I really kinda hate to say this, but, IMHO... the better one's are the one's
you don't have access to (apparently).

-Frank

 

[badgolferman]

no one, 6/12/2006, 12:15:16 PM,

Hi,

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

This will help you decide.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/

 

[Ian Kenefick]

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

Which version. Commercial or Retail versions?

 

[edgewalker]

Hi,

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

McAfee ... no wait! - - Norton!

HTH

 

[Gaz]

no one, 6/12/2006, 12:15:16 PM,


This will help you decide.
http://www.av-comparatives.org/

Which doesnt take into account how badly some of the software deteriorates
in the wild. Norton for example regularly shuts itself off, and disabled
auto definition updates, on top of that it doesnt enforce regular scanning.

Norton can severly cripple your desktop environment, doubling and often
quadruping the amount of time for certain applications to open.

Gaz

 

[Greg Rozelle]

McAfee ... no wait! - - Norton!

HTH

I use avg free on windows 98se

Greg Rozelle

 

[Bill]

I have access to both Norton and McAffee. Which is better?

Both are equally adequate.

 

[Kayman]

Norton is a resource hog, stay away from it.

Real-time Anti-Virus Scanning Engines.
Select one (1) only!

AntiVir - FREE
www.free-av.com
http://www.majorgeeks.com/AntiVir_Personal_Edition_7_for_Win9xME_d4472.html

Please note: In March 2006, David H. Lipman ran an impromptu test of AntiVir
Free-av placing 27 known infected EXE only files in a folder and had AntiVir
Free-av scan the files.
The free anti-virus program detected 26 out of the 27 infectants...

avast - FREE
http://www.avast.com/

AVG Anti-Virus System - FREE
http://free.grisoft.com/

Or
http://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/
FREE trial version for one full year

Do not run more than one real-time anti-virus scanning engine!
Ensure that the automatic update facility is engaged only for the real-time
scanning engine. It provides no additional protection.
--------------------------
On-Demand Anti-Virus Scanning Engines (non-viral malware...)
Select all!

Bit Defender - FREE
http://www.bitdefender.com/PRODUCT-14-en--BitDefender-8-Free-Edition.html
(you may wish to disable the automatic update capability as it can interfere
with your browsing)

Ewido Anti-Malware 3.5 - FREE
http://www.ewido.net/en/download/

a-squared - FREE
http://www.emsisoft.com/en/software/free/

Ad-Aware - FREE
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/support/download/
http://www.lavasoft.de/ms/index.htm

Spybot S&D - FREE
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/index.html
http://www.safer-networking.org/microsoft.en.html

SUPERAntispyware - FREE
http://www.superantispyware.com/index.html

Be sure to keep the on-demand (manually) updated on a daily basis) and
perform a full scan weekly with alternate scanning engines.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
There isn't one software that cleans and immunizes you against everything.
That's why you need multiple products to do the job i.e. overlap their
coverage.
Because one may catch what another may miss.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
For a more 'challenging' infection (viral malware...)

Download Art's KAVDOS.EXE - FREE (Abandon/CareWare)
http://home.epix.net/~artnpeg/
and/or
David's MULTI_AV - FREE (Donation/Charity/CareWare)
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm or
MULTI_AV.EXE from the URL --
http://www.ik-cs.com/programs/virtools/Multi_AV.exe

Good luck.

 

[edgewalker]

Please note: In March 2006, David H. Lipman ran an impromptu test of AntiVir
Free-av placing 27 known infected EXE only files in a folder and had AntiVir
Free-av scan the files.
The free anti-virus program detected 26 out of the 27 infectants...

I'm sure David knows the value of such tests.

Could you pass the salt, please? )

 

[Kayman]

The post wasn't directed to David. The added comment serves to highlight
the effectiveness of a free av application; Only regular readers of the
relevant newsgroup(s) may be aware of this particular test. Since David
initiated and conducted this test, I find it appropriate that a short note
recognizing the source of information is in order. However, I failed adding
his websites. http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm for further useful references.
This unintentional omission will be rectified in future posts.
With all good wishes,

 

[edgewalker]

The post wasn't directed to David. The added comment serves to highlight
the effectiveness of a free av application;

Its effectiveness against that particular small subset of viruses. Another set may
well trade that 96% for 3% effectiveness.

Only regular readers of the
relevant newsgroup(s) may be aware of this particular test. Since David
initiated and conducted this test, I find it appropriate that a short note
recognizing the source of information is in order.

Kudos for that - recognition is a good thing. I believe that David would be the
first to admit such tests are best taken with salt.

However, I failed adding
his websites. http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm for further useful references.

Neither of those sites are his. )

This unintentional omission will be rectified in future posts.
With all good wishes,

No need on account of me - David has proven his abilities and I don't doubt them.
I don't believe he places too much weight on results produced on such a small set.

 

[Kayman]

Its effectiveness against that particular small subset of viruses. Another
set may
well trade that 96% for 3% effectiveness.

Well, it has to be worth something. David does not appear to me having an
inflated ego.
The following is an abridged and consolidated test report from 3 e-mail
messages posted to newsgroups
microsoft.public.security.virus,microsoft.public.security,microsoft.public.security.homeusers

"I just ran another impromptu test of
http://safety.live.com/site/en-US/default.htm and it
scored extremely poorly. I placed 27 known infected EXE only files in a
folder and had
Microsoft, Sophos, Trend Micro, McAfee, Kaspersky and AntiVir scan the
files.
Microsoft: 2 out of 27
Sophos: 23 out of 27
Trend Micro: 19 out of 27
McAfee: 18 out of 27
Kaspersky: 23 out of 27
AntiVir: 26 out of 27
AntiVir did surprising well !!"
---
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm

Kudos for that - recognition is a good thing. I believe that David would
be the
first to admit such tests are best taken with salt.

I will consider adding the "salt" bit when recommending AntVir Free in
future.

Neither of those sites are his. )

I did not imply this, rather to direct newcomers to useful websites in which
they
may access av applications written by David and read other valuable
articles.
Hopefully, it also would steer them to the main-site reading the text as
shown blow and act accordingly.
"We support Enrichanother.com - Direct Impact Giving
Enrichanother.com is an internet tool, offered free of charge to the public,
where charities can post projects, donors can
pick the projects they like, and everyone can see the results. Know exactly
what your donation is accomplishing, who is
benefiting, and how a problem is being solved. Enrichanother puts you in the
driver's seat in your charitable giving, with an
accessible, clear picture of where your dollars and efforts go before,
during and after you donate. Please visit
enrichanother.com and show your support today!"