fordman Trend Micro has Updates on most days of the week Kaspersky has Updates every hour ?? Lesley

0

I'm not talking about updates; I'm talking about stopping malware before it enters your system, and sorry to pop your bubble but in the several tests that I have seen PCCILLIN is #1 even over Norton. And PCCILLIN updates at least 4 times a week. That's plenty. Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime; Then industry pollutes the water and kills all the fish.

0

i dont think you should download kaspersky, cause i had problem with it. it actually slowed my computer so bad. so i removed it.thats what happened to my computer, i dunno, every computer is different. wazup

0

first and foremost NOD32 is THE BEST av on the market period. thats not my opinion its simple facts.... here are the facts. http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml choose your brand and see if it has passed 100% viruse test more than nod32. but of course use what u want...but this post was for the best av. i personally dont see why anyone would use kaperspy, my god its fail 13 times. norton 6 times rest are worse. happy holidays

0

> i personally dont see why anyone would use kaperspy, my god its fail 13 times. norton 6 times rest are worse. I'm afraid that you're misunderstand and VB 100% is not the 100% fact. What Virus Bulletin tests is only viruses/worms that appear in The WildList lists (ITW malware) but what about other malware that are circulating but not in the WildList ?(trojan like, trojandownloader, spyware, adware, etc.) so not to mention that the methodology to produce the ITW malware is still in question. Today, there are many malware (trojan like, trojandownloader, spyware, adware, etc.) are circulating in the real world not only ITW viruses/worms and you have to read the full Virus Bulletin magazine and you'll see why some products pass and some fail. So many producs can detect ITW viruses/worms 100% as NOD32 does but it fails because false positive and some stupid reasons. You can not judge AVs qualities just by count the VB100% logo that's misleading. That's why so many people trust and use Kaspersky, McAfee, Norton. When it comes to overall detection rates, Kaspersky is the best and is the clear winner.

0

thats funny nod 203.if you had some real smarts then you wouldnt be using windows.windows is a virus factory clear and simple.

0

i have been a tech for nearly 8yrs now, i used every single brand of antivirus software on the planet, i found that nod32 is the best overall protection for viruses period...vb100 and icsa labs are both independant testing labs..for testing the most effective software against infections, u would be crazy not to take a look at their results as am sure they do alot more testing then you can do. now for judgeing a software, well use the labs mags, wordofmouth, all u want to, i found people are going to use a product that they feel secure with..so weither that be kaper,norton,macfee........use it. i provide the facts plain and simple, facts dont lie and should be used as a guideline for makeing judgement..which is what forums are all about...this post was for the best av and so i provided it thru facts. goodday. vk101

0

i use avast! antivirus.. its handy b/c of the boot time virus scan, so before actually loading windows.. it scans your HD for virii. like i had a virus that infected the winlogon.exe file and avast! was able to fix it :) anyways, thats just what i use.

0

thanks for all the help. i'll try to getting one soon as i don't even use norton its so useless

0

Too the original poster, I think if I were you, I'd look into ubcd4win -- dos?! Please note these are just opinions and these opinions are only somewhat accurate right around December 2004. They will change. No antivirus is useful if it isn't regularly updated -- so update it! I think you'll find that there is no a/v software that is perfect. If there was, we wouldn't be having this debate. The post's exhibiting zealotry on behalf of one or another a/v, is pretty much nothing more than steam. If they can't see beyond the fact that none are perfect, they probably ought not be giving advice as they have no other a/v experience in which to compare. I use many different a/v applications regularly and test just about everything else--it's one of my jobs. I'll differ with the original poster here, I have found that norton does a pretty good job with everything except compressed archives (--this is true even in 4/5 edition) and system restore files--the competitors don't seem to have any problems reaching into the restore and grabbing infected files -- mind you the restore is now broken and won't work. Norton 2004/5 seems to require a p4-1.8+GHz cpu to even run, without killing the utility of a machine. On the otherhand Symantec's Corporate AV, Symantec 9, run's well even on old hardware. [Edit: I will note though it does seem that some of these in the wild exploits I've seen are specifically targeting norton or symantec -- and sometimes they seem to be working :/] If your primary defense against email borne viruses is your outlook client side a/v software then I'd highly recommend looking into Panda's Network edition. It's done a wonderful job. The client edition I have reservations about. And be prepared to format and reload a machine if your installing panda on an old crufty machine. If it gets in their first it seems to do a great longlasting job, but otherwise, hmm. I have a similar opinion about kaspersky as I do about panda at least as it pertains to installing it. I have only tested a single user edition of kaspersky. I was not that impressed with kaspersky's scanning engine. I will admit my experience with kaspersky is fairly anecdotal as I quit testing it for the application it was intended. For single user machines I'd recommend Grisoft's AVG. It seems to have no issue with compressed archives and as an added bonus tends to actually remove spyware although it doesn't distinguish between a virus and spyware -- but really should we?. AVG's scanning engine is pretty top notch. I have used avg7, no less, on a p233 with great success. I didn't mention it earlier but both avast and panda hash a few of the more important files on your system -- a feeble attempt at an ids maybe, but better than nothing and probably good enough. I've been using Computer Associates etrust A/V off and on for sometime now. I have some mixed feelings about it. Somedays I think, damn this is great and other days, well I dont. Etrust seems to work fairly well even on lower end hardware. If you'll notice there is one perennial favorite I have neglected to mention. It's unfortunate as their price is pretty damn good. I have had nothing but headaches with it. There are a few situations where Superdat seems to be the best damn thing in the world. Too bad the client sucks. One thing worth mentioning is pagefile.sys (the virtual memory swap file) it seems more frequently viruses are getting pretty handy at hanging out there. The only real solution to repairing that requires using a livecd installation like knoppix or bartpe. Otherwise it's necessary to remove the drive, install it in another machine and scan. Is their a silver bullet? No. If I had a large installed userbase and I could afford it, (If you buy in volume it amounts to 20 bucks a year per seat) I'd be okay with recommending symantec 9. For a single user, I think AVG pretty much rocks. It may behoove you to try some of the trial versions. You may be required to Format and Reload the machine after you have decided which one suits you. Again I stress there are no silver bullets. If your particular AV fails once or twice, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Lets talk about backup for a minute. The single most expensive thing on your computer is the data YOU have created or saved. You are responsible for making reliable backups of your machine. Although not strictly related to AV, you might be surprized to read up about the MTBF on your harddrive and then you'll even be further surprized that the capacitors on your motherboard generally have an even shorter duration. Do Your Backups!

0

i know that non can be the best as there is so many but the main thing is that i had with nortan which was terrible was that once you got a virus it couldn't remove it. it just said access denied. now anytime trying to delete files through registery or in safe mode it didnt do much as virus are programed to manipulate windows. thats why i wanted to use dos because no viruses effect dos anymore but with ntsc dos is obsolete and i don't see windows recovery console any help at all. it works just like windows and doesn't let you access half the files anyway even if you enable them in the allow command or whatever it is. why did microsoft make dos obsolete as its what i see as the only way to geet around windows without actually using any of microsofts windows based solutions that are always restricted to their "user friendly" ways that don't allow a user to "damage" any "important" system files. Ntfs dos seemed a solution but i don't want to spend money on it because i don't think it supports 48bit lba addressing as my hard drive is 200gb. this was a matter with their free read only version that used different ntfs support files than windows itself. i don't know about their pro. version. Its not that i thought norton couldnt prevent viruses (well actually i was never impressed with nav99 and nav03 as they never prevented anything from me but just notified me even with the latest virus definitions even if the virus was about 2 years old) What i want is something that can create an emergency boot disk to repair. nav's is useless as it only reads fat32. Any solutions now?

0

*sorry for the bad sentance structure. I was writing too fast and i should have checked it.

0

u wont need a boot disk with nod32, and yes its the best kept secret in the tech world, i have tried to get the average joe to just look at the prevention that nod32 has, it even warns u if u go on a site that contains a trojan variant, trying to sneak in, thats all i have to say about nod32 do take a look at it, am sure u be glad u did www.nod32.com

0

well, for me I recommend Norton as it simply the best! Just that installation and uninstallation part is troublesome@ ha!

0