I just bought a new laptop and this specific software is already installed (trial version). I'm wondering if it's really reliable so I would know if I would pay for the full version or not. Nice answers will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Printable View
I just bought a new laptop and this specific software is already installed (trial version). I'm wondering if it's really reliable so I would know if I would pay for the full version or not. Nice answers will be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
My personal opinion are that Norton and McAfee are both trash. My personal choice would be NOD32 by www.eset.com second runner up would be Kaspersky from either a local store or www.kaspersky.com I also try to avoid the "Internet Security Suites" and other grand named products and just go for anti-virus. I find the automated firewalls to be less than effective and better at blocking things you need/want access to and not suited to blocking what you don't want to get through.
Listen to everyone elses advice as well before making a choice.
Thanks Niclo. I'm looking at the link you had given.:)
I agree that the all encompassing suites arent worth the money you pay. Strictly on a waste of good resources idea. Just plain ole antivirus works very well.
Although unlike Niclo I have used Norton Anti Virus very successfully for the last few years without issue on a lot of customer machines
Thanks Ferrit. Have you tried the paid version of Norton Internet Security? Do you think it's worth it?
I absolutely will not recommend either Norton Internet Security or Norton 360. Even though they have scored fairly good on reviews. I really don't see any need for that big of a piece of software.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferrit
Norton Anti Virus uses around 12/15 megs of ram on a regular basis and it updates a lot without being in your face all the time.
I don't think any of the others can claim much more then that.
I just dont see the need for all that firewall /protection stuff. In all likely hood your behind a router that already has a built in hardware firewall so really your just doubling up for nothing.
For the last 2 years I have used Microsoft Essentials on my personal PC's, clients and doctor offices with no problems. Before there was a variety of Norton and Mcafee on the PC's which caused a lot of problems. This is just my 2 cents worth.
Exactly. MSE works great, small footprint, customer proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonie
The problem I have seen with this particular software suite is the security piece. It is not configurable to begin with. When was the last time your firewall had no exceptions? We routinely get calls that someone out in the wide world can't access one of our database subscriptions. Since they are paid subscriptions, our users have free access. These subscriptions are acessed in one of 2 ways: Either we authenticate on our end and pass off the request to the webiste, or they will authenticate based on the link they came from. The first method NIS will see as a "referring URL." Which is absolutely forbidden by NIS. But it is what it is. That is the authentication method and we have to tell our customers to turn off their security to get to the website.Quote:
Originally Posted by terihilton27
Another problem I see with these big company AV suites is their lack of identifying threats in a timely manner. We use McAfee Enterprise at work and we are regularly loading trial Malware Bytes to find stuff McAfee has allowed through. Only when MB finds the threat does McAfee "claim" to have found something.
Oh yeah, then there was that update that killed several thousand machines world-wide because McAfee pushed out a dat update that hosed your machine! Lucky me, I called in sick that day.
I like Avast! I particularly like the boot scan.
Let it exprire. And then go with AVG. It is the best anti virus i have ever come across. Automatic daily updates with only kb files. Easily you can find its serial key till 2018 version. Overall a perfect combination to keep your PC secure.
If you're going to go the free route the real advantage would be with Microsofts Security Essentials. Microsoft pretty much knows the ins and outs of their own product and if you're going to go with a free solution might as well take theirs. Not to mention it's simple, effective and does the job more reliably than all other free solutions.Quote:
Originally Posted by techbug157
AVG has some issues that I don't agree with. One being that it seems to miss some of the more common bugs but catches the ones Norton always misses. The other issue I have is people think you can have more than one antivirus on a PC which is a big big big NO. 90% of the time when I fix a norton/avg problem is because both are on the same machine and it now boots slower than the time it takes to cook a turkey. That problem also is evident when norton has been uninstalled but did not remove all of its original functions with the uninstall and avg was installed afterwards. With that problem set aside I've never felt secure with the results or even the time it takes to scan with AVG.
By the way AVG has a free edition, no need for a key. If you're touting the idea of stealing please take that kind of advice elsewhere. In addition you didn't advise removing Norton when it expires which leads back to the biggest issue I have to contend with on machines that are slow and have BOTH on them. Finally, all AV update daily as it's an unofficial standard. If you want to get gritty about it ESET updates 3-6 times a day in some instances and the updates are just as miniscule.
That is theft and this post will be reported and should not be answered.Quote:
Originally Posted by techbug157
No antivirus will help you with the problems associated with stolen keys.
By the way AVG is crap, try uninstalling it on 10 machines.
The answer will become clear
I never did understand the need to steal antivirus when there so many good free products. Oh well. Leaving the thread as is, otherwise I have to delete everything posted today.
Some people just feel the need to "borrow" everything
Certainly true, just as there are people who will lie to you when the truth is better just to stay in practice.
Anyway, since we're more or less officially sanctioned, I've got to say that Norton 2011 and 2012 are really underachievers. Truth in naming should require that they both be renamed Norton Cookie Removal Tool. You can use MBAM scan a system with Norton installed, and their is virtually zero chance that Norton will detect a single infected file during the process. Except for cookies.
Monday, I ran MBAM on an obviously infected system running NAV 2012 and the only "threat" it detected was the MBAM installation file. In the meantime, MBAM detected seventy-something threats.
Now, somebody may pop up and say, "Well, Av Comparatives says that Norton is like, 99.5% effective in realtime testing."
All I can say is "Good luck replicating THAT performance in the real world!"
No, my recommendation is that you should get AVG. Best anti-virus ever. Quick, small and auto updates. Remove every Trojans or viruses in your computer. And its installation and serial key can be done easily as well.
Sorry, I'm not convinced AVG can hold up compared to Kaspersky and NOD32. Care to give any examples and comparisons? Personally i find avast and bit defender to be better than AVG and those don't compare to Kaspersky or NOD32 either.Quote:
Originally Posted by techbug157
avg isn't the best but for a free customer based program it works ok.. as long as they don't surf porn sites because it will let the bugs in and THEN tell them.. kapersky rates higher for me...
Mayet! Howdy!
In free AV, I think Avira and Avast are the most effective, but Microsoft Security Essentials is pretty good, and it is a perfect match for folks who want an unobtrusive AV. I install it a lot for older clients or those who are technically challenged. AVG just doesn't fare well in anybody's independent tests (OK, West Coast Labs has always liked it), and the new version is seriously buggy.
On a personal note, I've got 15 years experience removing nasties from AVG "protected" computers, so I've zero respect for the software. Kaspersky is very good, but I'm still partial to NOD32, even I don't like the interface in v.5.0 quite so much as 4.0.
Personaly I don't believe there is an AV out there that can claim 100% protection. Until there is a way protection can be done proactive instead of reactive, we will have to choose the best AV for the client or our own personal use and the machine it will reside on. Some are better than others and some are pure crap. All we can do is the best with what we have.