Antivirus Software Comparison

[hpotter606]

Norton cant many viruses.

means ??

nyway i think ur using pirated copy of NAV .. rite ??
so the best wud be switching over to KAV...free...light ... nd efficient ..!!

NO NO NO
I am using orignal copy from IBM branded.
Its totally updated but it fails to delete virus 75% times.

 

[devilhead_satish]

Norton sucks big time. They spend so much on marketting. Wish they would employ good developers. Make them work really really hard and then would NAV would become our fav anti virus. (Only if it consumes low resources that is)

 

[rohanbee]

Norton sucks big time. They spend so much on marketting. Wish they would employ good developers. Make them work really really hard and then would NAV would become our fav anti virus. (Only if it consumes low resources that is)

Well yes it is good. Beg your pardon but it does not suck . My experience with it over the years has been quite good bar a few exceptions .
Yes it does consume resources, i will give you that. Any game i play it recommends shuting off norton but on my current system even with activating it keeps my system running smoothly.

 

[Tux]

Norton slows computr.
That y it sucks

 

[hcp006sl]

This is my 2nd post here.

Norton cant delete many viruses.

It's true. But, this would not be solved by just changing your AV. It's not always a fault of anti-virus. Not only NAV (any version) each and every AV has its own limitations. If the OS protects a virus as its extremely important file what can an AV do then? It's mainly an OS fault. Otherwise there was no reason for Microsoft to distribute a free SP-2 CD to everyone who wanted.
Solution: Use Windows XP with up to date security (Always load XP from its original CD from Microsoft and not from its copy). Use a reputed and trustable AV, Firewall, Anti-spy, Anti-spam. Use AMD Athlon 64 for enhanced security.

*www.virus.gr/english/fullxml/default.asp?id=67&mnu=67
- I have checked the above link. Surprisingly found an updated version of Kaspersky get less point in comparison to its previous version. I have nothing to say about it at this moment. Windows 2000 SP4!!! CELERON 2400 MHz!!! - cannot find any reason behind them. Should be Windows XP SP-2, Intel P4/AMD 64.

 

[FilledVoid]

Ive found Avast Home Edition to suit my needs for my Windows XP box whenever I use it but could one suggest a free one for Linux (that is if I need one ...)

 

[ujjwal]

You don't really need one, however you can use F-Prot or BitDefender Console if you really want it. They are on demand scanners, and purely command line based.

Windows 2000 SP4!!! CELERON 2400 MHz!!! - cannot find any reason behind them.

Obviously they will be testing on average system specifications, considering those are what most people will use. And if something can perform nearly as well while taking less resources, it should certainly deserve a higher rank

 

[~Phenom~]

hey guys, what about AVG .? It works quite good for my PC. any comments?

 

[Biplav]

i use norton corporate verion 8.
it takes the least memory , i suppose has good detection rates and more or less whether we think norton sucks or not we all have to agree- its got the nice ways to sell its products thats why it is the largest used anti virus.
anyways i had used kaspersky and no denying the fact that it had much much better detection rate(it detected 5 more virus which nod could not) but man how much ram does it suck? Speaking from a wider perspective most anti virus softwares detect the viruses which are really harmful(some viruses just stay and dont affect anything).
so my vote goes to nod32

 

[koolbluez]

I'm kool with my Avast.
It's light, good & free for Home users.

Norton & McAfee r huge & irritating. AVG, I just don't get along with it. Kaspersky took time, while Avast... uhmmm... reminds me of good times

 

[Charley]

hey guys, what about AVG .? It works quite good for my PC. any comments?

Very Good.

Is AVAST or AVG a smaller software to install, which doesnt take lot of system resources ???

 

[adithyagenius]

LATEST TESTS

April 2005 Tests

The link present in the first post is last year's test results. This is this years test results and norton seems to have climbed the ladder. AVG is at low 50s and avast and antivir being the top free ones. Antivir 84.5%. Just take a look

 

[Charley]

Norton slows computr.
That y it sucks

Thats why I shifted to AVG, runs perfect

 

[navjotjsingh]

I am using NAV 2005 with 256MB RAM on XP SP2. Great.

 

[hcp006sl]

I am using NAV 2005 with 256MB RAM on XP SP2. Great.

No doubt about that. I am also using NSW2005 on XP SP-2.

 

[mr_356]

I m using avast.
best thing of avast is that quick and smaller update to download.

 

[Charley]

I m using avast.
best thing of avast is that quick and smaller update to download.

The error I got before installation

ASWCLNR caused an invalid page fault in
module USER.EXE at 001e:00002a04.
Registers:
EAX=0000000c CS=16df EIP=00002a04 EFLGS=00000a06
EBX=00458908 SS=5037 ESP=000088d0 EBP=000088d4
ECX=00020004 DS=5037 ESI=000088e6 FS=20cf
EDX=0000000c ES=016f EDI=0045046c GS=0000
Bytes at CS:EIP:
67 66 ab e2 f7 c3 66 33 c0 b9 02 00 ad 67 66 ab
Stack dump:
16bf0b1d 38868908 503788e4 00000004 0e700413 0018000c 00300024 01920e70 00000004 0045046c 00000001 c0360006 0045046c 16df2d8c bff714d9 00000167

 

[Biplav]

I am using NAV 2005 with 256MB RAM on XP SP2. Great.

No doubt about that. I am also using NSW2005 on XP SP-2.

i tried norton 2005 and my computer slowed down like never before.
i lost near bout 20 mb of my memory which kaspersky didnt even eat and my computer took 20 seconds to load my computer.
i thought there wqas a problem with sp 2 as i had installed it just then with norton2005.
but after i uninstalled norton my copmuter was faster than ever before.
Now i am at risk though as i dont have any anti virus software loaded as i am fed up with changing from one to another.
just have zone alarm , windows firewall and spybot S&D.

 

[kumarmohit]

Dude even AVG free edition is good, it also detects the latest viruses and what more its free.

yeah ill tell u what-- AVG free detcts virii alright but that poor chap cannot repair or delete them so u know its there but u cant do anything(They say in their website in XXXXXXXXXTREMLY small print -- Healing systems DISABLED. Twice I have used it and suffered

And who says KAspersky has a free version-- Its a month long demo dears

The best option is Check ur MOBO cd it might have an OEM Av so that is all legal stuff..I had suffered all AV woes and finally settled for avast --its freee / faast / can repair damage / and is skinnable.. Now I thot that PC Cilliin 2002 I had in my MOBO CD was a demo but once i used it it was a full version so I switched to PC CILLIN 2002 (I dont think its really good cant exactly repair all damage --- hey only temp files it leaves repaires other alright -- but since I use win 2000 I have no inbuilt firewall and it provides a basic firewall -- which is a bit paranoid and most of the time remains i n warning mode- even if some one pings or tries some NETBIOS Browsing despite that i have disabled it on my Lan connexxion it goes in warning mode -- and I cannot browse my NW without allowing it thru PCCILLIN -- the only reson I use it is that I have its legal version and that is a big relief...

 

[Charley]

Howzaat , when I tried installing AVAST...

ASWCLNR caused an invalid page fault in
module USER.EXE at 001e:00002a04.
Registers:
EAX=0000000c CS=16df EIP=00002a04 EFLGS=00000206
EBX=00458908 SS=3abf ESP=000088d0 EBP=000088d4
ECX=00020004 DS=3abf ESI=000088e6 FS=3baf
EDX=0000000c ES=016f EDI=0045046c GS=0000
Bytes at CS:EIP:
67 66 ab e2 f7 c3 66 33 c0 b9 02 00 ad 67 66 ab
Stack dump:
16bf0b1d 38868908 3abf88e4 00000004 0bd00413 0018000c 00300024 01920bd0 00000004 0045046c 00000001 c0360006 0045046c 16df2d8c bff714d9 00000167