tell me why :antivirus size some big some small

Status
Not open for further replies.

shashank4u

Youngling
tell me if anybody know
why norton , mcfee are so big in size and r not the best.
whereas nod32,avg are small but favourites of everyone.
is there anything to do with the size of the antivirus.
nav 2005 around 100mb.
nav 2006 300 mb.
nod32 11.7 mb.
avg 26.4 mb.
 

ilugd

Beware of the innocent
there is a saying in Hindi:

which is bigger, a brain or a buffalo (Akal badi ya bhaiyns)
 

paul_007

Padawan
ilugd said:
there is a saying in Hindi:

which is bigger, a brain or a buffalo (Akal badi ya bhaiyns)

absolutely agree with u , it doesnt mean that norton and mc afee r better just bcos their installation package size is bigger, just try all the software , and use the one which is best
 
OP
shashank4u

shashank4u

Youngling
hey man :
i just wana to know why they have a big installation file ,
they r big companies dont they know that the task can be
done with a small installation.
or do they have some
different technnique of searching viruses.
got my point what i mean .
 

eagle_y2j

Youngling
i think ...file size depends upon wat language has been used to code that program like if we code a program using assembly lang. it creates much large program when same task done by machine language
 

aadipa

Padawan
Larger the installation, more the stuff it bundles. Norton comes with many extra tools/softwares (most of which are useless for power user). While on the other hand, Symantec Corp. client, made by same company, is just 20MB or so, and is counted as one of the best AV.
 

uttoransen

Broken In
i don't agree to it

norton am not using, am using panda, but still norton is one of my favorites, and you say norton is not good, i suggest you to go to pack.google.com and install norton 2005, you get free lisence for 6 months, use it, and then say it's good or not, and also you need some extra ram, as it uses 100 mb of ram for it's active scanner. the bigger the anti-virus the more strong is the virus data base, and the more ram it uses to run means more active the shield is, though you don't require all that for the home pc, but for a surver you need to think on these topics before taking any antivirus,
 

kumarmohit

Technomancer
Absolutely good reason Using Windows native interface not only provide a good merger feeling with windows it also keeps app size light.
 

ECE0105

In the zone
Re: i don't agree to it

uttoransen said:
norton am not using, am using panda, but still norton is one of my favorites, and you say norton is not good, i suggest you to go to pack.google.com and install norton 2005, you get free lisence for 6 months, use it, and then say it's good or not, and also you need some extra ram, as it uses 100 mb of ram for it's active scanner. the bigger the anti-virus the more strong is the virus data base, and the more ram it uses to run means more active the shield is, though you don't require all that for the home pc, but for a surver you need to think on these topics before taking any antivirus,


This is news to me..........
I know of big companies that use Software like Symantec Anti-Virus both at the Server as well as the client Level.....

Dude.... Big AV doesn't mean Strong Virus Database... Better get ur Facts right before commenting on the comments of others....

People here are not Chu***yas as u percieve them to be. This place is a wealth of knowledge..
N BTW, when Norton is ur favorite, Y do u use Panda????
 
try avast 4.7 home edition its free, it has nice database & low on size....
quickly detects attacking ip's & blocks it automatically displaying msgs...

many gr8 features, graphical scanning, better than avg, norton, mcafee....
do telll me after downloading it.....its a blast indeed...i gonna buy avast professional edition
 

shaunak

Tux Fan
It all depends on the method of active protection used. Some try to scan everything at one go and kill MBs of ram. Some spare the MBs at the cost of safety.
the best mean mix i have found so far has to be avast.
 

jenaguru

Broken In
Hi guys, my favourite is THE KASPERSKY. excellent protection, low on resource, take only around 50mb installation space. Scan-time is a little long, but ok for safety purpose.

most remarkable is available update (online) even every minute.

I never used NOD23. can any user of it give a little more detail?

awaiting. jenaguru.
 

rakeshishere

HELP AND SUPPORT
jenaguru said:
Hi guys, my favourite is THE KASPERSKY. excellent protection, low on resource, take only around 50mb installation space. Scan-time is a little long, but ok for safety purpose.

most remarkable is available update (online) even every minute.

I never used NOD23. can any user of it give a little more detail?

awaiting. jenaguru.

Well its not NOD23 but NOD32..Check its review here.
Its not resource hungry like norton and doesnt give problems to the user and and its very userfriendly
 

led_shankar

In Shamful Mystery
I was very impressed with AVG when I used it for its low profile (norton keeps butting in everywhere)....What's more, it finds viruses better.....But I found Avast slowed my Comp? Was there something wring in what I did, or was it avast's problem (i dont think so, seeing as u pl have praised it so much)

My comp is pretty old....128MB ram 1.6 Ghz, P4

-----

Though the best prevention for viruses is simple common sense... If you see a music video on a p2p network of 40 KB it's almost definitelyt a virus. And don't d/l stuff from shady looking sites. And always scan things you d/l (which is where a low-resource av comes in handy)
 

Desperado

Broken In
i had gotta a virus on my pc which norton could only detect but could not delete.. ultimately i had to restore my c drive.. after dat i ran a scan with norton... it didnt find anything...i uninstalled norton and installed NOD32 V2 ...it found three infections....NOW DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.. I HAVE BECOME AN nod32 fan....i trust this software.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom