anti virus what is better?

[tinpis]

Kaspersky 8.0 v AVG free edition,any thoughts ?

[HandyAndy]

I'm running AVG 8.0 free with no particular personal gripes.

Be advised that Kaspersky doesn't like Zonealarm (if you are running it) so I found I had to uninstall ZA for Kaspersky to install.

[ZEEBEE]

I used to think AVG was pretty good until I loaded Avast.

It found about seven viruses (virii ?) that AVG let through.

Now use Avast professional and find it pretty comforting. :ok:

[Founder]

Being a mac fanatic I have to say it: Buy a mac and you dont have to worry about viruses anymore... why, there are none that does any serious harm...

[ChrisLKKB]

Just 2 points.

I installed Kaspersy after several years of using AVG, it didn't find anything but it slowed the PC down considerably and it locked up occasionally so I went back to AVG.

A friend had been using Norton (automatically updated) for years then tried Kaspersky, his PC was riddled with viruses, worms, trojans, malware etc.

[VnV2178B]

Founder,

you missed the magic word 'yet' from your post

try:- Malware authors target Mac emerging markets ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/25/mac_malware_menace/)

for a warning, daughter uses macs and she's now paranoid:sad:

VnV

[call100]

Try AVAST....I've never....(Touch Wood)...Had a virus pass through to my computer. It has however stopped many.....:ok:

[amanoffewwords]

Comodo - install & forget.

[Parapunter]

I got fed up with AVG 8 & went with Avira, after the last thread about this gave a few recommendations. I find it perfectly ok, but very slow on start up for botha vista & an xp machine. I would be interested in the observations of others.

[frostbite]

Another long-time user of Avast.

[Bushfiva]

Comodo - install & forget.This is the Comodo who think so highly of their antivirus 2.0 product (which never got out of beta), that they recommend installing someone else's product until 3.0 is released? And on 22nd September, a company rep said of CAVS 3.0 beta "CAVS3 is just a baby right now so of course AVIRA and avast! would have better detection."

Well, I quite like the firewall but I'm not going to be using their antivirus anytime soon.

[tallsandwich]

I've used 'em all, currently using Fortinet (firewall and AV) and like it more than any of the others, but it is not free.

ALL anti-virus software FAILS to catch common viruses SOME of the time (check the penetration tests). So changing from one AV to another it would not be surprising to find something here or there that another has missed.

As for the pl0nker who thinks he is safe on a Mac, grow-up and read-up some more. Perhaps the history of the internet worm might be a good idea for starters. Then perhaps read about the competition to hack into a mac...which lasted...hmmm - no longer than any other system.

[airborne_artist]

Another Avast vote - I loaded it onto a laptop that had a "fresh install" of XP SP3 and it found two Trojans, one of which had replicated itself a dozen times into other files.

[The Flying Pram]

Another ex AVG user who's moved over to Avast!. And you might be interested in this blog. (http://blog.itsecurityexpert.co.uk/labels/Eugene%20Kaspersky%20security%20guru%20Latest%20Malware%20Tr ends%20virus.html)

[Loose rivets]

I down loaded AVG and let it loose on all five logical drives. Nothing, nada, nowt. If I'd paid, I'd want me money back....there'd have to be something wouldn't there?

Then I played with the tabs at the top. The two hour scan seemingly had found something. But when was it going to tell me? How hard have I got to work to screw information out of modern software. Don't answer that. F:mad:ing hard is the answer.

{new thread started - SD}

[Bushfiva]

Sheeeesh, trying to get a Laser Jet 4 Plus driver for this XP Pro has been a total failure.

The driver is part of the XP installation. Add Printer, go through the screens until it asks you what printer you have, pick "HP" from the left column, then "4 Plus" from the right column.

[tinpis]

Right.Will give AVAST a go
many thanks :ok:

[stickyb]

I got fed up with AVG 8 & went with Avira, after the last thread about this gave a few recommendations. I find it perfectly ok, but very slow on start up for botha vista & an xp machine. I would be interested in the observations of others.

I use Avira on a few machines and have always found it very good. Don't have any problems with start up speed.

Only problem i ever had was a false positive, which was easily spotted, reported and fixed the next day.

[Tarq57]

tinpis
Things I find great about Avast:
-It's helped keep my computer clean for about two years.
-It's effective.
-The forum membership is responsive and very helpful.
-"boot-time scan".

The not so brilliant (but definitely willing to live with it)
-No scheduled scanning in the Home version
-The interface navigation takes a bit of learning. Worth it, though.

I think you'll be quite happy with it. Not to mention malware-free.
Demand scanner is also recommended. All the AV's can occasionally miss one "on the day".
Highly recommend MBAM and/or Superantispyware. Both (free or paid) antispyware applications, with a very good rep.

[Wader2]

I use Zone Alarm. It seems to update almost every time I log on. It is better than the others; don't know?

It naturally does on access scanning and I schedule a full scan weekly. It also runs anti-spyware but when I run another ASW it still finds things. I guess it depends on what is defined as spyware.

[mixture]

Kaspersky 8.0 v AVG free edition,any thoughts ?

There's a difference between free and paid. The speed of response.

There is no incentive for the free commmunity to provide rapid updates to cover new viruses (which appear more frequently than you may think !). The commercial guys have every incentive, if they are slow, people go to a competitor.

Kaspersky and F-Secure are rumored to be some of the quickest in the business.

F-Secure are good because they have multiple engines , and so more chance of finding stuff (one of their engines is Kapersky, funnily enough).

[Saab Dastard]

There is no incentive for the free commmunity to provide rapid updates to cover new viruses (which appear more frequently than you may think !). The commercial guys have every incentive, if they are slow, people go to a competitor.

You have a valid point, but what about those companies that have both a paid-for and free version? If they have to provide fast updates / definitions for the paid-for versions, they obviously have them available for the free version too.

As far as I can tell, the differences between free and paid-for versions tend to be features and capabilities, rather than core performance and updating.

I am willing to be corrected, of course!

SD

[Wader2]

As far as I can tell, the differences between free and paid-for versions tend to be features and capabilities, rather than core performance and updating.
SD

That has to be true as a free version that did not trap a virus is hardly going to encourage people to buy the pro version.

[mixture]

Saab,

Interesting observation about the people who do both.

However I think you've answered it in your second paragraph. The nitty gritty (e.g. scan engine etc.) is likely to pretty much be a mirror copy of the free version, as is the case with Linux and it's kernel and core components.

What they will probably tag on for your money are a few extra bells and whistles, plus access to paid for technical support. But as you say, performance and update frequency are unlikely to change.

It's the same thing that's happening with Linux. Most of the platform very similar between free and paid. What you pay the vendors $$$ for is the 24x7 tech support and vendor developed business class features (e.g. clustering, management etc.).

[mixture]

Quite a good comparison table here and reasonably up to date (02 September 2008) :

Virus Bulletin : News - AV-Test release latest results (http://www.virusbtn.com/news/2008/09_02)

AVG showing response time of 4-6 hours vs Kapersky at <2 and F-Sec at 2-4 or <2 depending on product version.

[Shunter]

Top tips for not getting viruses:

DO NOT use Internet Exploder, use FireFox
DO NOT use Outlook Express, use Thunderbird
NEVER double-click a file with a .exe, .bat, .cmd or .vbs extension unless you can 100% verify the source of said file
USE the Windows firewall
Set your Windows theme to look "different". Then you won't be fooled by fake dialogue boxes
Buy a Mac
Use Linux

This laptop (hers), runs XP, with built-in firewall, has McAfee and a public IP address. It sits on the kitchen worktop, is never switched off, and has never had any virus problems.

You can get the best AV in the world, but there's only so much it can do in the face of naive (stupid?) users who click everything in sight.

[Bushfiva]

DO NOT use Internet Exploder, use FireFox
DO NOT use Outlook Express, use ThunderbirdThese aren't top tips, they're personal opinions. The biggest problem with emails, other than viruses in attachements, is allowing HTML emails to be rendered on receipt. That's applicable to Outlook, OE, Thunderbird and others. Disable rendering on receipt, and you're more secire, whatever your email client.

[tinpis]

Trying Avast Home edition trial
Why did I thunk it were free?:uhoh:

[Bushfiva]

Why did I thunk it were free?

Um, because it is?

[Tarq57]

It is free.
Are you referring to the "pro" version, above?

[Tarq57]

Better make sure you got the right download. (http://www.avast.com/eng/download-avast-home.html)
(It needs yearly registration, too, which does not involve the exchange of money, just an email address.)

[mixture]

Hey boys, not wishing to sound like a moderator, but if you're talking printers it might be a good idea to start a new thread (hint: other people who want to talk printers but not anti-virus might actually read your posts) . :ok:

Mixture, you want my job? :) Done when I had a spare moment. SD

[Shunter]

These aren't top tips, they're personal opinions.No, they ARE top tips. I'm not going to bore with with if/why/what executes what by default and renders X without asking, but I manage a large corporate network supporting 50,000 (l)users. The majority use Lookout (sorry Outlook) and are locked down so they can't break anything no matter what they click, but a substantial number of mobile users who aren't connected to Exchange use standard POP/IMAP clients like OE and TB on laptops with admin access (so fairly akin to the average home user). The helpdesk calls related to infections from OE users when compared to TB users stands at 9:1. So don't tell me it's just a personal opinion; it's a fact.

Microsoft have traditionally put security way down the priority list. They're changing, thank God, but in a lot of instances (eg. Windows) they've gone so far down a particular road it makes it impossible to turn back. The Windows model of monolithic kernel and every single service running with system privileges is pure stupidity in the internet era... but as we know that's not the environment it was designed to run in. They can't go back; the break in backwards compatibility would kill their biggest customers. Apple were damn lucky to have got away with completely trashing their OS and moving to BSD; but due to the sheer size of MS they could never consider such an option. Windows 7, as it's known, it alleged to introduce big changes and break backwards compatibility. If that's true, they could fundamentally change Windows and make it something suitable for the internet age. But if they get it wrong, it could bury them.

Noone's perfect, but Firefox and Thunderbird are an infinitely better choice for general web and email than the Microsoft offerings.

[mixture]

Mixture, you want my job? Done when I had a spare moment. SD

Not wishing to drag this topic off-topic again, have sent you a PM Sir :p

[seacue]

The helpdesk calls related to infections from OE users when compared to TB users stands at 9:1.
And what fraction of your customer base uses each?

[I am a TB & Firefox user.]