AVG free version users

[Ghosth]

Can a virus or malware cripple or blind AVG, yes, its happened to me.
In which case AVG or whatever software will sit & scan and find nothing.
I've seen it happen with more than 1 virus scanner.  At least with AVG its not complaining if I try to install it in more than one location or computer. Unlike some other bloated antivirus programs out there.

So I can easily have a dual boot system and in case of doubt. Jump into the other side, and scan all.  At least AVG will NOT crash your system, tie up huge chunks of system resorces, and hide itself away in strange places on your HD like some of the big boys. I had a symantic utilities disk back in win 95 that caused about a dozen crashes before I figured it out.

Last, like everything else, you get what you pay for. I didn't pay a dime for AVG.
Nod32 is NOT free, its a 30 day trial. Avast I havn't checked out yet. But it doesn't sound THAT much better.

BTW the ultimate fixer is an avg dos virus scanner.
Boot up with win98 floppy, insert disk, do a DOS scan of the whole computer.
Takes a bit of time, but it catch's everybody. Windows is not running so nothing can hide, protect itself from delete, etc.

This is not a black & white world, there is no one perfect answer that is the same answer for all people & all problems at all times.

[Westy]

Vulcan you didn't come across like an a-hole to me.  I can espect your opinion based on your experience.  Mine has been different is all.

[CHECKERS]

AVG , free or Pro , both suck
 New McAfee is crapware just like Norton.... , both companys add campaines are full of Hype and BS.....their base code is same old stuff John McAfee and Peter Norton wrote years ago.....

  CA antivirus r7,  can be had for a year,  free,  thru Microsofts security
website , and is a far better choice ....  

 2 years without a problem using NOD 32 antivirus software .

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by CHECKERS
AVG , free or Pro , both suck
 New McAfee is crapware just like Norton.... , both companys add campaines are full of Hype and BS.....their base code is same old stuff John McAfee and Peter Norton wrote years ago.....

  CA antivirus r7,  can be had for a year,  free,  thru Microsofts security
website , and is a far better choice ....  

 2 years without a problem using NOD 32 antivirus software .

Its not the 'same base stuff'. And you show your ignorance, Nortons did not write their original AV code. It was written by Dr Solomons.

CA sucks, I know of a few large corporate site thats had a significant outbreaks with CA. Once again a free or extremely cheap solution (they've sold it here for $1 per node).

I like McAfee, theres nothing wrong with it. Same goes for NOD32.

[LePaul]

Originally posted by Viper9th
AVG is one of the best programs, and not all programs can find viruses, except norton cause it sucks, AVG doesn't try and put it in the vault or delete? Cause nothing else (program) wise can lepaul. AVG great program but bit defender, give it a year and there will be something it can't find.

LOL your arguments are laughable.  Symantec sucks?  And AVG is great although when both products are presented a known-infected system, your "great" application detected nothing.

Now look, Im not fanboy of Symantec, AVG, MacAffee or (insert your brand here).  I was just giving all the programs I could think of one evening a swing at fixing the situation.  Surprisingly (to me), Symantec not only detected but fixed and repaired the system.

I hadnt thought to try McAffee, I have never used em.

Im sorry, in a technical discussion of one software app versus another, saying "one sucks" doesnt cut it.  Empirical evidence please.  Let's stick to facts and not opinions.

[dmf]

Originally posted by wooley
Viruses on Mac's. Surely you jest? I've seen the adverts on TV and Apple says only PC's get viruses

Yea right.

[dmf]

Originally posted by Bogie603rd
Maybe he doesen't want the NSA to find him:cool: !

I have a program for that too, it completely erases every piece of data on the Hdd and writes, ( not over writes) o's to the drive, that will take care of whatever pic's progs, or other stuff that was downloaded, as for tthe hardware, may I suggest starting over with all new?

[CHECKERS]

Originally posted by Vulcan
Its not the 'same base stuff'. And you show your ignorance, Nortons did not write their original AV code. It was written by Dr Solomons.

CA sucks, I know of a few large corporate site thats had a significant outbreaks with CA. Once again a free or extremely cheap solution (they've sold it here for $1 per node).

I like McAfee, theres nothing wrong with it. Same goes for NOD32.

Vulcan,  Dr. Solomons is/was McAfee,  ie Network Associates ...... DUH ???

    You like McAfee , great ! you run it !

   "To achieve ICSA Labs’ Anti-Virus Certification, a product must demonstrate that it can protect computer systems and media from computer virus intrusion, detect computer viruses on an infected computer system or media, and provide for recovery from a computer virus infection. To that end, ICSA Labs Certified anti-virus products must detect 100% of viruses on the current "In the Wild List”"; detect 100% of the ICSA Labs’ Common Infectors List; detect 90% of known viruses not currently listed as "In the Wild" and do so without causing any false alarms. Complete criteria may be found at: http://www.icsalabs.com. CA’s eTrust Antivirus successfully met all of these specifications.

 McAfee falls flat on iits DirectX activated butt ....... VB test, after test ..... good stuff ?

   TOO FUNNY .......


   Like LePaul kinda refers to , an opinion formed on loyalty is pure BS ....
 
"LOL your arguments are laughable. Symantec sucks? And AVG is great although when both products are presented a known-infected system, your "great" application detected nothing.

 Now look, Im not fanboy of Symantec, AVG, MacAffee or (insert your brand here). I was just giving all the programs I could think of one evening a swing at fixing the situation. Surprisingly (to me), Symantec not only detected but fixed and repaired the system.

I hadnt thought to try McAffee, I have never used em.

Im sorry, in a technical discussion of one software app versus another, saying "one sucks" doesnt cut it. Empirical evidence please. Let's stick to facts and not opinions."

   Symantec has a 99% detection rate in Wild List tests , but,  it old patched base code is loaded down with all kinds of crap that are required to run with it .... and it bogs down even the fastest PCs. ie Norton Security Center is a prime example .....


   Regards............
 
 CHECKERS......

[LePaul]

Yea when I ran Symantec Corp version (8 ?) on my web servers, I noticed the CPU power drop significantly.  That program may have done its job scanning and detecting...but wow, at a substancial load on performance

[mietla]

Geez ladies,

why do you have to be so emotional. Why don't you stick to facts and useful hints and info and leave the "I hate", "I love" behind. If you opinion of a particular product is negative, tell us why. This is useful and constructive.

If all you have to offer is womanly "I hate it but I don't know why", go to Oprah BBS.

[mietla]

Back to topic.

I was using Norton for number of years. It worked ok, but what I found very anoying was their greed. Not only they want me to "buy" their product every year, but they also want me to buy more than one copy. I understand that updating the current DB costs money and I'm ok with some yearly fee, but charging for an yearly upgrade as much as for a new product just rubs me the wrong way. I have a small home network (10+ boxes). I really dislike the idea of charging per seat.


Recently I've decided to switch to McAfee. The ads looked good, and after an initial installation I liked the product. After playing with it a bit on my laptop, I've decided to install it on all my computers. This is when real problems started to show up.

* It failed to even install on some of my older boxes.
* Some of my comps lost the internet connectivity. Uninstall fixed the problem. I did not bother to troubleshoot.
* The overhead is too big. After McAfee installation everything is not only  visibly, but also significantly slower. The effect is more visible on some comps that others. My wife's comp got so much slower that she not only immediately noticed it, she told me to whack it immediately. Before McAfee, she was running Norton, so it was a comparison of two competing products, not McAfee vs. clean system.

All in all, three days after I purchased it, my brand new, still shiny McAfee got and axe. I uninstalled it from all my  boxes and replaced it with Avast. My laptop is running the Pro version, rest is on Home Edition. So far, I'm pretty happy with it. Installed without problems, seems very unintrusive. It does not get in you way with tons of pop-ups. The only question I still need to answer is... does it work, does it catch viruses. You guys seem to have varying opinions.

Can someone direct me to some official third party evaluations?

[MrRiplEy[H]]

MAC addresses can be spoofed. No worries.

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by CHECKERS
Vulcan,  Dr. Solomons is/was McAfee,  ie Network Associates ...... DUH ???

    You like McAfee , great ! you run it !

   "To achieve ICSA Labs’ Anti-Virus Certification, a product must demonstrate that it can protect computer systems and media from computer virus intrusion, detect computer viruses on an infected computer system or media, and provide for recovery from a computer virus infection. To that end, ICSA Labs Certified anti-virus products must detect 100% of viruses on the current "In the Wild List”"; detect 100% of the ICSA Labs’ Common Infectors List; detect 90% of known viruses not currently listed as "In the Wild" and do so without causing any false alarms. Complete criteria may be found at: http://www.icsalabs.com. CA’s eTrust Antivirus successfully met all of these specifications.

 McAfee falls flat on iits DirectX activated butt ....... VB test, after test ..... good stuff ?

   TOO FUNNY .......

OK so I got em back da front on Dr Solomons

DirectX activated? Are you referring to McAfee's ASAP product ( .net, not directx).

I run the .net version on work PCs as its managed by the firewall, good for zero day outbreaks and aV enforcement, and 8i on my servers. Have done for quite a while. Both are good, reliable, and never fallen over. Sure the managed version is annoying as .net likes to jump to the front every now and then.

The fact remains with CA that we've seen several large scale outbreaks on CA deployed sites with worms that went straight through CA, when McAfee, NOD32, Symantec, and Trend sites were fine. One site example is the Ministry of Education in NZ - who selected CA simply because CA went in at NZ$0.50 per node!

good resource for those who are asking: http://www.virustotal.com

[deSelys]

Well, I did the test this afternoon on a laptop which was used by the son of a boss to surf pr0n (that's the boss version and he's sticking to it )...

McAfee VirusScan with latest engine and DAT: no viruses...

AVG 7.1 network edition with latest update: 2 trojans

Both were configured to scan all files and look into compressed files.


So much for your evaluation, Vulcan.

[Nilsen]

Ill trust Vulcans advice even if he is a Mac hater