Best Anti-virus for XP?
Thx
Thx
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
I had a problem with Norton 2001 when Nimda was out. They hadn't updated their AV definitions until the 2nd week the virus was out
Sorry, you were a little unclear as to who hadn't updated their AV definitions.
If it was your users then shame on them, although maybe the Systems Administrator should have set up automated updates.
If however you are saying Symantec didn't update their definitions then I'm afraid I have to very much disagree with you.
Norton/Symantec were one of the first AV companies to be fully protected from this virus, updated definitions were available on the day this virus was first found.
Large AV companies do not sit around for two weeks before releasing updates to definitions.
Infact Symantec definitions are always updated every Wednesday without fail and if you are using the Corporate Edition and local servers there are new builds every day.
Sorry, you were a little unclear as to who hadn't updated their AV definitions.
If it was your users then shame on them, although maybe the Systems Administrator should have set up automated updates.
If however you are saying Symantec didn't update their definitions then I'm afraid I have to very much disagree with you.
Norton/Symantec were one of the first AV companies to be fully protected from this virus, updated definitions were available on the day this virus was first found.
Large AV companies do not sit around for two weeks before releasing updates to definitions.
Infact Symantec definitions are always updated every Wednesday without fail and if you are using the Corporate Edition and local servers there are new builds every day.
You're dead on about the Wednesday updates... but they were every 14 days, not every week. I'm speaking of the retail version so if you had something better, obviously your story will be different.
Let me assure you the problem was on their side. Even after I contracted the virus, I attempted to update the definitions to no avail. The program said I had the latest version. Norton updated their protection the following day but it was "a day late and a dollar short" as far as I'm concerned. Having over 400 files infected is a huge turn-off for any Anti-Virus program. No real harm done though. I switched to PC-Cillin2k, which cleared it right up, disabled the share from the culprit who was DL'ing pr0n, and haven't had a problem with anything since.
My version of PC-Cillin won't run with WinXP so I had to switch to McAfee VirusScan 6.0 Pro. Overall, I'd still take PC-Cillin over the other 2. Anyone got a hook up on the 2k2 version? ;-)
P.S. Everyone needs to stop being so personal with everything and being so quick to blame. Unless you're Mr Norton himself, I think you need to kick back a bit.
Let me assure you the problem was on their side. Even after I contracted the virus, I attempted to update the definitions to no avail. The program said I had the latest version. Norton updated their protection the following day but it was "a day late and a dollar short" as far as I'm concerned. Having over 400 files infected is a huge turn-off for any Anti-Virus program. No real harm done though. I switched to PC-Cillin2k, which cleared it right up, disabled the share from the culprit who was DL'ing pr0n, and haven't had a problem with anything since.
My version of PC-Cillin won't run with WinXP so I had to switch to McAfee VirusScan 6.0 Pro. Overall, I'd still take PC-Cillin over the other 2. Anyone got a hook up on the 2k2 version? ;-)
P.S. Everyone needs to stop being so personal with everything and being so quick to blame. Unless you're Mr Norton himself, I think you need to kick back a bit.
I don't need to "kick back" a bit because I'm afraid what you are telling me is incorrect.
I will rush to the defence of software made by any manufacturer if I feel that a post in a thread is likely to damage the reputation of that said software package.
Especially if I use the package and know that there isn't the problem you described.
Norton updated their virus definitions to protect against Nimda on the day the virus was found.
They were in fact one of the very first to have full protection available and that covered all versions from Corporate to Home User.
You've already changed your story once, first you say it was two weeks before they had protection, now you've changed it to one day.
If I can just get you to acknowledge it was actually on the day I'll be even happier.
The way you have incorrectly said Norton was not offering protection until some 24hrs after this virus hit is rubbishing a product that I use and know is always updated with emergency virus definition packages the second anew virus is found and porotection is written.
Norton have also been up[censored] their definitions every Wednesday for two years now, not every other Wednesday which you are quoting.
Sounds very much like a misconfiguration at the PC, only checking for updates every second Wednesday and that being the cause of the infection.
The only way an upto date Norton/Symantec protected system could have got Nimda was during the period when NO anti-virus company had protection in place, it wouldn't have mattered which software you were using as none of them knew how to protect.
Once the protection was available Norton would have stopped infections before most other products.
No I don't work for Norton, no I don't need to "kick back", I just want potential Norton purchasers to realise that no you don't have a two week wait for protection against new virus', you don't even have 24hrs, you will be protected within hours of new virus's being found.
I will rush to the defence of software made by any manufacturer if I feel that a post in a thread is likely to damage the reputation of that said software package.
Especially if I use the package and know that there isn't the problem you described.
Norton updated their virus definitions to protect against Nimda on the day the virus was found.
They were in fact one of the very first to have full protection available and that covered all versions from Corporate to Home User.
You've already changed your story once, first you say it was two weeks before they had protection, now you've changed it to one day.
If I can just get you to acknowledge it was actually on the day I'll be even happier.
The way you have incorrectly said Norton was not offering protection until some 24hrs after this virus hit is rubbishing a product that I use and know is always updated with emergency virus definition packages the second anew virus is found and porotection is written.
Norton have also been up[censored] their definitions every Wednesday for two years now, not every other Wednesday which you are quoting.
Sounds very much like a misconfiguration at the PC, only checking for updates every second Wednesday and that being the cause of the infection.
The only way an upto date Norton/Symantec protected system could have got Nimda was during the period when NO anti-virus company had protection in place, it wouldn't have mattered which software you were using as none of them knew how to protect.
Once the protection was available Norton would have stopped infections before most other products.
No I don't work for Norton, no I don't need to "kick back", I just want potential Norton purchasers to realise that no you don't have a two week wait for protection against new virus', you don't even have 24hrs, you will be protected within hours of new virus's being found.
I'm just stating the story as I remember it. If I made an error, I made an error. I rest my case.. try decaf.
Norton is the best I use the corporate version and the network admin is great. You can set up auto updates and install the client program onto workstations from the server it is really easy and powerful.
Fingers crossed this link works:
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB=REQINT1=54540
This is one of the reasons why I will stick to Symantec, they get the job done whilst others just arse around giving the end user the feeling they are fully protected when they are not.
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?30REQEVENT=&REQAUTH=21046&14001REQSUB=REQINT1=54540
This is one of the reasons why I will stick to Symantec, they get the job done whilst others just arse around giving the end user the feeling they are fully protected when they are not.
Wow, that does suck for some people (we do perimeter filtering as well, so nothing gets in anyway), but if you judge software on any single issue, then I would have to assume that you don't use much software in general (especially any version of Windows).
Oh, and one more thing, just thought I would share these with everybody:
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?R...p;REQAUTH=21046
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?R...p;REQAUTH=21046
But hey, Symantec doesn't "arse" around afterall now do they? Oh, and I am guessing that you still get all the credit since I kept the "bladerunner" portion in the link...
Oh, and one more thing, just thought I would share these with everybody:
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?R...p;REQAUTH=21046
http://www.silicon.com/bin/bladerunner?R...p;REQAUTH=21046
But hey, Symantec doesn't "arse" around afterall now do they? Oh, and I am guessing that you still get all the credit since I kept the "bladerunner" portion in the link...
Quote:
Clutch, i have just realized something about you,
if someone doesnt share your opinion, they are a "fanatic"
or a (whatever they are talking about)loony.
Whats up with that crap?
Funny, I thought the same thing about you. However, have you noticed that I only ask for facts to back up what someone is saying. Bladerunner did as such just recently, but after a couple of minutes of searching on the same site it appears that Symantec isn't that much better. So, what's up with this "crap" you ask? It's actually quite simple; put up or shut up. Bladerunner already stated in another post that he would rush in to back up a good product against false or exaggerated accusations, and I am doing the same thing here. Bladerunner and I actually see eye-to-eye on many things, it just so happens that Symantec isn't one of them. However, I have asked you to back up your claims in the past, and yet you haven't. So it seems that you are coming into this thread to "troll" a bit. Is this the case?
Clutch, i have just realized something about you,
if someone doesnt share your opinion, they are a "fanatic"
or a (whatever they are talking about)loony.
Whats up with that crap?
Funny, I thought the same thing about you. However, have you noticed that I only ask for facts to back up what someone is saying. Bladerunner did as such just recently, but after a couple of minutes of searching on the same site it appears that Symantec isn't that much better. So, what's up with this "crap" you ask? It's actually quite simple; put up or shut up. Bladerunner already stated in another post that he would rush in to back up a good product against false or exaggerated accusations, and I am doing the same thing here. Bladerunner and I actually see eye-to-eye on many things, it just so happens that Symantec isn't one of them. However, I have asked you to back up your claims in the past, and yet you haven't. So it seems that you are coming into this thread to "troll" a bit. Is this the case?
I am amazed at all the prople that use Norton.
You would think that it is the only anti-virus program out there!
Has anyone tried System Suite from Ontrack? Their virus program comes from Trendmicro and the updates are free!!
The program is much smaller that Norton,
It doesn't load at startup either at the dos stage or at the windows stage unless you want it to, unlike Norton,
It doesn't have all the side effects like Norton, less interference with other programs. Everytime I see troubleshooting tips on program installations, Norton Antivirus is at the top of the list causing problems!
I find Norton overated and bloated. I do have Norton Utilities but rarely run it. I find System Suite V4 from Ontrack far better especially the defrag program. The software is much smaller also.
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them.
You would think that it is the only anti-virus program out there!
Has anyone tried System Suite from Ontrack? Their virus program comes from Trendmicro and the updates are free!!
The program is much smaller that Norton,
It doesn't load at startup either at the dos stage or at the windows stage unless you want it to, unlike Norton,
It doesn't have all the side effects like Norton, less interference with other programs. Everytime I see troubleshooting tips on program installations, Norton Antivirus is at the top of the list causing problems!
I find Norton overated and bloated. I do have Norton Utilities but rarely run it. I find System Suite V4 from Ontrack far better especially the defrag program. The software is much smaller also.
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them.
The program is much smaller that Norton
Old saying, but size really doesn't matter.
The installation size of Symantec is not important, everybody has got more than enough hard drive space.
As for memory useage Nprotect is using 3.7MB and this is full protection, not exactly a lot is it?
It doesn't load at startup either at the dos stage or at the windows stage unless you want it to, unlike Norton
And this is good?
You do know viruses don't wait until your virus checker is running before they attempt to infect your system?
A system that can be switched off is certainly no good what so ever for the corporate community, we administrators do not want users stopping the virus scanner from running.
Some viruses don't deliver their payload until the first reboot after the infection, unless that software is running as soon as Windows does then it's too late, payload delivered.
Your system can be infected as you simply browse a few web sites, so an AV product that doesn't run at start up and run all the time is a waste of time.
It doesn't have all the side effects like Norton, less interference with other programs
I am yet to see Symantec AV interfere with any program it is not supposed to.
It scans files as they appear in IE's cache, it scans every e-mailas it arrives into my inbox and scans them as I send mails too.
Every .exe file is quickly scanned before it is run causing no slow down at all as it does this so quickly.
I've never had to close AV down to install a program/game, play a game, run an application.
It just sits there running all the time, please define "interference" & "Side Efects".
I find Norton overated and bloated
My whole \program files\norton antivirus folder is 13MB in size, now if that is bloated......lets be honest, it isn't really is it?
I do have Norton Utilities but rarely run it
Nothing to do with AV, we are talking about either Symantec AV Corporate Edition or Norton Antivirus 2002, both of which are stand alone packages.
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them
Of course I've heard of them, maybe they should stick to what they do really well and that would be data recovery.
Once again, before the shouts of "fanboy" and the like are thrown, I am defending the product I know and trust from a series of arguments I don't feel are true.
Old saying, but size really doesn't matter.
The installation size of Symantec is not important, everybody has got more than enough hard drive space.
As for memory useage Nprotect is using 3.7MB and this is full protection, not exactly a lot is it?
It doesn't load at startup either at the dos stage or at the windows stage unless you want it to, unlike Norton
And this is good?
You do know viruses don't wait until your virus checker is running before they attempt to infect your system?
A system that can be switched off is certainly no good what so ever for the corporate community, we administrators do not want users stopping the virus scanner from running.
Some viruses don't deliver their payload until the first reboot after the infection, unless that software is running as soon as Windows does then it's too late, payload delivered.
Your system can be infected as you simply browse a few web sites, so an AV product that doesn't run at start up and run all the time is a waste of time.
It doesn't have all the side effects like Norton, less interference with other programs
I am yet to see Symantec AV interfere with any program it is not supposed to.
It scans files as they appear in IE's cache, it scans every e-mailas it arrives into my inbox and scans them as I send mails too.
Every .exe file is quickly scanned before it is run causing no slow down at all as it does this so quickly.
I've never had to close AV down to install a program/game, play a game, run an application.
It just sits there running all the time, please define "interference" & "Side Efects".
I find Norton overated and bloated
My whole \program files\norton antivirus folder is 13MB in size, now if that is bloated......lets be honest, it isn't really is it?
I do have Norton Utilities but rarely run it
Nothing to do with AV, we are talking about either Symantec AV Corporate Edition or Norton Antivirus 2002, both of which are stand alone packages.
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them
Of course I've heard of them, maybe they should stick to what they do really well and that would be data recovery.
Once again, before the shouts of "fanboy" and the like are thrown, I am defending the product I know and trust from a series of arguments I don't feel are true.
Quote:
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them
Of course I've heard of them, maybe they should stick to what they do really well and that would be data recovery.
Does this mean that you don't care for OnTrack's AV software, fanboy? I haven't used it, and while I have heard of them I haven't had a need for their software/services. Are their any other AV products that you would run (provided the Symantec's HQ was blown up by my deathray...err, some "accident" happened)?
Signing off from my base modeled after the Cobra Terrordome,
clutch
By the way, Ontrack is one of the larger data recovery services if you haven't heard of them
Of course I've heard of them, maybe they should stick to what they do really well and that would be data recovery.
Does this mean that you don't care for OnTrack's AV software, fanboy? I haven't used it, and while I have heard of them I haven't had a need for their software/services. Are their any other AV products that you would run (provided the Symantec's HQ was blown up by my deathray...err, some "accident" happened)?
Signing off from my base modeled after the Cobra Terrordome,
clutch
Originally posted by dosfreak:
Quote:Kaspersky is the best for detection.Symantec second.
Haven't used Symantec 10 but I doubt the interface has changed much. Kaspersky is probably superior interface wise.
I'm referring to the corporate ver of Symantec of course.
Yeah, it Kasp got first place again this year.
I'm running CA right now, cause it comes free with my Rogers.com account, and why pass up a freebie with anti-spyware\anti-spam\email virus protection. Also comes with a popup blocker.
I have a prob with Kaspersky, I got the trial version, it worked very well, no complaints, UNTIL I tried to uninstall it. It gives you the option to leave "strings" attached to files in case you decide to use Kaspersky again, I chose not to when I uninstalled, I figure I'll stick with my free CA.
Bad move, after uninstalling, I lost my video, no matter what I did, I could not get better than 640X480, and no hardware. I reinstalled drivers, then cleaned drivers and reinstalled, nothing.
Reinstalled Kaspersky, all was back to normal, surprise surprise.
;(
So, I uninstall with the "strings" attached. Hey, I have video when I reboot! I also now have two of freaking EVERYTHING!!! ;( ;( ;(
Kaspersky sucks if you ask me, it's as bad as Norton used to be, once you get rid of it, like Herpes, it just keeps coming back. Here's an example, the Control Panel is one of the most interesting areas, all the other folders have a (2) after the names, but not here. I'm alomost through Half Life, as soon as I am, it's time to format. Thanks Kaspersky, you suck. ;(
Quote:Kaspersky is the best for detection.Symantec second.
Haven't used Symantec 10 but I doubt the interface has changed much. Kaspersky is probably superior interface wise.
I'm referring to the corporate ver of Symantec of course.
Yeah, it Kasp got first place again this year.
I'm running CA right now, cause it comes free with my Rogers.com account, and why pass up a freebie with anti-spyware\anti-spam\email virus protection. Also comes with a popup blocker.
I have a prob with Kaspersky, I got the trial version, it worked very well, no complaints, UNTIL I tried to uninstall it. It gives you the option to leave "strings" attached to files in case you decide to use Kaspersky again, I chose not to when I uninstalled, I figure I'll stick with my free CA.
Bad move, after uninstalling, I lost my video, no matter what I did, I could not get better than 640X480, and no hardware. I reinstalled drivers, then cleaned drivers and reinstalled, nothing.
Reinstalled Kaspersky, all was back to normal, surprise surprise.
;(
So, I uninstall with the "strings" attached. Hey, I have video when I reboot! I also now have two of freaking EVERYTHING!!! ;( ;( ;(
Kaspersky sucks if you ask me, it's as bad as Norton used to be, once you get rid of it, like Herpes, it just keeps coming back. Here's an example, the Control Panel is one of the most interesting areas, all the other folders have a (2) after the names, but not here. I'm alomost through Half Life, as soon as I am, it's time to format. Thanks Kaspersky, you suck. ;(
