| User | Post |
kitty
Posts: 2032/2449 |
AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic 6¹ was added in an update, as well as several others. Check it out. |
Surlent
Posts: 1049/1077 |
I'm using AntiVir PE, it is available in German and in English.
The downside are rather huge periodic updates with more than two megabytes, on the other side it is free and often updated. For a free antitivirus it has pretty good (slightly more than average) ratings - if virus scanners got compared, the free scanners must not be compared with the commercial ones.
I'm just trying to determine the update size by downloading the most recent update using the internal "Internet Updater". Doh, it's 3949 KB, ONLY for the virus definitions  , I'm on broadband and have no limits with a flatrate, but I used to use ISDN (64 kpbs) a long time, but it was never close to 4 MB  |
Ailure
Posts: 10961/11162 |
I used to have Norton Anti-virus 2003. Or maybe it was 2002... and well it's really not that much of a resource hog.
Then, my other computer have a more recent version and that's... oi.
Besides, Panda Antivirus 2006 takes much less resources than my old Norton did so.  Might mention that it's a beta version of Panda Antivirus too, applies to some beta-testing for awhile ago. So far i'm happy with it.
My laptop uses Kaspersky Anti-virus. And it's a rather solid anti-virus program.  |
Sokarhacd
Posts: 1549/1757 |
I use NOD32, very good I find, supposedly won some award for 100% detection 13 times...and it uses like no system resources.
(Never use Bitdefender, super resource hog!) |
aioria1981
Posts: 103/234 |
I've been using F-secure from a long time ago. It seems to work fine, as its realtime protection works and it downloads updates automatically. But i've been thinking in another antivirus to download. I don't know is Karspersky (is it spelled like that? ) has realtime protection and automatic update downloads. That 2 things are enough for me (with my Zonealarm firewall  ) |
BMF98567
Posts: 1135/1261 |
Aww...and I've been using F-PROT (DOS) for years. 
Hopefully the few hundred it didn't find were rare relics from the DOS era. |
kitty
Posts: 1980/2449 |
Originally posted by HyperHacker
And yes, Norton blows, but not as hard as McAfee.
All 3 suck, but Norton IS the worst. Sorry, but it's the biggest resource hog EVER, with McAfee also being a major hog, but not nearly as much. All AV's in general suck. The best thing to do is use TrendMicro's online scan. Virus scanners only really help you AFTER you've been infected anyway. |
Tarale
Posts: 2544/2720 |
Originally posted by HyperHacker
AVG, Firefox, security updates and common sense do the job for me. Hell, I could probably go without AVG, but why take the risk?
And yes, Norton blows, but not as hard as McAfee.
I don't find McAfee to be all that much of a pain in the arse at work actually... I do like the fact that it's all managed with EPO for me and I don't have to do anything  |
HyperLamer
Posts: 7009/8210 |
AVG, Firefox, security updates and common sense do the job for me. Hell, I could probably go without AVG, but why take the risk?
And yes, Norton blows, but not as hard as McAfee. |
Tarale
Posts: 2543/2720 |
Hmm.... I use AVG Free at home, and find it to be fine. Although honestly after using a Mac for over a year now, I've started to forget all about virus software.. o.o
At work it's all managed for me too... McAfee with EPO. |
kitty
Posts: 1976/2449 |
You can find the article itself here. A few points of intrest:
# PC-cillin 2005 found the most viruses, AVG pro, EZ AV and F-prot found the least [SIC]*
# Norton 2005 is ironic - much like viruses, it brings down to its knees even the fastest computers! A true resource hog!
* - I don't know why the article says this, when, later on, it says "The amazing thing is that the Kaspersky Online Scan is my new champion - it found more than any other, including any desktops antivirus!" Perhaps because it doesn't allow you to delete the viruses from within the scan itself.
I usually use just TrendMicro's HouseCall online scan. |
