What's better NAV or McAffee?

[CyberGenX 0]

I just read the virus thread and thought i would separate the "2" different discussions going on there. I favor Norton Corporate Edition because it seems to have been the least trouble for me on many machines (me being an OEM and all). Although McAffee can run great if you only install the bare minimum. On both you should try to stay away from all the stupid "crash guards" and "anti fragmenters" etc. Those extra's are what really f(*k a computer up! If your computer is crashing, how is another program going to help, you need a solution not a bandaid. Just the basic scan set, email scan, and keep those defs up to date and you should be fine.

[clutch 1]

OK, it sounds like you are comparing the commercial version of Norton to the *consumer* version of McAfee, as the corporate version of McAfee's virus scanner does not have any of those other options. Now, if you want to compare one consumer product to another, then compare the version of McAfee that you are complaining about to Norton SystemWorks and I am sure you will hear/read plenty complaints about both. My version of McAfee's virus scanner is 4.5.1, and it uses the most current engine (as of now, it's 4.1.60) and it is centrally managed just like it's big brother NetShield by ePolicy Orchestrator. We have the "Active Virus Defense Suite", and it includes VirusScan, NetShield, ePolicy Orchestrator, and some other applications and utilities. If you want to compare Norton's corporate solution to a McAfee product, at least put them on fair ground and use McAfee's corporate virus scanner.

[CyberGenX 0]

Ok, your right...I was just stating that I favored Corporate Edition more than the McAffee. However, both have run great on my machine. I used the same exact version of McAffee that your are using for awhile so I know what you mean. They both have their pros and cons. System Works is a horrible idea.

[Ant -|- One 0]

I would choose Kaspersky's Antiviral Toolkit Pro 3.5.x, once again it more accurate than Norton or McAffee ! AVP sees and destroys viruses that the other two can't even see !

My choice was simple as that !

My opinion !

[thymios 0]

The new version of norton(2002) is very improved compared to the older ones. I've tried all 3 progs(Norton, Mcaffee and AVP) and i didn't notice big differences in speed and accuracy. I've gto a couple of old CD's infected with some virus, and all 3 programs located it easily, with the default values on.

 

AVP sometimes intercepts hoax virus, and that's the main reason than the others don't.

 

For the record, I'm using Norton, since i am quite used to it, and configure it the way i want easily.

[insaNity 0]

what about a good virus monitor that doesn't use much on system resources. I heard VET is good..

[bobbinbrisco 0]

Quote:

I would choose Kaspersky's Antiviral Toolkit Pro 3.5.x, once again it more accurate than Norton or McAffee ! AVP sees and destroys viruses that the other two can't even see !
My choice was simple as that !
My opinion !

when i first used it, the program was a complete memory hog. it had so many options that it overwhelmed me. what was even worse it didnt give any help when it finds a virus: it keeps giving me the same "virus found" dialog (this is during real time) even when i tell it to delete it or just ignore it. i had to turn it off the preserve my sanity.

another thing is that the auto-protect scans the WHOLE folder b4 u open it, which lags ur computer for about 1.5 mins. it's even worst when u have a lot of compressed files.

i prefer to user NAV.

[Xianuro 0]

There is any important difference between NAV Corporate Edition and simple NAV 2002 (or any version) appart from network capabilities?

[BladeRunner 0]

Not as far as I can see.

I'm using the latest Corporate edition of NAV at work because I have a central server etc.

I use NAV 2002 at home because, well it's the consumer version and you can't buy single copies of the Corporate Edition.

They both use minimal system memory and have found every virus that has been sent to me.

[deeman 0]

Cant be bothered completely reading your question, nav and mcafee are cr*p, get VET

[CyberGenX 0]

where is VET?

[deeman 0]

Oh yeh, most of you guys are American *woops*

VET is an australian made antivirus package *aussie aussie aussie!*

I like it because it's a tiny install, it uses bugger all memory, it's faster than mcafee/norton, it's constantly upto date, and I get free downloads. website www.vet.com.au

Norton causes too many conflictions.

[CyberGenX 0]

$84 a bit high in price for us cheap americans. You can get a bundle version of McAfee or NAV for free here in the US. I will try it though...

[clutch 1]

That's in $AUS, not $US, and they are owned by a US company anyway (Computer Associates) so you might be able to find something from them distributed locally.

 

http://www3.ca.com/virus/

[Davros 0]

As a NAV user who has never tried anything else, I can attest that NAV is the best!

 

jk, actually, I like NAV but the only problem I have with it is that since version 2002 it won't install without IE 5 or higher.

[sapiens74 0]

In an enterprise situation.... NAV corporate hands down. Easy to mangage, to use, and users don;t seem to mind it much. As for the home, Again NAV, cause I bundle it with Internet Security anyway, and MAC has always not been very intuitive.

[clutch 1]

I use McAfee Corp 4.5.1 at my work sites, and it runs very well (especially with ePolicy Orchestrator that comes with our bundle to manage automatic installations and updates). However, I don't think you can get a free evaluation without speaking to a sales rep (which is what I think the original request was for, right?).

[sapiens74 0]

When running any AD network it's so much easier to us NAV tho. ONly problem is every morning having to see all those Virus messages from the same users over and over

[clutch 1]

That's pretty cool, I use the reporting function and installation management of EPO just because it's closer to SMS rather than AD at the moment. Plus, I am just not a huge fan of Symantec stuff as I have been repeatedly burned in the past.

[deeman 0]

Hey look, each to their own right?

I just refuse to use norton on the basis that on every PC I've seen it installed on, it seems as if it's taking a grip on the PC, I want a virus scanner that's going to find virus's and stay out of my way.

[sapiens74 0]

I actually know certain users from thier IP's, cause they are constantly getting viruses. THe same ones over and over. We had to ban web based emails on some machines. I had one department almost completely down with Sircam cause someone decided to share a funny email.

 

We took care of that tho. With NAV we set it to delete any files infected instead of repairing them. If it infects a Windows system file, or let me say the right one, then the OS won't boot.

 

Then they cannot do any more damgage. It's kinda funny actually

[sapiens74 0]

NAV corporate is very unobtrusive. Tho the desktop version is a bit overbearing at times, me thinks its still the best