Best Anti-virus for XP?

[Four and Twenty 0]

NAV Corp 7.6 is the one

[clutch 1]

Quote:

Why is iy always me who brings up the name Sophos? has anyone even bothered to try Sophos Sweep for NT?

Actually, if you go to the 7th post, you'll see this:

Quote:

Also, you might want to check out Panda or Sophos, or just do a search on antivirus on this forum as some have posted links to different applications you might have interest in.

So, while I haven't used it, I did mention it.

[Immortal 0]

My Mistake! Sorry!

[DosFreak 2]

Umm, Immortal....You may want to change that to NT4. NT 3.51 kicked @$$....and still did for many years to come over 9x.

[Immortal 0]

Yeah well, i was just talking about NT in general, not a specific version!!! I know that NT 3.51 was ok, but NT4 was had more to give really. Anyway as i said i was talking about NT in general, but if you still feel i should change to NT4 let me know!

[DosFreak 2]

Nah, it's your sig man and your pretty much right. NT4 did surpass Novell as the OS of choice for business and still is and will be for some time to come.

 

It just sounded from your sig like NT popped into being after 95.

[GTwannabe 0]

I'm a fan of Norton Corp 7.6, but I'm running AVG Pro on some systems. Works quite nicely, but the interface is a bit clunky.

[pr-man 1]

So Sophos for XP is better than Mcafee and AVG Pro?

 

also does AntiVir Personal Free Edition have an email scanner?

[tHêGhð§tÔfT¡mé 0]

i think norton antivirus 2002 is best program available...

[Immortal 0]

Yeah its true NT 3.51 did come before 95, but I havent used NT 3.51 at all! I started to use NT 4.0 when my 95 system wouldnt work properly, all those years ago!!! Thats when I realised what kind of OS NT really is, and thats why i got 2k Pro when it came out, and XP Pro!!!

And on the Anti-Virus matter, I still like Sophos Sweep for NT most.

[Admiral LSD 0]

Quote:

... and you want to continue to use a piece of software that is now extinct.

Geez... how difficult is it to use the "quote" function...

Anyway, I worded that post completely wrong. What I meant was that while the product was still supported it did check email so long as it is downloaded as seperate files the ways Opera's mail client does. I know that from experience since it caught a couple of viruses that were sent to my folks (I have my machine check their account so I can catch messages from our ISP). I don't use the product now anymore because no updates are made for it. Instead, like I said earlier, we're now using an email checking service provided by our ISP which is proving quite effective.

[gisot 0]

I've tried many av products..and from my experience best antivirus scanners has to be PC Cillin 2002 and Kaspersky Personal Pro ver.4 or late. They have too many features unlikely 'everywhere sponsored' Norton AV's. Faster and efective than NAV in all comparative tests etc. I'm workin on win XP , Cel.667mhz, 320MB Ram,20GB hdd,GeForce 2mx 400 64MB,and so far no problems at all with

[Mr.Guvernment 0]

Quote:

Honestly, it's truly amazing how "they" seem to have all these problems with McAfee software and "they" seem to never have a name, nor can back up anything with hard evidence. But man, "they" have the biggest mouths out there and can share their "knowledge" with everyone. I pretty much expected a huge influx of Norton fanboys coming in, but I figured I'd post anyway.

Also, you might want to check out Panda or Sophos, or just do a search on antivirus on this forum as some have posted links to different applications you might have interest in.

The persons name is richard = TrueHostRich at my work.

to me the name was irrelevant as u did not know the person at all.This did happen, and i have hard evidence cause i was the one on the phone with him for about 2 hours trying to get his computer to work.

so THEY does exist and it is not simply me trying to put down McAfee.

I guess things like this alwasy end up as mostly "i heard" which is EVER so true, that is why i try not to comment on something i have simply "heard" about, or i state that i only "heard" about it

were as many other do "assume" that because they "heard" it, it has to be true, these are the people who rush home every night to read their daily copy of the National Enquirer. (typo?)

[clutch 1]

First, in your post you claimed that you had "heard nothing but hporry stories", so that would lead myself (and others I would imagine) to believe that there were several times you have been told/have read about problems with this software but the only thing you offered was something about writing to the boot partition (which sounds more like a virus than the application) as your reason why the software was poor. If you have evidence, or personal experience, or something more than rumors then great, but if not why bother? You do state that you can show this, so what version was it? What engine version? What OS was it? Tell the person asking the question more useful information if you have it, that's all I ask.

 

Quote:

(typo?)

 

Plenty, but we have worked around it.

[one_2_three 0]

use Pc-Cillin 2002.

 

It gives me no problems, it loads fast and does what it is suppose to do. None of this flashy stuff like McAfee has and it isn't as expensive.

[HardcoreGK 0]

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. Not only did it infect my computer (thanks to an idiot on my network) but it would not clean it. It had no problems sending files to quarentine (same ones every boot, even after I disabled the shares) but would neither delete nor clean the files. The one saving grace Norton has is how easy it is to use. The GUI is very clean and straight-forward.

 

I installed PC-Cillin 2000 which not only detected the virus immediately but deleted them the first time. I never heard from Nimda again. It has nowhere near the amount of frills as the other AV software packages but 1) it gets the job done, 2) doesn't take up much by way of resources, and 3) came free with my mobo.

 

In upgrading to WinXp, I thought I'd install McAfee 6 Pro w/ the built-in firewall. The firewall is a pain in the butt to configure. I put some of my progs (like MSN) on the allow list and every time it loads, I have to click 2 windows each program for the firewall to allow it to access the outside. Also, after a file transfer, its scanner hogs resources and won't give them back until you open their screen and hit ok. I do like the QuickClean Lite feature even though I really don't use it much.

[BladeRunner 0]

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.

[HardcoreGK 0]

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.

[BladeRunner 0]

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.

[HardcoreGK 0]

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.

[Four and Twenty 0]

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.

[ofelas 0]

Does NAV Corporate Edition 7.61 protect against e-mail viruses before or after the attachments hit the Inbox?

 

Also, does the Corporate Version 7.61 protect against scripts?

 

I know NAV 2002 does both, TIA.

[BladeRunner 0]

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.

[clutch 1]

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...

 

[Xelerated 0]

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?