# What Do You Think Is The Best??? (Mcafee or Norton or Kaspersky or Others)



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

Hi,

This might sound alittle strange but i have Nod32 Anti Virus, it found no problems on my computer. I thought i would play around and try others so I installed Kaspersky Internet Security it found over 300 problems within 20 minutes, So okay, Imstall Mcafee and that found over 400 in 25 minutes.

I did use norton Internet security but that only found cookies.

What do you think is the best for me??
What do you think is the best you can get? (E.g. What do you use)?

Thanks For The Reply and your time.

Jaymie.


----------



## Emporer_D (Jul 5, 2005)

AVG all the way. Everything else pales in comparision


----------



## Joefireline (Apr 2, 2006)

AVG - free, fast (doesn't use much system resources) and effective.


----------



## ebackhus (Apr 21, 2005)

I don't use AV software myself, but I install AVG on systems I build for people.


----------



## Ariesjill (May 16, 2006)

AVG. Open & shut.

And I luuuuuv the bars in the poll window! Slick and totally helpfulray:


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

Hello Jamie,
I depends for me, in terms of what firewall, anti virus, anti spyware?

My favorite Anti-virus is Avira antivir (My second favorite is AVG, but seeing you should only ever have one installed I choose Anti-vir). I use Zone alarm for the firewall.

For you personally, you need to try them out and use the ones that are good for you.

I would stay away from Norton.


----------



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

Thanks for the replys. Please keep them coming, If you choose other on the poll please leave a post saying what others.. 

Thanks


----------



## SpySentinel (May 30, 2006)

I like Symantec's Norton, Kaspersky, NOD32, AntiVir, and BitDefender. I personally use AntiVir.


----------



## Duckster (Mar 30, 2007)

I love my trend micro PC-cillin


----------



## sdornan7 (Jun 3, 2007)

AVG for reasons mentioned above.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

I'm pretty sure we told you to stay clear of Norton. :4-thatsba :grin:

My opinion: Out of the commercially and freely available - only the ones I've seen with least problems, least resource hogger, most intuitive, best user control and best overall effectiveness are: 

*Paid*

Nod32 and BitDefender joint.

*Free*

Avast!, then AntiVir and then AVG. 


*All round:* *Avast!* by quite a long margin. 

For a person who analyzes the various software offerings regularly, it's always been the best for compatibility and control with effectiveness. I can even start various modules stand alone and leave the rest alone while troubleshooting the system. Their support has been very helpful and rapid when help was needed.

Even BitDefender gave me problems after a Windows update, sparking an incompatibility issue where they didn't bother to refund or help much. AVG hosed my Thunderbird setups and made it too slow for any usefulness and would not stop the email scanning until uninstalled. But *never *any slight glitch with Avast. It does what I want without sacrificing speed, which you'll make a big deal of if you have so many emails a day.


----------



## forhockey (Sep 30, 2006)

I really like *AOL Active Virus Shield*. Its free to use and really does an excellent job, and I'm currently using it on my system.

Second, I would have to choose Kaspersky.


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

I change my mind on my *Firewall* choose, I reckon that Comodo, IS the best!


----------



## Jack.Sparrow (Jan 22, 2007)

Avg Ftw!


----------



## forhockey (Sep 30, 2006)

"*Other*" is not that far behind ....


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

This is more a popularity contest than what "really" is the better for each person. For that, you'd have to test all the listed and not and then make a judgment on your experience. :grin:

AVG and Norton tend to be the real life tech favorites that I've seen.


----------



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

I must say that its quite surprising that no one likes Panda and before you make a HighJack This thread you have to do a Panda anti Virus scan.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

It's in comparison to other AVs by experience, rather than how good the online scan is Jay. :wink:


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

Yea there is a difference between between an AV installed on you system and the online ones.


----------



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

Okay, So what is that point?


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

What do you mean?


----------



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

Why have the free online scanner that works better than the retail version if it doesnt work as good.


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

Because the online version does not have to be installed onto your system, I personally have not tried Panada, As I love Anti-Vir.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Online versions are *strictly* for point-to-point scanning of a host system. Nothing more.

The installed versions offer far greater options, usability, protection and security and that's why we have them. Real-time scanning, configuring and protection off OS, network and applications.

Between the "online scanners" I see them all good enough and don't differentiate quality between the major ones.

But installing, configuring and using an AV is about much more than just it's attack preventation, as you will see why people get rid of Norton, whereas it really is very good at virus protection - so the hordes of problems with the software lie elsewhere. :wink:


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Here's one attribute of an AV :- resource hog. System boot speed percentage of application: http://www.thepcspy.com/articles/other/what_really_slows_windows_down/5


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

Thanks Kalim, more use full info ray:, where is antivir though :grin:


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

Avast and AntiVir are the same on that scale. :wink:


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

Ok thanks. :4-cheers:


----------



## Ben (Mar 26, 2007)

AVG, free and very light on system resources.

I would use AntiVir but in prompts you to buy the full version when updating the definitions and it has a licence which will run out, then what do you do?


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

topcreator said:


> AVG, free and very light on system resources.
> 
> I would use AntiVir but in prompts you to buy the full version when updating the definitions and it has a licence which will run out, then what do you do?


Yea that annoys me about the upgrading prompts, it has never ran out on me? :4-dontkno


----------



## Ben (Mar 26, 2007)

Have you gone past your licence expiry date then?


----------



## Go The Power (Mar 5, 2007)

No, but is says inside the program that it will reset the license before 4 weeks it expires.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

topcreator said:


> I would use AntiVir but in prompts you to buy the full version when updating the definitions and it has a licence which will run out, then what do you do?


It doesn't run out but it's unassuring, and this is the exact reason I uninstalled it on my "_all free_" system. :wink:


----------



## Jaymie1989 (Mar 25, 2007)

Surly it does depend on you Spec and what else you have starting up.

I have 

On XP & Vista - 

Avg Anti-Spyware 
Nod 32 2.7
PC Tools Firewall Plus

All starting up, and it only takes my computer about 10 seconds at the most.

My Spec is 2.2gh's and 1.5GB RAM.


----------



## Kalim (Nov 24, 2006)

On system tests (BootVis), XP SP2 was at around the 20 second mark for a clean install bootup. Vista was longer, near 30 seconds. What that means is not the time it takes between hitting the power on switch and the desktop wallpaper showing up, but when all applications are *fully* ready to use, loaded up completely. That won't take 20 seconds with Vista, there are professional industry reviews around to show this (with Kentsfield quad cores, 4GB dual channel RAM and so on).


----------

