Re: Comparing the different virus scanner...

From: Michael Pelletier (mjpelletier_at_mjpelletier.com)
Date: 04/18/05 

Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:45:31 -0700

Leythos wrote:

> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 14:31:45 -0700, Michael Pelletier wrote:
>>
>> Leythos wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:03:11 -0500, Shenan Stanley wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Michael Pelletier wrote:
>>>>> Here is an article comparing many of the popular anti-virus software.
>>>>> I thought some of you might like to read it...
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.transceiver.co.uk/index.html Click on "Virus scanner 2005"
>>>>
>>>> I like comparison pages, so I thought I would link that here as well:
>>>> http://www.transceiver.co.uk/txt/av05-04.html#details
>>>
>>> Both sites appear to be slanted towards a product, the ones that seems
>>> to either be a personal favorite or provided the most advertising
>>> money.
>>
>> Please specify your points. I am not disputing them, I just do not
>> understand them....
>
> I just read the reviews and it seem very slanted towards one product with
> little explanation of the reasoning for that product. At the same time,
> several of the lesser reviewed product offer the same features and
> functions but were not selected.

Which products do you recommend if you were to rate them and why?
 
>>> When reading the articles in link one, they say that there is little
>>> difference between home user versions and small business version as far
>>> as protection levels - which we all know isn't true when working with
>>> home vs business products.
>>
>> I read it as some of the products are purchased where the antivirus
>> vendor does not make separate versions for home users or corporate
>> users. In other words, you buy the same version regardless...
>
> I read it as they offer two versions that appear to be the same product,
> but that's not true for several of the products that were not given better
> reviews.

...I see.

>>> I liken these types of reports to the ones that state that
>>> defragmenting a drive has no benefit to performance.
>>
>> I assume you mean Windows based OS'es...
>
> Why would you assume that - There is more to fragmentation than just a
> file, it could include free-space fragmentation, which also leads to file
> fragmentation. In the case I mentioned, yes, it was a review on windows
> defragmentation.

Not why I made the comment. Most *INXes have code in the file systems to
either self defrag or adjust to the level of fragmentation...

P.S.
What do you think of kapersky anti virus?

Michael 

-- 
"Microsoft isn't evil, they just make really crappy operating systems." -
Linus Torvald
Quantcast