Re: Symantec vs. McAfee

And you can get them all to work smoothly with each other?


"Noway" <noway@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message

"D. Spencer Hines" <poguemidden@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in

There seem to be SOME indications that vendors of these computer
security suites and others are trying to avoid fixing bugs in their
software that are LESS than crippling and simply tell customers and

"You should upgrade to the 2006 version. It has all these new
features." Then they FIX the bugs in the NEW version -- but not the
OLD one.

Has anyone else run into that?

I think that's why they have LiveUpdate instead of downloadable patches.
The last think they want would be for you to have a bug-free copy of
something you paid for years ago. With LiveUpdate, they can simply
stop supporting that version and you will be stuck with something you
cannot fix without LiveUpdate. Seen similar with Microsoft, such as
with Win2000 minor bugs, such as "using show/hide desktop causes taskbar
to disappear", with XP, such as having to use UPHClean or having the
systray icons load from right to left or not appearing at all...these
guys have had years to fix these minor issues.

That being said, sometimes these vendors come up with something that is
a little too good for their own good, and it becomes a "classic" that
people use for years instead of the latest versions. Examples are
ZA 2.6.362 or 4.5.594, Kerio 2.1.5. Even though they are classics, they
still have bugs/issues/vulnerabilities like all software does. I'm
currently running Norton Personal Firewall 2005 and it's the only Norton
firewall product that I haven't found any bugs in yet! I hope this lasts,
because if I find a major bug or vulnerability that needs LiveUpdate to
fix, I will have to find something else to use.

I like to use separate apps rather than makes it easier to
switch out one product without having to find three to replace it with.
So I use NPF2005 for firewall, Kaspersky Pro 4.5 for antivirus and
Proxomitron for ad-blocking, etc.