Re: Antivirus software is the new protection racket

From: Sammy (hhi_info_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 05/14/05

  • Next message: Vanguard: "Re: Antivirus software is the new protection racket" 
    Date: 14 May 2005 08:32:17 -0700

    Vanguard wrote:
    > http://www.av-comparatives.org/ (but I have seen some difference in
    CPU
    > usage). High CPU usage doesn't NOT necessarily dictate loss of
    > performance. Even if a process runs at Normal priority, it can
    > relinquish its process when another wants equal or higher priority
    > execution. Even zombies know that trick: run heavily when idle but
    > throttle back when inuse.

    While I'm not an expert in this field, as I've admitted before. I do
    have some associates who are. I am thus, aware of this. However, as I
    said before; Norton is showing a noticable effect on the system speed.

    > Were you comparing ONLY Norton AntiVirus against the other AV
    products
    > regarding performance, or were you comparing the full suite of Norton

    > Internet Security against just an AV-only product? It's been awhile
    > since I've seen someone purchase *just* Norton AntiVirus when it
    > represents 75% of the cost of the suite (i.e., for a few bucks more,
    you
    > get the suite instead of just one component of it).

    I have been advised against purchasing and/or installing the entire
    package. I was told not to buy the antivirus either, but as you can
    see; I didn't listen. :(

    > Too often users claim there is a performance drag but neglect the
    fact
    > that they are running a dirty system. It has been polluted over a
    long
    > time with software installs, often from unknown or untrusted sources,

    > been repaired several times or crapware eradicated, and they think
    that
    > a polluted and mended system should perform flawlessly. If you want
    to

    While I can accept the fact many assume everyone is an idiot here, I
    sir am not. While I do not have expert knowledge of computers, I do
    have associates whom I trust that do. I have already been educated as
    it were regarding all of this. I personally would use the term
    lectured, but to each his own.

    > When I switched from Norton AntiVirus to CA EzAntiVirus, I noticed a
    > just perceptible performance increase. However, I have yet to see
    > AV-Comparatives (or anyone else providing as comprehensive a test)
    show
    > the coverage for EzAntivirus so I'm in the dark as to it coverage. I

    > see lots of users saying to use AVG or Avast simply because they have

    > free versions, but their coverage sucks - but then I really don't
    know
    > how good is the coverage by EzAntiVirus.

    What exactly do you mean by the coverage issue? And do you have
    references I could read regarding it?

  • Next message: Vanguard: "Re: Antivirus software is the new protection racket"