Re: Norton vs "?"
From: Film Fan (film_fan_69NO_SPAM_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 10/10/05
- Next message: Phil Weldon: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Previous message: Film Fan: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- In reply to: Panda_man: "RE: Norton vs "?""
- Next in thread: Galen: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Reply: Galen: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Reply: Panda_man: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Sun, 9 Oct 2005 23:05:36 -0700
Okay.
I would like to try something else.
I want to feel the difference. But, I want something that WILL WORK when it
comes to viruses and updates.
I might not feel the resource lags because I only use my machine for
graphics and html, not games.
Any AV program suggestions?
"Panda_man" <Pandaman@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FA5A63A1-3F0F-44D9-9AAA-B31E6BF3012D@microsoft.com...
> Norton antivirus and any other security Symantec products has many
> disadvantages:
> 1.Live Update - used from many people and from you,of course,offers
> updates
> only ONCE a week which is critical for new viruses like Sasser
> ,Zotob,Sober
> critical.
>
> 2.Norton always creates too much files and folders and reg keys and it
> isn't
> possible to be cleaned withouth something else.I mean it is possible but
> need
> time and special expert skills in "How to clean a computer after Norton"
> Norton's files are so much that even a malware creates less.
>
> 3.Symantec's tech support is terrible.They never do not know why something
> has happended
>
> 4.In my opinion Norton is bad in dealing with Trojans (this is my personal
> opinion)
> I think so, because I have helped many people but nowhere Norton helped
> with dealing with trojans
>
> 5.Please read this post and you'll see what kind of problem can Norton
> create:
> http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.security.virus/browse_thread/thread/ee04b0b9a2b1e661/2766975658608580?lnk=st&q=norton+av+2005+(in+Microsoft)&rnum=5&hl=en#2766975658608580
>
> It is being discussed in the group you are posting to.
>
>
> At the end I would recommend you to have one of these better than Norton
> things:
>
> Panda Titanium (at about $ 40 a year)
> http://www.pandasoftware.com
> http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/truprevent.htm
> http://www.pandasoftware.com/about_panda/technology
>
> or
> F-prot AV + Panda TruPrevent ( at about $ 60 a year)
>
> http://www.f-prot.com/products/home_use/win/
> http://www.pandasoftware.com/virus_info/truprevent.htm
>
>
> You can get trials and learn why they are better.
>
> Panda_man
> " Let's beat malware black and blue "
> " No new epidemics of all kind of malware -> Panda TruPrevent "
>
> "Film Fan" wrote:
>
>> I've used NAV for years and have had no bad results. It's saved my ass on
>> several occasions.
>>
>> Why is everyone so down on NAV?
>>
>> What is better?
>>
>> If I get a good answer, I will switch to something else.
>>
>> Suggestions?
>>
>> R.D.
>>
>>
>>
- Next message: Phil Weldon: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Previous message: Film Fan: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- In reply to: Panda_man: "RE: Norton vs "?""
- Next in thread: Galen: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Reply: Galen: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Reply: Panda_man: "Re: Norton vs "?""
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|