Forum Home
Press F1
Thread ID: 39033	2003-10-25 06:11:00	Antivirus new and old	Taly (4598)	Press F1

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
186461	2003-10-25 06:11:00	What is the difference between Antivirus 2002 and 2003? The cost gap is substencial.	Taly (4598)
186462	2003-10-25 06:16:00	What brand? Norton Antivirus 2004 is now out, and is about the price that 2003 was - The older versions usually drop slightly in price when a new version comes out. A new version theoretically would have more advanced virus scanning capabilities, as well as other features. To be honest though, I didn't really notice any outward difference between 2002 and 2003 versions. Mike.	Mike (15)
186463	2003-10-25 18:52:00	I fail to understand why people PAY for antivirus programs............theres a VERY good one out there FREE called AVG...........consumer institute did a test on AV progs and norton was first, mc afee 2nd and AVG 3rd,...............the gap between first and third was so small as to be hardly noticable......also it may interest you to know that the PC Company, until they went bust was pre-installing AVG on their new puters for the last couple of years....... (well they put the setup prog there for users to install/configure).............so WHY PAY ????? Helll I'm a tech and I recently had a client who wanted to update her NAV2003 subscription.........well it cost her $53 for three months............and in my experience NAV aint any better than AVG.........well maybe oneday they'll cut AVG but in the meantime why pay all that money to symantic......?............ avg >>> www.grisoft.com look for the free version to download	drcspy2 (4743)
186464	2003-10-25 19:18:00	Yes AVG is a very good virus scanner though not as good as Nortons in my opinion. As for The PC Company preinstalling AVG on computers, I think that was more to do with making it look like the computer was good value for money. "Wow, it comes with a virus scanner, adobe reader, internet explorer"	-=JM=- (16)
186465	2003-10-25 19:38:00	well no virus scanner is perfect and i've seen norton and avg and mcafee let one slip by very occasionally ...........I realise that norton has a couple of extra bells and whistles but I feel that AVG is just as good in general and hell, it's FREE......so that makes it VERY worthwhile compared to a couple of hundred bucks to keep your subscription goin........	drcspy2 (4743)
186466	2003-10-25 21:05:00	Thanks to Mike, drcspy2, LM. got the idea. Taly	Taly (4598)
186467	2003-10-25 21:32:00	the biggest thing between the different vers is life span. most antivirus programs get old eg their antivirus engine no longer finds the more moden virus. thats why an upto date free one is better than an old out of date one. as far as free antivirus progs goes ,such as avg free, the're fine for most light users. however heavy net/email users would be better off with a good paid one.	tweak'e (174)
186468	2003-10-26 01:29:00	hey Tweakee........um whys that ?	drcspy2 (4743)
186469	2003-10-26 03:49:00	> hey Tweakee........um whys that ? which bit do you want to know about?	tweak'e (174)
186470	2003-10-26 04:28:00	NOD32 Antivirus is very good, and is probably the best on the market. I'm using it at the moment and find it much better than Nortons. NOD32 has not missed a single "in the wild" virus in a Virus Bulletin test in the past four years, and has several "clean sweeps" of every virus in every category to its credit ... and NOD32 holds more VB100 awards than any other antivirus program in the world. Virus Bulletin (www.virusbtn.com) is widely regarded as "The Bible of The Antivirus Industry", and its VB100 is the award every antivirus vendor strives to win, but winning it isn't easy ... Virus Bulletin's test team are full-time professionals who vigorously test antivirus software against thousands of real viruses. Also, Nod32 uses much less resources than Nortons and others, so if you are playing games etc, you can basically leave it going without any noticable difference in performance.	PoWa (203)
1