Page 1 of 1

Antivirus question

PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2004 10:53 am
by CarryStress
I've been using Norton 2002 for a while with my definitions always up to date. My subsription just ran out though. My question is this: Is there a difference between using an old version with all the updates and going out and buying the latest version at the store? Thanks in advance for any answers.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 19, 2004 11:53 pm
by wicked1
try kaspersky
avp.ch

PostPosted: Tue Jul 20, 2004 5:44 am
by integspec
There is a considerable difference between Norton 2002 and 2003 regarding functionality. However the difference between 2003 and 2004 seems to be slim and 2004 is a resource hog. Theoritically, a virus scanner is as good as the capability of it's virus definitions, at least when comparing difference releases of the same brand.

There were few discussions regarding similar topics before. Maybe a search on the topic would help you further.

HTH / Cheers.

This is a little late but...

PostPosted: Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:03 pm
by dpippin
This is a little late :oops: but the best virus programs I have found have been AVG, NOD32, and AVAST (which is free). However I would go for NOD32 over AVG any day.

You'll have as many opinions out there as there are fish in the sea. But most agree NAV 2003 is better than 2004 because of all the resources it uses.

My two cents anyways.

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 2:21 am
by pranav81
I have 2002 and 2003 installed on some of the computesr and keep them up to date.The difference between the versions is that the scanning engine is a little different in each version.There are many new features like worm blocking,etc in 2004.But 2004 hogs the system like hell.



::Pranav::

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:28 am
by dodecahedron
NAV 2004 doesn't have the Virus list (under Reports), so there's no way you can check to see if your virus definitions are up to date except for doing a LiveUpdate.
i liked that Virus list. :(

PostPosted: Sun Aug 01, 2004 6:29 am
by dodecahedron
by the way, are also the Norton Personal Firewall and Norton SystemWorks (Pro) worse in 2004 than in 2003, wrt resource hogging?
or is it just the NAV?

PostPosted: Mon Aug 02, 2004 8:05 am
by pranav81
Yep.You are right dodecahedron.There is no virus list in NAV 2004.You have to connect to the internet and then go to the SARC site to browse their virus encyclopaedia.


::Pranav::

PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:44 pm
by Intimidator
You may want to try this awesome program:

CyberScrub AntiVirus, Lifetime Edition:

http://buy.cyberscrub.com/avutility/ind ... rerId=1348

It is scary to think that Norton has had two security flaws in one month. Read here:

http://www.securitypipeline.com/news/20900285/

This is the first anti-virus package that does not take advantage of the customer. Both Norton and McAfee as well as many others charge yearly subscription if you continue to use their product. This program is based off a very well known Russian Kaspersky scanning engine. Look at chart (from the first link) for the five-year cost for each product.

CyberScrub Antivirus also comes with a built in KERIO software firewall as well.

In order to get this special promotional deal include the reference ID# 1348.

PostPosted: Wed Oct 20, 2004 9:08 am
by pranav81
Has anybody tried NAV 2005?

I have installed it on one computer,a P3 933 Mhz with 256 MB RAM and Windows XP SP2.It doesnt hog the system as NAV 2004 does and has worm protection built in.I quite liked it.



::Pranav::