Free Technology Newsletters
» All 33 InfoWorld Newsletters
Technology & Business Daily
 
InfoWorld
 
   

The Second Annual AntiVirus Poll

By Ed Foster, Section Columns
Posted on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 12:05:59 AM PDT

One of the best ideas I've had since I started the GripeLog was the poll I ran a year ago asking which antivirus software vendor readers trust the most. So why has it taken me until now to follow up on my promise to do it again, adding those vendors that readers felt shouldn't have been left out of the first one? And why do I suspect -- hope, even -- that this second annual GripeLog AntiVirus Poll will be the last?


Online discussions on the GripeLog often turn to the question of which product alternatives exist for the subject of that day's gripe. And, with all the Symantec and McAfee gripes, that has always been particularly the case with anti-virus software, which is why we asked readers to name their favorite last year. And today we're asking the same question: which antivirus vendor do you trust the most?

The list has grown from last year because several vendors with many fans were left off last time. So the choices now are are Computer Associates eTrust, Clam AV, Eset NOD32, Frisk F-Prot, F-Secure, Grisoft AVG, Kaspersky, McAfee, Norman, Panda, Sophos, Symantec, and Trend Micro. Find the poll in the right-hand column of this page to cast your vote and see how other readers are voting. And please post your comments about why you voted the way you did, and which deserving vendors I left off this time. Hey, I only know if you tell me.

And there are quite a few other product categories where it would be nice to learn more about alternatives to the more prominent vendors. Anti-spam, anti-spyware, firewalls, laptops and routers are just some of the ones readers have suggested. But I think to do a good job of exploring such categories we need a different mechanism than a poll.

The GripeLog polls are fun to do and readers seem to enjoy them. And sometimes the results can lead to some interesting insights as long as everyone realizes they aren't scientific and are obviously skewed by the tastes of my very picky readership. But, as with all the GripeLog polls, the real value of the antivirus poll came from the discussion it generated. Readers gave details about why they liked or disliked certain products, they suggested additional products to add to the list people might want to consider, and they provided some perspective on which products are best for which kind of purpose.

When you're looking for an alternative product in any category, the hardest part is understanding the playing field. A freeware product might have legions of fans, but it might not have the enterprise capabilities you need. A product that's popular with the Windows crowd might have a Linux version that's completely dysfunctional. The only way for a poll to begin to provide the sense of what fits where is to split it into ten polls. And who's going to do that?

A few weeks ago we heard some of the comments from readers about how they would like to see the GripeLog have more structure so that the content is more accessible when you're looking for information on a particular product, vendor, or issue. Polls obviously aren't the answer in that regard. So vote for your favorite antivirus vendor this week, and then next week we'll talk about what appears to be the logical way to do it.

< Reader Voices: Advantage Microsoft | Sage Has a Tough ACT to Follow >


Display: Sort:
The Second Annual AntiVirus Poll | 122 comments (122 topical) | Post A Comment
AVG for me[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#1)
by wantobe on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 02:15:54 AM PDT

I can't claim to have tried all of the other offerings on the list, but I can say that I've been using AVG personally for a long time, and I am happy to recommend it to my clients. It has components for file servers, email servers and networked computers, and even support Linux though I haven't had any experience with that part of it.

Rob Miles
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world; those who understand binary and those who don't.
[ Reply to This ]


AVG Good - but ....[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#29)
by vroberts on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:58:34 AM PDT

For many years I used McAfee Anti-Virus, but it was becoming more and more intrusive. So, a year or so ago I switched to Grisoft's AVG Anti-Virus. I have three Win98SE systems, two for business and one for personal use. I use the licensed version on the two business machines and the free version on the personal machine.

All was well for many months. The program worked well, did its job without being overly intrusive and installed updates at least once a week or more often.

About 2 1/2 weeks ago disaster struck. The day after an automatic virus definition update none of my three machines would boot to Windows. There was only a slight hint on one of the machines that the problem was related to AVG. I booted to Safe mode and removed AVG from all three machines and only then they would boot to Windows.

I immediately went to the AVG web site, www.grisoft.com, to see if they had posted anyting about a problem with the virus definitions. Nothing! I contacted tech support via e-mail and two days later received a response that, yes, there had been a problem with the definition file installed the previous Friday. I asked why they did't post something about this problem on their Web site. No answer. I asked why they didn't send an e-mail to their registered and PAYING customers about the problem. No answer.

Tech support said the problem had been resolved and I should download and install the latest version. I did and everything is now working again. But - what happened to those customers who cound't figure out that the reason why their computers are now doorstops is becaise of AVG and Grisoft? Are these some of the people we read about who are throwing away computers that become "infected" since it is easier to buy new ones than figure out what is wrong with the old ones?

This whole interaction with Grisoft has destroyed my confidence in them and AVG. While I continue to use AVG I will consider another vendor when my license is ready for renewal - or perhaps sooner.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Trend Micro did that too...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#35)
by CzarKasm on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:37:05 AM PDT

I would have selected Trend Micro as most trusted, except they let me, and many other administrators, down. Back on the 22nd of April, Trend released a definition update file that caused the CPU of systems running the AV product to max out at 100% and effectively cripple the computers (yes, Trend created their own DOS attack!). Were there any announcments on Trend's web site about this? Not in any timely manner, until online forums and news sites had already posted info about it.
http://www.trendmicro.com/en/support/pattern594/overview.htm

I find it hard to trust an AV vendor that is more concerned about minimizing egg on the face rather than letting their customers know the problem is with their product and how to fix it.

So, my vote goes to Frisk F-Prot. I've been using the $29/5 computer license at home for over a year now. It has a small footprint, updates regularly, and is easy to manage.


[ Parent | Reply to This ]



Interesting but ...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#83)
by Anonymous User on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 07:41:19 AM PDT

My three computers did not turn into doorstops and I auto-check AVG on Fridays & Wednesdays. They were all uptodate this am. Hmmm, go figure.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


pasing[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#115)
by Anonymous User on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 01:58:43 AM PDT

Our web is Wholesale Jewelry|Jewelry Designer | precious stone jewelry| body jewelry| costume jewelry| silver jewelry| beaded jewelry| swarovski crystal jewelry| glass jewelry| pearl jewelry| turquoise jewelry| wire jewelry| fashion jewelry| unique handcrafted jewelry| bridal jewelry| tour jewelry| discount jewelry| vintage jewelry| jewelry scales| jewelry boxes| imitation jewelry supplies| Material ofjewelry supplies and etc. Our Jewelry| Wholesale Jewelry Blog Jewelry stores| Blog.To know more details about Jewelry Wholesale|, please enter our web: www.aypearl.com beads jewelry

水晶|饰品批发

pasing oicq:80810487

Our Email: Tangjewelry_001#yahoo.com



[ Parent | Reply to This ]


AVG here too[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#84)
by kevin on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 11:15:22 AM PDT

AVG for me too. I've been using the free one on my home machine for about a year and it just works.  no problems with definition files for me.

We use McAfee at work and it seems ok if you're an enterprise client, just too many gripes about the personal versions for me. Plus it seems to run an awful lot of services.


[ Parent | Reply to This ]



wholesale jewelry[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#128)
by Anonymous User on Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 12:53:11 AM PDT

wholesale jewelry fashion jewelry jewelry wholesale handmade jewelry pearl jewelry wholesale crystal jewelry coral jewelry wholesale fashion jewelry gemstone jewelry discount jewelry

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


What about avast??[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#2)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 06:06:22 AM PDT

You forgot AVAST!

[ Reply to This ]


Re: What about avast??[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#52)
by Ed Foster on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 05:23:52 PM PDT

Sorry about that, but you'll get the chance to correct my error next week. -- Ed

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Avast![ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#89)
by Anonymous User on Thu Aug 04, 2005 at 01:32:04 PM PDT

I've used Avast! for a few years now with no crashes and negligible impact on system speed. I haven't had an infected system either. I have also used Trend Micro's online scanner with good results althought the installed product (of a few years ago) crashed the system.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


The Security Baseline[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#3)
by RocDoc on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 07:31:25 AM PDT

Ed,

Your former coworker, Brian Livingston, and his associates put out the biweekly newsletter Windows Secrets, which includes a column called The Security Baseline that addresses anti-virus, anti-spyware and anti-hacking applications and devices.

I do independent testing of antivirus, antispyware, and firewall/router equipment for computer security research and development. I can concur that the items on his Security Baseline list do provide an adequate to above average level of security. Additionally, I believe the items on this list are relatively easy to configure and manage and are a good bang for the buck, too.

RocDoc

[ Reply to This ]



AVG[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#4)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:07:55 AM PDT

I used to use Symantec/Norton, but reached a point of exasperation with its components hanging up the system every so often, so when I needed set up a new computer I decided to try AVG, which seems to work very well (as well as being free). And ZoneAlarm is fine as a firewall.

[ Reply to This ]


anti-virus[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#101)
by Anonymous User on Tue Jun 06, 2006 at 05:49:36 PM PDT

Since ZoneAlarm has been doing Anti-Virus as well as the traditional ZoneAlarm firewall, I spent the extra couple of bucks. For over a year now, I have been just as pleased as I can be. It's unobtrusive, works like a dream on my Win98 and XP machines, doesn't fight with my router, my programs, my booting or me. Updates go quickly, every few days, and I have developed a lot of faith in the system. It's cheap, works well and the folks have been responsive when I've had questions (rare) by email.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


AntiVir[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#5)
by rmunson on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:14:17 AM PDT

I've found that AntiVir by H+BEDV Datentechnik GmbH (a German company) does an excellent job.

[ Reply to This ]


Symantec?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#6)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:24:22 AM PDT

Who in their right mind would trust Symantec? The company makes it difficult for legitimate users to user their software with all the copy protection bugs and then its a nightmare to try and remove it! What should be on the poll is Zone Labs A/V product that is bundled with their firewall.

[ Reply to This ]


Symantec Corporate/Enterprise/Home[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#32)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:12:22 AM PDT

I have never had any issues with Symantec. Corporate/Enterprise Edition takes care of my entire network. Once installed, you do not even have to look at it again until the next upgrade - which is something that can be pushed to all of your clients. Since we installed Symantec Mail Security for SMTP gateways, Symantec Mail Security for Exchange, and Symantec Web Security, all on servers between the clients and the Internet, there has not been a single virus getting through to the clients or other servers. As far as causing problems goes, just make sure that you have your exclusions set right when you use certain server software, such as database servers. Most people do not realize that they should not scan certain types of databases. The home edition does have the activation. I have never had a problem with it. Also, if you feel like reloading the OS, you will get another year on your subscription.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Symantec[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#78)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 02:36:38 PM PDT

When I get a call from somebody who has a virus and needs help there are two typical scenarios: 1. They aren't using any A/V product. Oops. 2. They're running Symantec. I don't know if it's because of issues with their updates not being timely, if it's a flaw in their scan engine or if it's just too difficult for the average user to know if they are current and working properly but for some reason it's just about always a Symantec A/V product involved if they are running any A/V. Now I realize this is skewed a bit because Symantec has so much market share, but it really ruins any trust I might have in them.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Symantec too heavy and buggy. A vote for AVG[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#96)
by Anonymous User on Wed Sep 14, 2005 at 09:29:21 AM PDT

Sure... once Symantec is installed it's all hunky dory. Getting there, or changing anything - like uninstall/upgrade- is the problem. The 150+ page Corp AV manual suggest that you test your Corp AV install in your non-operations test environment before committing it to your servers... yeah right. The product is confusing and buggy, down to install screens that don't, and a big drain on resources. I have spent many hours TRYING to install, repair, bug fix, uninstall Norton installations and I will not recommend them anymore. There is no reason why anti-virus should be such a drain on time and resources or require high level of experts to install. For now AVG is light and easy to setup and remove. I hope they don't start loading it up like Symantec did. NOTE: AVG NOW ALSO HAS NONPROFIT PRICING; 30% OFF LIST PRICE. CONTACT THEM DIRECTLY FOR FULL INFORMATION.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Symantec Antivirus[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#7)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:29:23 AM PDT

Much as I like to support the opinions & experience of our community when a particular vendor trends toward making our lives miserable, I'm still using Symantec Enterprise Antivirus. It keeps itself updated automatically, protects my Novell server, easily integrates with GWAVA antispam protection, and just hasn't caused any hassles with our Win-2K and XP client workstations. I just haven't been sufficiently motivated to switch to something else.

[ Reply to This ]


Norton is my default as well[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#16)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:03:03 AM PDT

I feel the same way. I've not had a virus slip by norton in the past few years. The anti-copying junk has motivated me to start thinking about alternatives but for now, I'll leave Norton on the box. One reason is that I don't know enough about most of the others to really vote 'most trusted'. Given the way things are going, I'll probably have to change that.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Symantec NAV for the Mac[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#41)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 01:08:17 PM PDT

Our department uses NAV under a university-wide site license. Last November, NAV silently quarantined the In box for a colleague's computer (Mac) resulting in the loss of some email. The cause was not discovered until several months later when NAV quarantined his In box again. Fortunately, it reported the event the second time. We were unable to recover the quarantined mailbox even though we knew NAV had quarantined it. During that attempt, we discovered the previous unreported quarantining in a log. I'm not aware of similar problems on Windows machines in our department, but we have received permission to remove it from our Macs. I don't want to draw broad conclusions from this one computer, but our confidence in NAV has been shaken.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Symantec, the bipolar software company[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#48)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 03:10:55 PM PDT

The huge difference between their enterprise software and personal software is what makes Symantec such a nuisance in a poll like this. I've used Symantec on the enterprise in several places, and never had much trouble -- by and large it is well-behaved and easy to maintain. The consumer/retail Symantec software is a poster child of bastard design, horrible configuration and impossible maintenance. While Symantec used to be the #1 choice of system utilities, I currently recommend that no home user ever touch their software for any reason, as it invariably seems to cause more trouble than it ever solves.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Re: Symantec, the bipolar software company[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#72)
by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 12:30:43 PM PDT

Yes, exactly what he said. That, and their incessant habit of sucking up of perfectly good products (Partition Magic, GoBack, WinFax) and putting them in permanent stasis fields. Enterprise Firewall, yes, maybe. They can stuff the rest of it.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Antivirus Poll[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#8)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:43:25 AM PDT

You ask which one I trust the most. Why not ask which one I use the most? I trust NAV because they were the only product to get Michelangelo the day it came out. I continue to trust them regarding the level of 'security' they offer. However I recommend and use AVG for all but client work PC's. The higher level of trust for NAV speaks to the number of years they have basically not let me down ( let's not discuss poor support and activation schemes ). Symantec needs to wake up.

[ Reply to This ]


You've got to be kidding...[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#50)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 03:47:15 PM PDT

I trust NAV because they were the only product to get Michelangelo the day it came out.
C'mon! Michaelangelo was the first widely-publicized virus scare in 1992! Nothing has shaken your trust since then?

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Anti-virus experience[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#9)
by bluecollar on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:50:25 AM PDT

We started with retail-box copies of Norton Antivirus, which circulating viruses were able to blow off infected machines. Trend Micro served us much better, but they discontinued support for our version of Netware. We bought a 15-station license from Frisk F-Prot last October, and the combination of low cost, simple licensing, constant pattern updates, and life free from virus damage is hard to beat.

[ Reply to This ]


A/V Software[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#10)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:50:37 AM PDT

My thought is that there is a difference between what software you trust the most, and what software you use. As far as "trust", I trust that the virus definitions will be updated regularly, and viruses be prevented from my systems. On that count, Symantec is the one I trust. Now, I use AVG at home instead of Symantec as I don't like Symantec's policies and complexity. If I had my druthers, I would not use Symantec at work. However, I trust that Symantec is probably more comprehensive and will do as good of a job or better than most any other product out there.

[ Reply to This ]


Anti-Virus Poll[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#11)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:56:02 AM PDT

Grisoft Anti-virus. I tried the Grisoft AVG free because: A. My Norton Anti-virus was too old to get updates and I had read negative comments about the new version. B. Your previous poll had rated Grisoft Anti-virus very highly. And it was free! It seems to work pretty well (did I say it was free?). However, one thing I don't like about it is that it leaves little files in each folder that it scans. And lately it seems to download its updates almost every other day or so. But it is free.

[ Reply to This ]


Softwin Bitdefender[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#12)
by johnj83 on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 09:56:18 AM PDT

Here is another good alternative from Romania to the mainstream commercial products. I use Grisoft's AVG as my primary on most machines but have also had good results with Bitdefender.

[ Reply to This ]


Where is AVAST?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#13)
by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:00:31 AM PDT

I am using AVAST freeware at home. It is also available at a cost for commercial use.

[ Reply to This ]


Avast![ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#38)
by SteveD on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 12:09:44 PM PDT

I use Avast as well and it's a great (and free) product for home use.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


Another happy Avast User[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#57)
by PeterMcG on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 12:26:13 AM PDT

I've been using this for a while. It's free and it occasionally talks to you.

[ Parent | Reply to This ]


pasing[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#114)
by Anonymous User on Thu Jun 19, 2008 at 12:36:49 AM PDT

  • China Overview
  • China Accommodation
  • China Attention
  • China BANK_ATM
  • China Bars_Nightlife
  • China Body_and_Mind
  • China Churches
  • China Climate
  • China Eating
  • China Education
  • China Entertainment
  • China FAQ
  • China History
  • China Museums
  • China Neighborhood
  • China Overview
  • China Recommanded
  • China Related_web_resources
  • China Restaurants
  • China Shopping
  • China Tips_and_Practical_Info
  • China Tourist
  • China Tourist_Attractions
  • China Transportation
  • China Travelogue
  • China Tour
  • China Travel
  • 6dao
  • zuotian
  • poples
  • USA Zerog
  • jiaojiao
  • pasing
  • ledao
  • 51
  • chinese
  • Google UK
  • china travel
  • learn chinese
  • Academic exchanges
  • Medicine
  • Yahoo!
  • Pharmaceutical
  • Google Canada
  • Yale-Yale
  • Biological
  • Chemical
  • Polytechnic
  • Material
  • Economy
  • English
  • Retrieval
  • English directory
  • Arts
  • News
  • Automobiles
  • Fooddrink
  • Business
  • Legal
  • Finance
  • health
  • Exercise
  • Slimming help
  • Plasticexperts
  • Beauty guidance
  • Health Alert
  • Bulletin
  • Parental guidance
  • Mental health
  • A healthy diet
  • Google China
  • pasing oicq:80810487
  • 水泵
  • 油泵
  • wow powerlevel
  • Roll forming machine
  • Twisting machine


  • [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    Anti-virus and Internet Security Suites[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#14)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:01:30 AM PDT

    If you are asking about free, then AVG is your best bet. I found Trend Micro's PC-cillin Internet Security to be the most trustworthy of the "big pay for" packages that give you a firewall, antivirus and some spyware protection. I was using Norton, and did an online scan with two other products (one being Trend Micro). Both online scannes found 3 viruses that Norton had completely missed.

    [ Reply to This ]


    AntiVir XP (personal edition)[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#15)
    by whitefang on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:02:25 AM PDT

    I've taken to loading this anti virus on residential PCs which I clean up. On my home network, I almost exclusively run Gentoo GNU/Linux so viruses and spyware are currently not problems for me.

    OTOH, I have a nice little side income cleaning up people's home PCs.

    I normally replace the user's AV with AntiVir for the following reasons:

    1} It's free for personal use.

    2} The virus defs are updated 2x a day. Compare this to McAfee which is updated ~2x a week with the occasional emergency update.

    3} I can run AntiVir from my Ultimate Boot CD for Windows diagnostic disk.

    4} I've received no complaints of AntiVir 'breaking' the Windows OS or other 3rd party programs.

    5} It has a good record with me for catching all viruses.

    6} It doesn't delete my copies of HijackThis! and other malware tools. Rather unlike McAfee which forced me to put my tools in an excluded directory.

    5} AntiVir has a reasonably small footprint.

    We use Trend Micro on Domino for our email AV scanner and McAfee Enterprise for our desktops. Not my choice.

    Since the first of the year, I've recorded 8 instances where both Trend Micro and McAfee Ent. did not detect viruses attached to emails. Said viruses were picked up in later AV difinition files, but I don't consider the AV def updates to have been timely.

    This is expecially true since I've started forwarding these emails to both my google mail and speakeasy accounts. In all such cases, my fowarded emails were bounced back to my work email address indicating either the email was valid or it was infected.

    It makes me wonder what google mail and speakeasy are using to filter out viruses so successfully.

    Because Antivir XP was not available as a choice, I voted for Eset's NOD32. My reason's are:

    1} Fastest and smallest footprint.

    2} Virus defs updated continuously.

    3} Almost never a false positive.

    4} Extremely effective at finding and quaritining viruses.

    5} No discernable negative impact on the hosting OS nor other 3rd party programs.

    YMMV.

    [ Reply to This ]



    Sorry for the various typos.[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#20)
    by whitefang on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:11:49 AM PDT

    The worst typo is: 'valid' This should be 'invalid' :-) As for finding viruses after Norton delares there are none, I've had several other AVs find more. NOD32 and Antivir immediately come to mind. I consider both Norton AV and McAfee to me mediocre at best.

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    NOD32 all the way[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#17)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:03:07 AM PDT

    If you want a product that actually works with a small footprint and very small resource consumption, then look no further than NOD32. I used it personally for a couple years and just recently purchased a corporate license for our company. The newest version also features additional malware detection as well. I just ran it on a pc running updated Symantec AV and it found 21 viruses on the machine which Symantec missed. I've tried nearly all the products you have listed and trust Eset the most over any of them.

    [ Reply to This ]


    Eset's NOD32 gets my nod...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#18)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:04:35 AM PDT

    Simply because it catches things the others don't. I've been through just about all the options listed (including Grisoft) and NOD32 is slimmer, quieter, comprehensive and painless. Can't ask for more than that :^)>

    [ Reply to This ]


    Anti-virus - trusted products[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#19)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:07:21 AM PDT

    I like Trend: frequent updates, no self-promotion or constant misleading badgering to upgrade or add other products from that vendor, no breaches so far (knock on wood), integrated package at a reasonable price. I think I liked the free ZoneAlarm firewall a little better, but not enough to go to the trouble to switch back. I had used retail and large-account versions of McAfee & Symantec for over ten years - I just wish I had ditched them earlier. Jeff Mangers

    [ Reply to This ]


    NOD32[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#21)
    by MCohen on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:14:32 AM PDT

    On my computers and on those of my clients that I have switched over from Symantec - NOD32 has worked flawlessly, with a very light fottprint and a very fast scanning engine. The people at ESET are the best, I've gotten excellant tech support the 2 times I needed it. The sales people are just as good - I had a situation were a client was imploding, going from 6 workstations to 2. The NOD32 virus subscription ran out 2 months before. ESET was very willing to sell me a 2 month renewal license for 4 computers, and a 1 year renewal for the other 2. No hassle and the price was right - they simply charged me 2 months (1/6) of the 12 month renewal cost. But most importantly, none of the computers that I have protected by NOD32 have every been infected by a virus.

    [ Reply to This ]


    NOD32 for 2003[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#68)
    by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 11:59:56 AM PDT

    I got a 25 seat license for Windows 2003 Server through a local user group that I use at home for testing and storage.  There was no way that I was going to pay >$100 for a AV on what was basically a workstation.  NOD32 provided a simple client install that was the only one compatible with the OS at the time.  Thank god I found those folks.  They are the best.  

    I now recommend ESET to every client that needs to buy AV.  However for those clients that are Home PCs - AVG is a great deal (free).  The only thing that makes Symantec and McAfee desirable is their install base and that is getting smaller and smaller everyday.

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]



    CA eTrust[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#22)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:17:02 AM PDT

    After dumping Symantec Corporate AntiVirus last year and switching to CA eTrust, I can say that I am still very pleased with the results. My Small Business Server clients have never had it so good. eTrust is lean, mean and completely efffective. I have none of the problems that Symantec created for me in the past and life is now good again in the battle against viruses.

    [ Reply to This ]


    CA eTrust Anti-Virus[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#34)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:20:24 AM PDT

    I have been using CA's Anti-Virus products and its predecessors at work for well over 10 years now. We never experienced any problems at either the server or desktop. The product is stable, updates to signatures are extremely timely and it does not seem to affect desktop performance in any way. Although CA's product is our primary AV shield, no single product can protect from everything. In our environment, we protect ourselves with several layers including the Barracuda SPAM Firewall (AV is an "extra" provided in this excellent SPAM filtering device - http://www.barracudanetworks.com/ns/?L=en) and Sybari's Anti-Gen Exchange add-in (http://www.sybari.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?Alias=Rainbow&TabId=3345&Lang=en-US). Using this approach, I am proud to say that our company has not experienced a virus infestation of any level (even 1) in nearly 5 years.

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    Worked fine, but customer support is horrible[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#76)
    by Anonymous User on Tue Aug 02, 2005 at 01:04:45 PM PDT

    I had an eval copy of CA eTrust and thought it was great. So, at the end of the eval period, I logged in to download a 'permanent' copy. They got my money up-front and then the download didn't work as anticipated or as advertised. I couldn't get ANY response via e-mail. When I tried to use their on-line support, it froze my browser (Netscape 7.1), causing me to reboot. They advertised no customer service number save for a paid tech support line that was going to charge me $50 to trouble shoot a $29 piece of software! My only recourse was to go back through my credit card to dispute the charge. My credit card company was able to give me a number for CA, but they were strictly on the billing side. So, I promised to uninstall their software (which I did) and they gave me a refund. Since then, I've been looking for a new package. I'd about settled on Trend Micro, then I saw this poll. I think I'll tough it out a little longer until the results are published. Remember, I'm talking about my home PC. Ease of use, thoroughness (i.e., finding all the bugs) and cost are paramount.

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    Corporate VS Consumer versions[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#23)
    by petermac on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:19:38 AM PDT

    Just a quick comment, inorder for this to be fair you need to seperate this into Corporate and Consumer versions. You can't compare the consumer version of Norton to the corporate Symantec products. One is designed to used by a single user on a home system with no management features, as many bells and whistles as you can stuff into a product and nasty and annoying copy protection features. The other is to be deployed to 100s of desktops in an organization that does not need or want the bells and whistles. The same goes for the McAfee software as well as the other products that offer Consumer and Corporate versions.

    [ Reply to This ]


    Re: Corporate VS Consumer versions[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ed Foster on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 05:19:36 PM PDT

    That's very true. And I hope you'll come back next week and help us make those distinctions clear. -- Ed

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    Glad to help[ Parent | Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#85)
    by petermac on Wed Aug 03, 2005 at 12:00:26 PM PDT

    I will keep my open for that part of the discussion

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]


    First Choice is AVG[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#24)
    by dliesse on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:20:13 AM PDT

    Of course, as Rob pointed out in the very first post, I haven't even tried most of these. And I can't necessarily say I trust AVG the most, it's just the one I prefer to use. I've read enough bad about McAfee that it's not a consideration. We use Norton at work, but when I bought a package for my home system a few years ago it would install but wouldn't run. Finally gave up since I was replacing the computer within a month anyway, and never went back to it. Have used PC-Trend, and had no beefs with it (it was pre-installed on my previous box). Only problem was a lack of information about the product, and I wasn't motivated enough to go to the web site to check it out (that was in the days when I had only dial-up access, and I had more important things to do with my time).

    [ Reply to This ]


    ZoneAlarm AV/AS[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#25)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:35:58 AM PDT

    Any reason why ZoneAlarm Pro isn't in the list? I don't know where they are getting their virus signature info from, but the software updates itself several times per week. The new Anti-Spyware addition has caught many more items than the other two products I was using. Thumbs up for ZoneAlarm! (And no, they're not paying me for the endorsement. <g>) Not A Geek

    [ Reply to This ]


    Only AVG has been a good experience[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#26)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:51:09 AM PDT

    I have used Norton, MacAffee, and Trend Micro. Both Norton and MacAffee were miserable experiences. MacAffee would scan outgoing mail and then hand it off to smtp, but it intercept smtp error messages so I could not tell why my email did not go through.

    Trend Micro was ok until I tried to renew. It took me quite awhile to get my account straightened out, and their support folks never did answer my email.

    I have used the both the paid and the free versions of AVG. The paid version is quite reasonably priced. I bought two licenses. I do find the control center a little confusing, but after examining the configuration in detail I found the default was just right for me. I like that it is just antivirus and not part of a suite.



    [ Reply to This ]


    Panda Software[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#27)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:55:36 AM PDT

    During one of the many arguments related to licensing in this group, Panda was mentioned. I tried it because of the licensing issue (home use) and have kept it because it just works. Earlier someone commented about the word 'Trust' in the question. I tend to trust that most of the products are equally effective. I don't trust the big names to not try to worm into my wallet every 15-20 minutes. My Panda license is about to expire in a couple of weeks and again they'll get the nod - do your job, do it at a reasonable price, upgrade to the latest release as part of my regular license - Panda does it and just works.

    [ Reply to This ]


    AVG-Grisoft[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#28)
    by tsingher on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 10:56:25 AM PDT

    Anti-virus software is supposed to stop viruses. It's not supposed to validate the bona fides of a customer, market the vendor's products or do anything else for that matter. AVG-Grisoft's code only stops viruses. It doesn't clog up computer resources doing things that only benefit the vendor. I particularly admire their willingness to make their product free for home use. It is a loss leader which has bought them many referrals and purchase for my clients. Finally, their enterprise products are scalable, manageable and cross platforms. They are what I wish all software vendors aspired to be: focused on the customer, on the customer's needs and on dishing up a product that meets them. If capitalism REALLY worked, Symantec and McAfee would have long been out of business.

    [ Reply to This ]


    AVG Just works...[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#30)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:02:22 AM PDT

    There's a lot of good information here, and as a few others mentioned, I haven't tried them all. Grisoft's AVG both in the free form (which is harder to find now) and commercial form (much easier to find) provide adequate anti-virus protection. I set all my clients up with the server and workstation versions and they have not gotten any viruses since then. The biggest problem with Norton and McAfee is (besides the horrible, horrible anti-piracy stuff) that viruses are being written specifically to attack them. That alone will make me remove them (tediously, I might add) and put something else on. The fact that they're a specific target makes me uncomfortable with depending on them. When AVG gets so popular that it is written directly for, I'll change to something else. I've had good experiences with Panda, although their support and sales staff are pretty much non-existent. But the product works, and it's reasonably priced with daily automatic updates and a fairly small footprint. So, I'll go with the easiest to install, use, and most cost effective for my clients. AVG fits the bill nicely. Bob

    [ Reply to This ]


    Where Is Zone Alarm?[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#31)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:06:08 AM PDT

    I can't imagine why you would not include Zone Alarm Antivirus. The field of antivirus is, by its very nature, a ripoff field, and I can't think of any reason to trust any vendor in such a field. I specifically have personal experiences that lead me not to trust McAfee or Norton, and I'll never buy another product with either brand name, or Symantec. Zone Alarm stands nearly alone in reputation in this field.

    [ Reply to This ]


    Another ZoneAlarm fan[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#33)
    by robba67 on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:18:25 AM PDT

    A top-rated firewall now with antivirus added, in a user-friendly interface, and provided by a company that seems to value its customers. We tied the can to McAfee after putting up with its crap (good product, lousy customer interface) for several years, and switched our 10 computers to ZoneAlarm last month. robba

    [ Reply to This ]


    Symantic & McAfee[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#36)
    by Anonymous User on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 11:50:40 AM PDT

    I've used Symantic with no problem for several years. Last year I purchased a new machine and installed McAfee 9.0 Professional product and had nothing but problems. The most common was a frequent abort of one of the programs. The system slowed to a crawl - couldn't get email,etc. Trying to get help from McAffe was hopeless. The 9.0 de-install even aborted and then wouldn't let me re-install since from the CD since it said I had a more current version installed. I went back to Symantic and have had no problems.

    [ Reply to This ]


    AVG - NO Symantec[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#37)
    by durth on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 12:05:49 PM PDT

    Most of my clients were using Symantec. I have switched many of them to AVG. I finally got sick of Symantec when they changed their Small Business Suite to not cover Exchange. THis was found out after renewing and we basically went with their Corporate Version for a year because I did not have another vendor lined up and ready. I do not need a box full of 5+ disks and books for a simple SBS2003 network. I also have had very little luck with their support staff (many times taking 3 calls to 3 different techs to get the right answer). I have seen no reason to switch back. AVG works great. Timely updates and no infection so far. It also was not evil to set up. I switch most of my home user cusotmers to AVG also. The only thing I would like to see is a phone support option. Aaron

    [ Reply to This ]


    Sophos[ Reply to This ] (none / 0) (#39)
    by grolan on Mon Aug 01, 2005 at 12:35:27 PM PDT

    We're very happy with Sophos - it handles our mixed NetWare, Windows and Linux environment very well, no problems.

    We particularly like that Sophos licensing allows employees of business customers to use the product at home, free of charge.  Since our IT policy requires employees to run a software firewall and AV product on their home machines, it's nice that we can give them the same products we use at work (ZoneAlarm for firewall, Sophos for AV).

    Although we may have to give up on the Zone Alarm part.  We've been wanting to renew our subscription & upgrade, but ever since Check Point bought them they won't bother returning phone calls.  It's kind of weird, we've left phone messages a