honestly, how good is AVG free antivirus? - Page 3

LoveDub · #21 10-03-2005, 06:49 AM

I had Norton installed, I tried out http://www.free-av.com/ and it found 3 viruses/keyloggers which Norton had no idea were there.
The interface is not stunning, but it picks up EVERYTHING.
I tried Avast, didn't like it, didn't work for me.

RollaJ · #22 10-03-2005, 09:23 AM

Norton Internet Security.......eBay $30 delivered.
Maybe there are some viruses it doesnt catch, but nothing catches everything. Also you get the entire suite that blocks 100% of pop ups, rids you of almost all SPAM, Blocks almost all web page ads....... Hell it's worth twice what I paid.....MSRP [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Freudian · #23 10-03-2005, 10:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Oh not really. Personally I use Kaspersky although NOD32 is also a good one. I'd say those two are the best pay anti-virus solutions out there. They both also use much less resources than Norton and Mcafee.

[/ QUOTE ]

I use NOD32 myself and I would never switch to Norton and McAfee. If I am going to use a resident program it better be small and efficient.

TDS-3 is probably one of the better ways to deal with trojans.

Chief911 · #24 10-03-2005, 10:51 AM

Take it for what its worth. I do computer support/repair/consulting for a living. AVG or Avast are just as good a solution as Norton.

#25 10-03-2005, 11:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I had Norton installed, I tried out http://www.free-av.com/ and it found 3 viruses/keyloggers which Norton had no idea were there.
The interface is not stunning, but it picks up EVERYTHING.
I tried Avast, didn't like it, didn't work for me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't say much. Were they actually viruses, or spyware keyloggers? AV recently had spyware detection added. Note also that some things aren't designed to be picked up by good software as they're false positives. For example, Microsoft Antispyware doesn't pick up certain tracking cookies, by design, because they're completely harmless, whereas Lavasoft does. This leads people to assume that Lavasoft is better, which it isn't.

As far as an all round protection package goes, nothing beats Norton Internet Security IMO. Firewall, private data protection, ad blocking, email control and filtering, intrusion detection, and detailed access to logs and network security info. In addition, they have a worldwide network of frontline virus detection software installed on corporate and home PCs that report suspicious activity 24/7...nothing can beat their response time or information base.

People can say what they like, you get what you pay for.

Freudian · #26 10-03-2005, 11:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I had Norton installed, I tried out http://www.free-av.com/ and it found 3 viruses/keyloggers which Norton had no idea were there.
The interface is not stunning, but it picks up EVERYTHING.
I tried Avast, didn't like it, didn't work for me.

[/ QUOTE ]
Doesn't say much. Were they actually viruses, or spyware keyloggers? AV recently had spyware detection added. Note also that some things aren't designed to be picked up by good software as they're false positives. For example, Microsoft Antispyware doesn't pick up certain tracking cookies, by design, because they're completely harmless, whereas Lavasoft does. This leads people to assume that Lavasoft is better, which it isn't.

As far as an all round protection package goes, nothing beats Norton Internet Security IMO. Firewall, private data protection, ad blocking, email control and filtering, intrusion detection, and detailed access to logs and network security info. In addition, they have a worldwide network of frontline virus detection software installed on corporate and home PCs that report suspicious activity 24/7...nothing can beat their response time or information base.

People can say what they like, you get what you pay for.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is simply false.

If you feel comfortable using Norton, that's fine. But don't make stuff up to motivate the use.

Read this review of antivirus and see how Norton stacks up against the others when it comes to detections, memory use etc.

obsidian · #27 10-03-2005, 11:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
That is simply false.

If you feel comfortable using Norton, that's fine. But don't make stuff up to motivate the use.

[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. There are MUCH better pay anti-virus solutions out there. Do a little research and you can find out for yourself.

jb9 · #28 10-03-2005, 11:16 AM

FWIW, I switched to AVG following advice I received in this thread a few months ago.

I have been happy with it as I was looking for a less resource-intensive/annoying antivirus software (price wasn't really a concern to me), and I got what I was looking for (without even paying anything).

However, I am fairly careful about what I download, and I don't feel like I need top of the line, super secure virus protection.

LoveDub · #29 10-03-2005, 11:22 AM

There is no doubt that Norton is a good product, I just think it's overkill.

They were keyloggers/trojans, not viruses (the line is blurry these days).

Norton should have picked them up IMO - you can't call yourself an Internet security suite if you can't detect keyloggers/trojans.

I am a proponent of Open Source/Free software, so my inclination is to go with free-av.

Norton does a great job, but it doesn't do a better job than AV + Spybot S&D + MS AntiSpyware + Sygate Firewall (all of which are free-ish).

#30 10-03-2005, 11:59 AM

Your source is not exactly top notch, nor is the analysis, have a look at a Comparison Table from PC World Magazine

Note particularly the entry for AVG. This product is, quite simply, CRAP. Also see this article from PC World:

[ QUOTE ]
But some fared less well with the zoo collection of 14,288 Trojan horses, malware that can't spread on its own but can be carried by worms or viruses or be hidden within infected downloads. Despite accounting for a significant proportion of all malware, Trojan horses are not included on the WildList. And the antivirus scanners varied considerably more in their handling of these pests: AVG detected just 23.5 percent of the Trojan horses, while the McAfee and Norton scanners nabbed 99 percent and 97.5 percent, respectively.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying buy Norton. Buy whatever you want. But when it comes to antivirus (as opposed to firewall or spyware), because of the sheer range and complexity of threats out there, the large professional companies have a huge edge.