PDA

View Full Version : Avg Vs. Nav2003



DarthInsinuate
05-02-2003, 04:38 PM
i have both installed at the moment, both running
should i keep both or just rely on one?

at the moment i'm leaning towards AVG because its got a slightly faster scan and is slightly more legal

zapjb
05-02-2003, 04:47 PM
Don't they conflict?

bulio
05-02-2003, 04:51 PM
nav 2003, personally it is the best. i don't trust free anti viruses.

KurtCocain
05-02-2003, 05:08 PM
Go with the AVG man. it will do perfect work for u. get rid of the nav!

CornerPocket
05-02-2003, 05:52 PM
Given the choice between just those two, I would say AVG (Nav2003 hogs pc resources).................everyone has thier opinions, I use Kaspersky.

thisiswhoweare
05-02-2003, 05:55 PM
norton antivirus (try corporate if its hogs a lot of resources)

ijc_2003
05-02-2003, 07:23 PM
norton sucks go with avg pro edtion
everytime i install that norton 2003 it kills my comp and also trying to get rid of it to leaves files everywere.

2ghz athlon xp
512ddr 2100
g4

ijc_2003
05-02-2003, 07:27 PM
also when i done a full scan with norton it took over an 1hour 30 mins to scan where avg done it in 22mins.

manbeast
05-06-2003, 05:47 PM
:D AVG - NORTON CAN`T TOUCH THIS --- AVG THE BEST

TRshady
05-06-2003, 05:55 PM
Avg wins without a doubt, much faster, less troubles and free (no, really free ;) ).

"Fuck the NAV, A-V-G
Fuck the NAV, A-V-G" :)

DarthInsinuate
05-06-2003, 08:31 PM
just so you know i'm sticking with NAV because its been no problems at all, and i think norton are a pretty established AV...thing
not hogging resources either or being MUCH slower than AVG, maybe you all turned bloodhound to max