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
Printable View
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
Don't they conflict?
nav 2003, personally it is the best. i don't trust free anti viruses.
Go with the AVG man. it will do perfect work for u. get rid of the nav!
Given the choice between just those two, I would say AVG (Nav2003 hogs pc resources).................everyone has thier opinions, I use Kaspersky.
norton antivirus (try corporate if its hogs a lot of resources)
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
also when i done a full scan with norton it took over an 1hour 30 mins to scan where avg done it in 22mins.
:D AVG - NORTON CAN`T TOUCH THIS --- AVG THE BEST
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" :)
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