What's Wrong With Norton Av

**uNz[i]** · 04-03-2004, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by peat moss+3 April 2004 - 12:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (peat moss @ 3 April 2004 - 12:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-uNz[i
,2 April 2004 - 00:45]Actually, this is a very timely topic for me.

I've been using Nortons AV since 2001.... currently running NAV 2003 Pro

It's been okay for the most part, but yeah, like zapjb said - it's a resource hog.
It slows my comp's startup time down considerably.

Also, the live updater only seems to work in fits and starts.

Sometimes it runs perfectly, other times I have to update the virus definitions manually.

I finally got around to downloading AVG last night
NAV is getting evicted over the weekend.

I'm looking forward to a marked improvement in my PC's performance.

I heard updates are few and far between is this true? AVG I mean .I would switch from NSW 2003 PRO but I would need a good reason. I know avg is free but?

edit My computer is running fine ,flying really, dont notice norton is even on till it finds a virus in my e-mails. BUT just wondering. I'm missing something? My xp box boots in 30 seconds. With norton starting .

[/b][/quote]
Going by what I've seen in the AVG Free version readme, virus definitions are updated once a month.
This looks to be about the only downside that I can find so far.

I cleaned NAV out of my system this morning and as expected, things are indeed running faster.

My PC, running NAV would take about a minute to boot.
Startup with AVG has halved that. Fast switching between XP user accounts is much quicker too.

Apart from the infrequent definition updates, first impressions of AVG are good so far.

**LTJBukem** · 04-03-2004, 10:55 AM

I'd like to know what exactly you people are doing, that your computers are constantly bombarded with viri that need detecting!! First and foremost, safe practice is the most important measure when preventing virus infection.

Everywhere you go on the internet, you will find kids rattling on about how the most popular products are crap, and that they have found something better. If they use a certain product X, they will, without fail, have personal experience of everything else failing miserably.

The only real way to research a product is to look to credible technical sites for reviews and lab tests. Asking a message board full of kids with pretensions of leetness is pointless.

muchspl2 · 04-03-2004, 11:15 AM

yea and..

**abu_has_the_power** · 04-03-2004, 09:17 PM

is it normal for nod32 to scan so fast? i ran a scan of both my hdds:
1: 45gig (total=120gigs)
2: 91gig (total=120gigs)

it finished the scan in 8 minutes!!! nav2k4 took 30 just to finish drive #1!!! is this normal? 8 min to scan 136 gigs?

and btw, how good is panda and avg compared to nod32? in terms of power and resource hogness

**shn** · 04-03-2004, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by abu_has_the_power@3 April 2004 - 15:17
and btw, how good is panda and avg compared to nod32? in terms of power and resource hogness

Why don't you try them all and make that decision for yourself.

**abu_has_the_power** · 04-03-2004, 09:44 PM

Originally posted by shn+3 April 2004 - 16:41--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shn @ 3 April 2004 - 16:41)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-abu_has_the_power@3 April 2004 - 15:17
and btw, how good is panda and avg compared to nod32? in terms of power and resource hogness

Why don't you try them all and make that decision for yourself.

[/b][/quote]
i can do that. now, about the 8 min thing