Which Anti Virus Works Best With Vista

Just wondering

 

"Brandon Mahler" <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23jYp8uk$JHA.4168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Try AVAST. Their home version is good and it's Free. Stay away from Norton
and McAfee.

 

Brandon Mahler wrote:<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
Bitdefender IS 2009 works very well with both Vista and Windows7 - it's
not a resource hog either...

Guy

 

And don't forget Grisoft's AVG, available at a no cost download for home
users:



Saucy


"Brandon Mahler" <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:#jYp8uk$JHA.4168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Just wondering <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

"Brandon Mahler" <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Try just using Google.

 

Hi Brandon,

Take a look at the link below were you can find a list of security providers
for Windows Vista:

Windows Vista security software providers


Regards,
Anton Pegan
--

"Brandon Mahler" <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23jYp8uk$JHA.4168@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
<mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
matter of which is the best anti-virus program.

If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus program
is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.

And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are best
known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).



--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

Brandon Mahler;1082599 Wrote: <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

There is no "Best". At best, there is a "Best of the month". You can
check this website for comparisons: 'AV-Comparatives - Independent Tests
of Anti-Virus Software - Welcome to AV-Comparatives.org'
()


--
whs

 

On 2009-07-06, Brandon Mahler <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all.

 

"Keith" <kilowattradio@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:s4q4m.333446$6p1.155950@en-nntp-02.dc1.easynews.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On 2009-07-06, Brandon Mahler <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>>
>> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all.
><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Norton is a resource hog and causes more problems than it's worth. Best to
stay away from Norton.

 

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:00:08 GMT, Keith <kilowattradio@gmail.com>
wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On 2009-07-06, Brandon Mahler <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
> >
> > Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


Many people I trust have reported that NAV 2009 is considerably better
than earlier versions. Although they may be right, my view is still
that given Symantec's terrible products and terrible reputation in the
recent past, I will stay extremely skeptical of anything they do for a
considerable period of time.

Let me also point out that with almost any poor product of almost any
type, not everyone experiences problems every time they use it. In
fact, I used to be a NAV user myself (several older versions), and
since, like you, I had experienced no problems with it, I generally
pooh-poohed the advice of those who told me how terrible it was. But
when I saw others experiencing the problems with it, and started
having such problems myself, I very quickly changed my views on it.

I continue to recommend that everyone stay as far away as possible
from all Symantec/Norton products.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup

 

Ken Blake, MVP;1082718 Wrote: <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:00:08 GMT, Keith <kilowattradio@xxxxxx>
> wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro--><!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> > > >
> > > On 2009-07-06, Brandon Mahler <mahlerbrandon@xxxxxx><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> > wrote:> > > > > <!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> > > > >
> > > > > Just wondering> > > >
> > >
> > > I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all. > > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>
> Many people I trust have reported that NAV 2009 is considerably
> better
> than earlier versions. Although they may be right, my view is still
> that given Symantec's terrible products and terrible reputation in
> the
> recent past, I will stay extremely skeptical of anything they do for
> a
> considerable period of time.
>
> Let me also point out that with almost any poor product of almost any
> type, not everyone experiences problems every time they use it. In
> fact, I used to be a NAV user myself (several older versions), and
> since, like you, I had experienced no problems with it, I generally
> pooh-poohed the advice of those who told me how terrible it was. But
> when I saw others experiencing the problems with it, and started
> having such problems myself, I very quickly changed my views on it.
>
> I continue to recommend that everyone stay as far away as possible
> from all Symantec/Norton products.
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


I run Norton IS and Norton Ghost since several years on 4 systems
without any problems. Especially Norton IS09 is excellent. The Symantec
on-line support is also pretty good. If I were you, I would not go by
hearsay.


--
whs

 

On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
<mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
>Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Whichever one(s) you feel happy with . I use free Avast ( audio and
visual warning ) , used to use AVG but had trouble with the updates .
Avast has free registration , and it`s registration every year ( still
free though )

 

"whs" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:79cfbbab414d1d25da8f72a8d857cc5b@nntp-gateway.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
>
> Ken Blake, MVP;1082718 Wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 17:00:08 GMT, Keith <kilowattradio@xxxxxx>
>> wrote:<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
>> > > >
>> > > On 2009-07-06, Brandon Mahler <mahlerbrandon@xxxxxx>
>> > wrote:> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Just wondering> > > >
>> > >
>> > > I use Noron Anti-virus 2009 with no problems at all. > ><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>>
>>
>> Many people I trust have reported that NAV 2009 is considerably
>> better
>> than earlier versions. Although they may be right, my view is still
>> that given Symantec's terrible products and terrible reputation in
>> the
>> recent past, I will stay extremely skeptical of anything they do for
>> a
>> considerable period of time.
>>
>> Let me also point out that with almost any poor product of almost any
>> type, not everyone experiences problems every time they use it. In
>> fact, I used to be a NAV user myself (several older versions), and
>> since, like you, I had experienced no problems with it, I generally
>> pooh-poohed the advice of those who told me how terrible it was. But
>> when I saw others experiencing the problems with it, and started
>> having such problems myself, I very quickly changed my views on it.
>>
>> I continue to recommend that everyone stay as far away as possible
>> from all Symantec/Norton products.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
>> Please Reply to the Newsgroup<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>
> I run Norton IS and Norton Ghost since several years on 4 systems
> without any problems. Especially Norton IS09 is excellent. The Symantec
> on-line support is also pretty good. If I were you, I would not go by
> hearsay.
>
>
> --
> whs<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Perfect. You continue to enjoy that Bloated pig Norton on your computer
which slows down everything and we will continue to alert others that Norton
is pure crap. No big deal.

 

Manny Weisbord <mannyweisbord@crimest.invalid> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>"Brandon Mahler" <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>>Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>Try just using Google.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

That said, I like Avira - and I use the PAY version.

 

You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing their
products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
<grin>

But I totally agree with you. They are worse than the malware they try to
protect you from - and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
news:j4a4559v8nmla5cvuvnuckj86is1qrhdfe@4ax.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
> <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
><!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
>
> It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
> matter of which is the best anti-virus program.
>
> If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus program
> is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
> quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.
>
> And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are best
> known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
>
>
>
> --
> Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> Please Reply to the Newsgroup <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

Richard Urban;1083234 Wrote: <!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing
> their
> products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
> <grin>
>
> But I totally agree with you. They are worse than the malware they try
> to
> protect you from - and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.
>
> --
>
> Richard Urban
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Desktop Experience
>
>
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@xxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:j4a4559v8nmla5cvuvnuckj86is1qrhdfe@xxxxxx> > > <!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro--><!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
> > > <mahlerbrandon@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > > > >
> > > >> Just wondering> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
> > > matter of which is the best anti-virus program.
> > >
> > > If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> > program<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> > > is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
> > > quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.
> > >
> > > And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> > best<!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> > > known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> > > Please Reply to the Newsgroup > > <!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Richard and Ken,

I am somewhat disturbed by your judgements. Both of you being MVP's I
would have expected a more balanced report. I am using Norton IS09 and
Norton Ghost since years and they have always done a good job for me.
Especially the Norton IS09 is a real step forward and there should be
little complaints about it. I also run Kaspersky IS09 on other systems -
and that works well too.
As far as AOL is concerned, I made the same experience. There are very
little complaints. If I compare that to all the problems other people
have with other mail services, I think AOL does a great job. Just follow
the threads on the various forums - half of them are about problems with
mail. My wife uses AOL exclusively. She never used another browser - and
that since years. She has always been able to do her jobs and we never
had to repair or reinstall AOL on her systems.
I think the hype about Norton and AOL is similar as some people's hype
about Vista. I usually comes from people who have not used the products
and go by hearsay. The result you have seen with the Mojave project that
MS launched last year. Those dummies really had egg all over their face.


--
whs

 

> I am somewhat disturbed by your judgements. Both of you being MVP's I<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> would have expected a more balanced report.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

Unfortunately, I feel the same after reading a few MS newsgroups for a few
years.

In fact, I think MS should seriously review their MVP program and consider
if it's really necessary to reward any title to "volunteers".

If some people are reluctant to provide assistance because they have no
title, they wouldn't be a true volunteer as they always claimed, would it?

And I believe those who are willing to help will do it with or without any
title.

Overall speaking, the title is misleading to the general public so both
sides don't need to take any responsibility for misleading and false
information by simply claiming that we (or they) are not MS employees.


"whs" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:b5b0a3e733becd255fb9802c2e1e3c0e@nntp-gateway.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
> Richard Urban;1083234 Wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing
>> their
>> products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
>> <grin>
>>
>> But I totally agree with you. They are worse than the malware they try
>> to
>> protect you from - and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Richard Urban
>> Microsoft MVP
>> Windows Desktop Experience
>>
>>
>> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:j4a4559v8nmla5cvuvnuckj86is1qrhdfe@xxxxxx> > ><!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
>> > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
>> > > <mahlerbrandon@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> > >> > > > >
>> > > >> Just wondering> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
>> > > matter of which is the best anti-virus program.
>> > >
>> > > If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus
>> > program
>> > > is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
>> > > quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.
>> > >
>> > > And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are
>> > best
>> > > known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
>> > > Please Reply to the Newsgroup > ><!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> Richard and Ken,
>
> I am somewhat disturbed by your judgements. Both of you being MVP's I
> would have expected a more balanced report. I am using Norton IS09 and
> Norton Ghost since years and they have always done a good job for me.
> Especially the Norton IS09 is a real step forward and there should be
> little complaints about it. I also run Kaspersky IS09 on other systems -
> and that works well too.
> As far as AOL is concerned, I made the same experience. There are very
> little complaints. If I compare that to all the problems other people
> have with other mail services, I think AOL does a great job. Just follow
> the threads on the various forums - half of them are about problems with
> mail. My wife uses AOL exclusively. She never used another browser - and
> that since years. She has always been able to do her jobs and we never
> had to repair or reinstall AOL on her systems.
> I think the hype about Norton and AOL is similar as some people's hype
> about Vista. I usually comes from people who have not used the products
> and go by hearsay. The result you have seen with the Mojave project that
> MS launched last year. Those dummies really had egg all over their face.
>
>
> --
> whs <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

A balanced report?

I guess you have not been in these news groups for very long. Going back to
Windows 95 there have been 10's of thousands of complaints of people having
problems with the mentioned manufacturers home/consumer products.

People place them on their computers and find, after having nothing but
trouble, that they can't uninstall them. Symantec was the first company I
know of that had to come up with a special download just to get the crap off
of the computer. Even then it left a load of crap that you had to manually
edit out. Much like AOL, except AOL did not have a special uninstaller.

You can't balance McAfee and Symantec against others because the balance is
way tipped toward almost anything else.

Granted, the 2009 Symantec products "seem" to be a bit better but their
products are fighting about 15 years, or so, of miserable performance upon
being installed on peoples computers.

--

Richard Urban
Microsoft MVP
Windows Desktop Experience


"whs" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:b5b0a3e733becd255fb9802c2e1e3c0e@nntp-gateway.com...<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>
> Richard Urban;1083234 Wrote:<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
>> You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing
>> their
>> products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
>> <grin>
>>
>> But I totally agree with you. They are worse than the malware they try
>> to
>> protect you from - and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Richard Urban
>> Microsoft MVP
>> Windows Desktop Experience
>>
>>
>> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@xxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:j4a4559v8nmla5cvuvnuckj86is1qrhdfe@xxxxxx> > ><!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
>> > > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
>> > > <mahlerbrandon@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> > >> > > > >
>> > > >> Just wondering> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
>> > > matter of which is the best anti-virus program.
>> > >
>> > > If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus
>> > program
>> > > is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
>> > > quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.
>> > >
>> > > And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are
>> > best
>> > > known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
>> > > Please Reply to the Newsgroup > ><!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
>
> Richard and Ken,
>
> I am somewhat disturbed by your judgements. Both of you being MVP's I
> would have expected a more balanced report. I am using Norton IS09 and
> Norton Ghost since years and they have always done a good job for me.
> Especially the Norton IS09 is a real step forward and there should be
> little complaints about it. I also run Kaspersky IS09 on other systems -
> and that works well too.
> As far as AOL is concerned, I made the same experience. There are very
> little complaints. If I compare that to all the problems other people
> have with other mail services, I think AOL does a great job. Just follow
> the threads on the various forums - half of them are about problems with
> mail. My wife uses AOL exclusively. She never used another browser - and
> that since years. She has always been able to do her jobs and we never
> had to repair or reinstall AOL on her systems.
> I think the hype about Norton and AOL is similar as some people's hype
> about Vista. I usually comes from people who have not used the products
> and go by hearsay. The result you have seen with the Mojave project that
> MS launched last year. Those dummies really had egg all over their face.
>
>
> --
> whs <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

 

On Tue, 7 Jul 2009 02:20:00 -0400, "Richard Urban"
<richardurbanREMOVETHIS@hotmail.com> wrote:
<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> You would think that after all these years of many of us bad mouthing their
> products that McAfee and Norton/Symantec would really be pissed at us.
> <grin><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


They probably are, but they don't get to control our opinions.

<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> But I totally agree with you. <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


Thanks ...

<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> They are worse than the malware they try to
> protect you from <!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


....but we disagree about that. I'd rather have NAV or McAfee than no
anti-virus software at all.

<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
>- and almost as bad as having AOL on your computer.<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->


LOL! We agree again.


<!--coloro:blue--><span style="color:blue <!--/coloro-->
> "Ken Blake, MVP" <kblake@this.is.an.invalid.domain> wrote in message
> news:j4a4559v8nmla5cvuvnuckj86is1qrhdfe@4ax.com...<!--coloro:green--><span style="color:green <!--/coloro-->
> > On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 07:09:17 -0800, "Brandon Mahler"
> > <mahlerbrandon@gmail.com> wrote:
> ><!--coloro:darkred--><span style="color:darkred <!--/coloro-->
> >> Just wondering<!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->
> >
> >
> > It's not a matter of which works best with *Vista*, it's simply a
> > matter of which is the best anti-virus program.
> >
> > If you are willing to pay for a product, the best anti-virus program
> > is NOD32. If you want a free one, I recommend Avast, which is not
> > quite as good as NOD32, but still a good one.
> >
> > And by the way, the two worst products are perhaps those that are best
> > known, McAfee (next to worst) and Norton (worst).
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
> > Please Reply to the Newsgroup <!--colorc--><!--/colorc--><!--colorc--><!--/colorc-->

--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup