Anti-Virus Software

[Clive George]

382 quid + vat for us. But that is a one-off cost, not per-year, unlike eg RH. We've got CALs anyway for all the people in the company - don't need more for another 'doze server. I think...

[Mike Buckley]

Heh. A couple of years ago Symantec went through a really bad period and made a shed load of mistakes with their AV software. It's pretty much sorted now and has been for a year or so. Kaspersky have also done a lot to cut down on CPU resource but Symantec is still marginally quicker if you're just looking for CPU use.

This will give a rough idea, no doubt Kaspersky have a similar independent report on their own site somewhere.

I use Avast or whatever is free on my home kit and at work I sell and install Symantec. If I had to pay for my home AV it'd be Symantec. I've had training on Kaspersky and that put me off going anywhere near it, clunky doesn't even begin to describe it.

[geoff]

In message , Mike Barnes writes

Dubious downloads

human anatomy and that sort of thing

[Mike Barnes]

geoff :

I'm not sure exactly what you mean but I do wonder why you get them and not me. I don't use Microsoft products for e-mail or web browsing, and I wonder if there's some co-operation between those products that I'm not getting the advantage of.

[Tinkerer]

I have not read all the thread (got to go out) but thought I'd just mention that I now run the Windows firewall (and of course the router hardware firewall) and use the free Microsoft Security Essentials for AV and Spyware. Very pleased with the MS product. It updates through Windows update and nags about once a week to do a scan - this only takes a minute or two. I used to use free AVG (pretty good) and then Comodo Internet Security (better and also free) which includes AV and firewall. I would happily use Comodo again if MSSE was not available.

[Gio]

Thanks for the update because I think quite a few folk never know what is best and do not necessarily know what others use / find good and reliable.

Gio