- Oct 4, 2006
- 2,779
- 1
- 81
Norton is noticably absent as we'll.
Also, after reading these charts, I still can't fathom why anyone with common sense bothers to pay for AV when AVG and Avast perform so well.
I can't seem to find MS security essentials in there.
Norton is noticably absent as we'll.
I can't seem to find MS security essentials in there.
Is Kapersky hard on resources?
Symantec refuses to enter in any of these Virus Tests since ages
Hmmm, I wonder why :whiste:
not surprised. the company i work for sells symantec heavily. i hate the everloving hell out of it. we run into a major sep manager issue pretty much every month at one customer or another, and ive lost count of how many customers want to know why theyre paying for AV software when they keep getting infected
/some of them click the shiny buttons, but not all of them
Symantec refuses to enter in any of these Virus Tests since ages
Hmmm, I wonder why :whiste:
there we go! another live proof! thanks for sharing that info! even though you work for a company that sells their products, you are actually honest about them!
What do you personally run?
If you use the dropdown menu, you'll see that Symantec was there for the last 2 year (2011, 2010) and ranked in the top three. I don't/won't use a paid AV myself anymore, but don't think it's fair to say they suck either. Years ago, Norton was a HUGE resource hog, dragging down any computer. Not sure if that's the case anymore, but one tag I think they will always be stuck with.
Non-enthusiasts continue to pay for AV, often Norton. Simply because it comes on the computer and they have "heard of them".