Norton Antivirus 2005 or AVG Free?

[aphex]

I have the norton disc in my hand, but should i use AVG instead?

 

[Nohr]

I used AVG for a while and I got the impression that it wasn't very thorough, but that may just be me. I hear that AntiVir is good and it's free. I'd suggest giving it a shot before installing Norton.

 

[clickynext]

AVG once let a virus through that Norton caught once I installed it. Norton certainly is a bigger hog than most programs, though, at least 2004 was. Personally I've found Panda Antivirus to be a good one as far as virus catching abilities go.

 

[mechBgon]

Norton 2005 will probably cover you better against adware, spyware and Trojans. Make sure to enable scanning within compressed files, and max out the Heuristics. You can password-protect the options, which can be nice for a family PC so your teenager can't switch it into Nerf mode or disable the protection altogether when it keeps deleting... mmm, that one file, the one he/she's trying to download 😉

By default, it seems Norton Antivirus 2005 will disarm the Windows Firewall (!) and use its wormstopper feature in place of it. You can override that behavior if you want.

I used AVG Free 7 for a while with no complaints, although my web surfing doesn't take me anywhere dangerous. I just tried a Norton 2005 15-day trial and am now trying McAfee VirusScan 9.0. Cannot... decide! 😕

 

[Malak]

Someone recently posted they installed AVG and it detected 4 virii that Norton hadn't detected. But that can be different for everyone. Personally I know AVG is a lot less intrusive and not nearly the resource hog.

 

[Zugzwang152]

if you have a beefy system, and the $$$ to spend, i would definitely recommend a commercial product, since there will at least be some accountability should some catastrophe happen. mcafee may be a better option than norton if you arent running a very powerful sytem.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152
if you have a beefy system, and the $$$ to spend, i would definitely recommend a commercial product, since there will at least be some accountability should some catastrophe happen. mcafee may be a better option than norton if you arent running a very powerful sytem.

So what would McAfee or Symantec do when a Virus(which they didn't detect), deletes all your data? Not much of an accountability there.

 

[Schadenfroh]

http://forums.anandtech.com/me...ey=y&keyword1=best

 

[aafuss]

I have tried NAV before, but didn't like it-AVG 7 was quite easy to use and does suit me well.

 

[aphex]

Originally posted by: Zugzwang152
if you have a beefy system, and the $$$ to spend, i would definitely recommend a commercial product, since there will at least be some accountability should some catastrophe happen. mcafee may be a better option than norton if you arent running a very powerful sytem.

Athlon 64 3200+ and 1gb of ram....

I also already own Norton 2k5 as i got it free from work..... So should i use it instead of a free AVG or Antivir?

 

[BW86]

I've been using AVG for the longest time and never got a virus. Does it's job great and uses very little ram in the process 😀

 

[Bucksnort]

Originally posted by: BW86
I've been using AVG for the longest time and never got a virus. Does it's job great and uses very little ram in the process 😀

 

[timswim78]

AVG has a pretty terrible detection rate. Norton's is much better, but it can be a resources hog. A good free solution is http://free-av.com

 

[Cvolt]

On my desktop I use ZoneAlarm with Anti-virus. It was a 19.95 download. It seems to work just fine for me. I'm running Norton Internet Security 2004 on my notebook.

 

[XBoxLPU]

AVG. Norton is a resource hog

If you are really worried about viruses, then I would suggest kaspersky.