NAV or AVG #2

I know that I have been a strong supporter of Norton but I have never felt ( or even tired to imply ) that it was the best. Just that I had never had problems with it.

Being involed in the thread NAV OR AVG I decided to go for broke and try something new. Which BTW is just opposite of saying " If it ain't broke don't fix.

#1 I wanted to see if NAV was as tough to get rid of as some thought it was. NO it was not. I ran the NSW install and modified it to remove NAV. Did a MANUAL check of the reg and found only two to three references to NAV left over. All files in the NAV folder under Program Files were gone. Except a few updates. It also took at least three items out of the startup group.

#2 I saw a chance to prove or disprove using my machine what was stated about AVG.

Installed AVG6 Free version BTW. It apperas that the downloaded program is already up to date. 05.06.03 updates were already installed.

If that is indeed the way AVG download does come through then it is By FAR different than most downloads. I know for sure that Norton is way out of date.

Now. It does appear to be pretty much a standalone program. (Ii like that )

I see NO SHARED files ( unlike Norton ). Everything seems to be all in ONE folder ( I like that also ).

So far I see nothing added to the Windows or Windows system folder. It did put itself into the path of the Autoexec.bat. Which I believe also help to Keep stuff out of the Windows Folder.

I like the idea of being able to check CDs also.

Seems to be working quite well with Eudora.

Now comes what may be the better part. Online work seems to be a noticable bit faster.

Just maybe Norton was causing problem that I did not see. More than likely because it does ( as mike points out ) tie itself into the system so much.

Gee Whiz. I have not yet but will check to see what differenc there may be in resource usage. I cna not do that right now as I am on here and have had other things loaded. Gotta check them after a restart.

BUT I AM NOT gong back just to find out

So the bottom line is. It seems that my time and taking the gamble may well be worth it.

In other words. So far so good.

BillyBob

 

Does a difference of 3 or 4 resources at startup tell me something ?

If it don't I believe it should.

BB

 

Each version of AVG that one downloads is the newest. No need to get new definitions, at least within the first few days. Bonus!

It is about as "standalone" as a program can get, and still use an installer. In order to do email scanning and background work, it must have something in the registry. If it didn't have these types of features, it wouldn't need an installer, but what's the point?

AVG will scan any/all drives in a system, including CD, CDRW, DVD, and mapped network drives.

It uses it's own .dll's and does not replace/overwrite any Windows ones.

It's less bloated, and even with background scanning enabled, it's much faster than NAV.

Are we (AVG users) as well protected as the one using NAV?
I think so. I have no complaints. As stated in the original thread, I have been using it since beta testing, through the 4 latest MS OS's, and Longhorn, and it's still working flawlessly.

Can't compare resource usage, because I refuse to put NAV on my computers (even for testing!), however I would guess that it's using noticably less than NAV. I know that it uses less processes, which translates into less resources.

 

RE: resources.

My fresh start resources were around 83, 83, 97 with NAV loading.

They are now 87, 87, 98 at a fresh start.

Nice improvement I would say.

Norton Firewall and Utilities are still installed. But nothing other than the Firewall loads at startup. They run only when I want them to.


reboot

I believe you have confirmed what I thought to be the case.

I LOVE standalone software. That is a reason why I use Eudora E-mail.

BillyBob

 

I've also been using Eudora since it fit on a floppy with IE and mIRC. (circa 1993)
I still use it because there isn't a trojan written that can read it's address book to propogate itself, nor can I get infected by anything, because EVERYTHING shows up as an attachment, even stationary and stuff.
Just make sure you go into Tools, Options, Viewing mail, and TURN OFF "Use MS Viewer ".
That disables any automatic running of embedded scripts.
Everything shows up as ASCII text only, so those of you who love incredimail et al, with stationary and sounds, they're completely wasted on me
ANY other email client is preferable to Outhouse Express.

 

Also with Eudora. If it is kept on a partition other than C: it does not get destroyed with the OS.

* MIGHT * need a re-install over itself but that is it. No address book or e-mail is lost.

All it needs is some version of Windows to run.

BillyBob

 

There you go folks.
Two opinions from two completely different types of people.

Billy, do you think anyone else will read this, and possibly heed the advice?

 

To return to the original question:

Doesn't this make resource usage less of an issue than whether the AV program is effective?

 

NIS in BAD books

Hi

NIS complete is in my bad books - inclding the irrelevant customer service !!!

It used to be that they actually gave one to one help with any problems ............... I do not think they even read the e-mail now.

I have NIS - download a Trojan Hunter as on advice from this site ( one package not great at all jobs )

NIS was on alert when I booted my PC - when I asked for details I was told that it was NetSpy on my local network
I was panic stricken as I have every update that is available.

I ran the Trojan hunter ( thankfully no actual Trojans ) BUT it found that 2 ports ( possible Trojan entrance ) were OPEN

Ports 1024 & 1025 - I use NIS to try & block these myself - get to the last screen & told not to use this configuration if you are not a PROF. - had to cancel.

Online question to Symantec - REPLY - LINK after LINK to pages on their KB - the half of which were totally irrelevant. They even told me that as I had upgraded to XP I would have to install NIS afresh - do they really think I was that stupid ?????????

One of the links - I thought I had found an answer
The description on how to ' self test ' the ports is not available on my version 2003 !!!!!!!!!!

I am no wiser now - going to have to sort things out for myself. I will then REPLY to them


Please Note - Symantec No longer provide online tools to remove Viruses ............... number one I don't have a virus etc. Number 2 this is certainly a come down with their service. Just don't get a virus as they will not help you to remove it !

I have had more than 3 updates in as many days. Customers are reporting a worm - they have upgraded the worm to ......

I was doubting the service they are now providing but now



I wonder if I should link them to all the posts here & let them see what we really think !
I am beginning to wonder if home users are at the bottom of the list now ? What's more they even have their hands on McAfee ( not that I want this one either ) Too big for their own good now

 

My opinion on the subject.

Those tests mean NOTHING to me. Maybe as quide lines but that is it.

I will take what actuall users ( like members of this BBS ) have to say before what the test site does. Actuall home usage and testing can tell two different things. The testers are not using our machines.

I do not believe there is a Virus Scanner going that will catch everything all the time.

Plus are those tests all run on the same machine with the same setup and settings ?

How well an AV scanner works ( or don't ) is just as much machine/system/user related as any other software.

Plus these test sites are beginning to PI** me off. The one I just looked at had nothing for Win98 Since 2000 ( unless I missed it )

Another Vender trying to drive us to use something we may not want or need. There is not a dam thing wrong with Windows 98SE. It is soft/hardware venders and Microsoft that are saying it is no longer useful.

Good Virus protection is not provided by the Scanner alone. The user has to take some responseability with use of software settings of same etc.

And the most important is keeping ANY AV software up to date.

As far as I can see right now AVG is like Eudora. It only needs some version of Windows to run. Much unlike Norton, McAfee and others which can be very OS version specific.

BillyBob

 

No need to wonder. I think it is a fact.

Everything seems to be geared more toward Networking and HEAVY duty usage.

I have a 4 machine LAN using 98SE. I tried XP Pro for a couple of weeks. Not only did it NOT do any better but was MUCH MORE of a PITA to get the LAN working properly.

With XP, Norton and other BIG names It is getting to the point where we must do it their way or not at all.

But, is this all the Venders fault ? I say it is not. Newer users just want to dump in and OS had have it do everything.


As to Norton.

I DO AGREE It is not as dependable as it used to be. That is why I am trying to find alternate software. Running NIS 2003 ( Firewall only now ) seems to be OK.

But, at the same time I see a Local Store is advertising an XP Pro Upgrade/Norton System Works bundle for less than the price of XP alone.

YUCK, YUCK, Noway Jose I may not be the smartest guy here but I am not stupid. And I wonder if that same store is going to provide HELP !! if needed ?

miniB

NetSpy on my local network

Do you have File and Printer sharing bound to TCP/IP ? If so that will allow the spread of a Virus or Trojan between machines and if one is present I believe it requires cleaning one machine at a time with all others OFF. Other wise a clean machine can get re-infected very quickly.

Also are you using Router or a HUB ?

BillyBob

 

A few semi-relative comments.

NIS *****...well maybe not that bad, as long as you beat it to death with a big stick, get it to do ONLY what you want, WHEN you want it. It's more that Symantec *****...Get Sygate, or even Kerio as far better (user friendly) alternatives.
Same sort of software as AVG. Minimal **** in the registry, minimal resource usage, good security (about as good as it can get with a software firewall). In conjunction with a router/SPI hardware firewall, Kiero is my #1 choice.

Symantec is going corporate...buying up the little guys, dealing more with companies than individuals, yet they still charge $39.95 retail for the AV alone (in Canada). Sorry Symantec, you're not getting 40 bucks plus taxes out of this "little" guy.

XP has security. Lots of it, turned ON by default. Getting a LAN working shouldn't be so difficult, but it is. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Depends on each user. Single system use, good. LAN/sharing, bad. I don't need/want all the security setup and installed by default, especially if I have to jump through hoops to share one stupid file via the LAN. OK, it's a steep learning curve, and I have managed. I like XP too much to go back to 9x. Live with it, learn.

AVG alternative: Yes, there are other free anti-virus programs available. Are they any good? Usually not. They're lame, feeble attempts to copy Symatec/McAfee/et al. Wait! What's this?
http://www.avast.com/ Cool! Skinnable, free, free updates, oh, and did I mention that 11 seconds after the obligatory restart it caught the new BACKDOOR APQ trojan? AVG didn't have a clue.
I had no problem with the trojan, because of the router firewall, and SPI, but a FULL updated scan with AVG didn't find it. Avast did, and promptly removed it, no questions asked. Integrated email scanning, scans floppy/CD/CDRW/DVD, scans mapped network drives, low system resource usage, looks like a winner.
Everything accessible by a right-click menu. Simple, too easy, I like it.
Time will tell, as real-world testing continues on my 5 system LAN.

 

Comparison of AV Products by Virus Bulletin.com

Here is a side-by-side comparison of 34 AV products as tested on five OS platforms:
http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/archives/products.xml?table

Here are a few highlights:
Avast - Result summary: 9 passes / 18 fails
F-Secure - Result summary: 14 passes / 12 fails
F-Prot - Result summary: 10 passes / 7 fails
AVG - Result summary: 4 passes / 20 fails
Kapersky - Result summary: 21 passes / 13 fails
McAfee - Result summary: 14 passes / 17 fails
Panda - Result summary: 1 pass / 3 fails
Sophos - Result summary: 23 passes / 11 fails
Norton/Symantec - Result summary: 23 passes / 6 fails
Trend Micro - Result summary: 9 passes / 7 fails

READ THE REVIEWS FOR BETTER EXPLANATIONS OF THE MEANING OF THESE HIGHTLIGHTS

Since most folks here are discussing NAV & AVG, here are there specific results for WinXP Pro:

AVG Summary
ItW Overall - 100.00%
ItW Overall (o/a) - 100.00%
ItW File - 100.00%
Macro - 99.51%
Standard - 99.21%
Polymorphic - 85.97%

NAVCE Summary
ItW Overall - 100.00%
ItW Overall (o/a) - 100.00%
ItW File - 100.00%
Macro - 100.00%
Standard - 100.00%
Polymorphic - 100.00%

 

Norton Ain't All Bad

http://www.windowsbbs.com/showthread.php?t=30720

Different security systems meet different users' needs. I know Norton has bloat and foibles, but, all-in-all, am quite satisfied with it. Live Update automatically keeps me up to date, the tattletale globe keeps me informed on-the-fly and my comp has never been infected, period.

Norton has two major issues:
1. It needs to be installed directly after the OS (and before going online, of course!) and forget trying to reinstall or uninstall it without a reformat.
2. "Average Users" don't know enough about the software on their systems to make good rules from the start. Norton is also the first thing they disable at any sign of a problem, which always leads to more problems.

Benefits of Norton:
"Default" when in doubt
Password protection can be installed for really difficult users (so they can't alter the settings! Ha ha!)
Slow, but usually helpful, tech support
Completely configurable to your style of working
Norton can be used to override other stubborn software's behavior, including MS
Live Update, on anything but dial up, is completely unobtrusive
Ad blocking, Spam alerts, event logs and Java/ActiveX control features on NIS

Yeah, it's a bit bloated (like XP is not?) but today's modern systems don't even notice. In my experience, Norton and common sense will protect even a newbie, and rather painlessly. Advanced users will always have lots of choices, from routers to a host of 3rd party software, and will use what suits them best. But Norton is not a bad choice for a less experienced user, or a lazy one, like me. I've used NIS 02,03, and 04, and even NU, until it became redundant with XP. I don't mind the way it's all hooked together, either- seems more efficient that way.

Just my two cents. YMMV, of course!

Johanna

 

No disrespect meant for you BB or Reboot but it seems to me there's not a whole lot of difference here between OE or Eudora. I've never used Eudora but if you have to turn off an option called use MS Viewer to keep it from running scripts etc., it doesn't seem to be a whole lot more secure than OE. In OE you can do the same by clicking tools>options>read and select read all messages in plain text. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, this accomplishes the same thing as the option in Eudora. Everything is displayed in plain text. Goodbye Incredimail. Works for me anyway. From what you wrote in your post it doesn't seem it's the default in Eudora. So, what's difference (in this respect anyway) from OE. If the user doesn't bother to go into the options and change it, they would still be vulnerable to scripts etc. No different than OE. As for losing mail after a format, this too can be avoided in OE. Simply move the store folder off the partition that the OS is installed on. You might say; well, how many people know they should do this? Probably not many but by the same token, those that don't know they should move the store folder most likely won't install Eudora to a different drive either. They'll take the defaults when they install it and end up like anybody else that uses OE and doesn't move there store folder. They'll lose there email in a format. As to the address book thing, if the option is set to read emails in plain text only, you aren't going to have that sort of problem either. Again, no different than Eudora. I'm not trying to antagonize anybody here but I really don't see the difference. If the options are set right, you won't have any problem. I've used OE for years, gone through a few formats and have received a lot of junk over the years and have yet to be stung by it. Am I missing something here?

 

Took me about 2 minutes to realise what a resource hog NAV 2001,2002 and 2003 are (haven't used 2004) in comparison with AVG 6.0 free edition. It's superb, small and easy to setup. The only tweaks I had to do was turn off auto updates and auto system scans. Updates are regular (daily at times!), and you can't complain about the price.

Brilliant programme!!!

 

Zander. The MS viewer simply puts embedded html on the viewing page in Eudora. It does not run any .scr .bat .pif, or other scripts, because those are all recognized as attachments.
Turn off MS viewer, and it disables the viewing of all html content, you only get raw text, with (sometimes) a link showing where the picture may have been.
Security wise, there is NO comparison between OE and Eudora.
Even if you don't turn off MS viewer, everything still comes as text, but any html that may link to outside images, can actually display that image in the email as it's being viewed.
Even with OE set to display text, anything embedded get's run as if it's part of the email, not excluded as an attachment. OE's plain text setting is great for eliminating all that fancy font/color and stationary that clients like Incredimail are so infamous for including in a message.
Face it. If OE were not simply included with your OS, and embedded so deeply into IE's interface, you just might actually have to learn to use a real email client.

 

you just might actually have to learn to use a real email client.

Interesting reboot. I knew there were lots of language differences in the US when compared to the UK but I never knew that folks in Canada used the word 'real' when us-uns in the lower 48 would use 'primitive'.

Well, at least we agree on how to spell color and flavor and such.

 

I'm not really sophisticated when it comes to using anti-virus programs. I gave up on Norton years ago when it seemed to think everything was a virus! I use the free AVG 6 and MicroTrend online. I tend to believe that some av programs issue definitons faster, some a bit slower, but all will probably issue them at some point.

I really try to focus on what if the virus/trojan got into my computer? First, I really don't have anything to steal. They might get my Windows BBS password. But that's about it! I don't have any online banking or financial in my computer. Anything I consider of consequence is backed up off my computer.

But I also keep fairly recent disk images of my drive. If I suspect that I've hit a virus, I go for restore of the last image.

I got rid of the Blaster Worm in 15 minutes. I thought being on dialup at the time, I was immune. Wrong! But I just restored, put up a firewall, and downloaded the patches!