XP & AntiVirus

Can any of you experts out there recommend an AntiVirus package that installs straight out of the box?
I have just had to return Norton AntiVirus 2002 back to the shop.
I could not get it to work correctly at all.
I am now thinking about buying Mcafee, but I don’t know now?
Is there an AntiVirus package out there yet that is completely Windows XP compatible.


All advice received with thanks.

 

xp antivirus

hi
i have windows xp home and i downloaded my antivirus from the mcafee site it gives you regular updates and so far i have had no problems as it is xp freindly you pay for 2 years subcription .
before i had xp i was running e and again i had the same antivirus
just go into the mcafee site and have a look and then make up your mind

 

Norton Antivirus 2002 works fine on my XP professional, and my friend's dell laptop. We have been using Norton for about 3 years...

norton 2002 has a much cleaner inferface that previous versions, and the automatic update is a nice little addition, since I do not have to look for updates on my own now

 

I know of dozens of folks running NAV2002 on XP Pro and a handful on XP Home...no problems yet!

Personally, I'm running SystemWorks 2002 on Home and Pro and think it's a little sluggish compared to SW 2001, but, oh well......the beast keeps getting bigger and bigger!!

 

I run Norton 2002 on my XP system, but it makes it run like a P II 450 instead of a P 4 1.5 GHZ.

 

With just NAV2002? I thought it was the whole SystemWorks thing that was slowing me down.....hmmmm......maybe it's time to start looking somewhere else!!

 

virus scan for xp

This is straight from the horses mouth, I am not talking from experience. McAfee techs tell me that McAffee VS 6 will work with XP.

 

McAfee....I Don't Think So !

Thanks for all your help and replies but, I have been trying to install McAfee since Wednesday, with no success.
After online chatting to 7 or 8 Technical Support people, all with different ideas as to why it will not download beyond 10% I decided to ask the advice of a friend. He recommended PC-cillin,
? you ask yourself, I downloaded it and it works fine.
So all these so called major AntiVirus companies need to get their house in order with regards customer support, because McAfee's
is absolutely disgracefull.

Thanks For All Your Help.

 

I agree with you, I wouldn't install McAfee on my enemies PC but before you get too excited about PCCillin, have you tried to do a File Search in XP since you installed PCCillin. If not, you might want to try one. Be sure you have XP set to look at all of the files, system, hidden, windows files, etc.. and you'll notice the PC freezes when the file search hits compressed .zip cabs once you've install PC Cillin 2000.

You might also want to try turning off things like WebTrap in PcCillin. Then reboot the PC and check TaskManager. You see the WebTrapNT process is still running regardless of what you turn off in PCCillin. You'll also notice all of the processes still running even if you end PCCillin. To make a long story short, PCCillin for XP is so bug ridden, even TrendMicro won't argue with you about it. They plan to release PCCillin 2002 in March since they can't seem to figure out what's causing the problems with PCCillin 2000 and XP.

BTW, just so you know, I'm a longtime user and proponent of PCCillin on W95/98/ME systems, but in the case of Windows XP, PCCillin fails miserably and Trend Micro should be ashamed of themselves for not pulling it off the market when they knew all of these bugs existed. After 6 years of exclusively using Trend Micro products, I've switched to Computer Associates, makers of the former AV, Innnoculate IT, who now sell "eTrust EZ AntiVirus" that's certified to be designed for Windows XP.

 

Thanks Bryan

What version of eTrust EZ AntiVirus are you using, is it
5.4.1.2

And Thanks Again.

 

I just don't understand why so many people are having problems with Norton 2002...We have been using Norton for years, and now I am hearing about norton completely destroying some system files. What exactly is the real deal here guys?

 

You might like to try this one.. it's free.
http://www.grisoft.com/html/us_index.htm

I will be switching just as soon as my free Norton updates are out that came on my new Dell. I use AVG on my old computer and it worked great.


Great that this forum is back! I sure missed it.

 

Lammy, it's 5.4.2.0

As far as Nortons, I use it at work and it works well but I like an AV that has a small footprint and that wouldn't be Nortons or McAfee.

 

How Norton System Works behaves in mostly due to how it is installed and/or setup. If if is installed using the default settings it can, will and does slow a system to a crawl.

If System Doctor is loaded at startup it will ( or may ) clash with stuff that Windows may also be trying to do.

NAV auto protect set to check all files will slow a system down quite a bit.

NSW needs to be watched VERY CAREFULLY during the install so that it does not install things that may clash BIG TIME with Windows apps that may be loading and trying to do the same thing.

I have had no Problems with NIS 2001 ( AV & Firewall )

I USED TO BE a big fan of Norton Utilities but not now. They are not keeping up with the changes in Windows.

Now that I am using ME Defrag it is just as fast ( if not faster ) than SpeedDisk and is FAR LESS apt to create problems. Especially with Win98 ME.

I do use WinDoctor & the Registry Editor from NU but that is about it.

Also I do on occassion run DiskDoctor from the CD after booting from the Startup disk.

 

Good point, BillyBob. Whenever I do a system util install, I find that the ONLY way to do the install is custom! I installed it with nothing but NAV running on startup. I regularly run a complete system scan, and have speedisk scheduled to run each night. I do have NAV set to scan all files all the time, but I don't think that's the problem, as I've always had it set to do so. I just think NAV2002 is a PIG!!! That being said, I still think the good outweigh the bad!!

 

I think that a lot of the problems with newer software is due to USER wishes in general. They want software to install and run without user interference.

This may be fine IF the user pays attention to what else is loaded. Many time problems are not caused by the individaul software but THE COMBINATION of software

I have used the three versions of Win98. ( FE, SE, ME ) And I found that with ME the above was VERY CRITICAL. More so than the other than FE & SE.

Microsoft Windows and things like NU ( if not handled correctly ) will fight to the death of a system. I made a BAD mistake with ME. I tried to use both SpeeDisk and degrag. I found out that, that was a NO-NO.

BTW. I am back to the original Win98 as I find that I HAVE much better control of it.

BillyBob

 

Win98!!! Argh!!!!!

Have you tried Win2K or XP? *I* think they are MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more stable!! But that's just my opinion...

 

I have yet to find any version of Windows more solid than Win95b or the original 98. But that can be very much machine related.

No I have not tried 2K or XP.

At this time I see no need to do so. I Have spent time and work to gain control of what I have that is causing me no problems and doing all I all I ask of it. IF I DO IT RIGHT

Of course in all honsety I can not say that I would have nothing to gain. But at his point in time I see nothing to gain.

I have a 3 machine LAN that is working flawlessly. May not be any speed demon but it is doing all I ask of it.

Plus we have quite a bit of DOS software that we run. Some of which requires the DOS Mode. Which ME and above I believe lack.

Also I can not justify the Expense of making the change when I do not see anything to gain.

I ran the Upgrade Advisor and it said XP would work on this unit with no hardware problems. But I would only believe that IF I was to install same and no problems came up.

Nowever, I am planning on building a new machine later. I am thinking at that time to give XP a try.

Not to knock 2k or XP but if you think I am going to mess up what I have that is doing just fine NO-WAY JOSE.

In other words. No problems exist and I don't care to create any.

If I were having problems well, that would present a different out look.

BillyBob

 

I hear ya! I've spent many hours helping people with Win9X machines, not to mention being involved in a 2500 node migration from WFW 3.11 to Win9X....wasn't really impressed.....then I found Win2K. It ran flawlessly (even a bunch of old DOS apps), but it lacked in the gaming arena. I've been running XP now for 3 months and am in love...IE6 still *****, but the OS is quite stable. And the frontend for WindowsUpdate is MUCH better, IMO!

 

but it lacked in the gaming arena.

I have read and heard that and it also fits into my thinking.

{i]..IE6 still *****, [/i]

And I have no problems with IE6.

Again we may be back to being machine related.

Heck, I have Win98/IE6 on and ANCIENT PII 100 with 48meg of RAM and it works just fine.

Again no speed demon but it works with no errors or hangups.

BillyBob