[i'm not ophiel]

i don't know if you're serious or sarcastic, but you notice the part in your window where it says "false positives"?

false positives are an everyday reality for ANY antivirus.

[sonu27]

Kaspersky the best for me. Using that now.

[olocin]

how about sophos? you guys tried it before? its cool

[Jeremy]

I won't even recommend anything that doesn't have a good report on http://www.av-comparatives.org/.

[nethex]

In Russia, the most popular AV software is Kaspersky Antivirus

This post has been edited by nethex: 12 July 2006 - 02:56 PM

[t4z]

Iv been using Mcafee Internet suite
its ok and doesnt realy slow down machine as norton does

[prx984]

iv been using avg free on my desktop for a long time. i havent noticed any speed differences. i ran it on my laptop for a little while too, although it didnt slow down my laptop, i just didnt feel i needed it for my laptop. if my laptop gets messed up, i just reimage the drive.

[Jeremy]

Cygnus, on Aug 6 2006, 08:40 AM, said:

iv been using avg free on my desktop for a long time. i havent noticed any speed differences. i ran it on my laptop for a little while too, although it didnt slow down my laptop, i just didnt feel i needed it for my laptop. if my laptop gets messed up, i just reimage the drive.

Yup, I'm in preparation of backing up everything, getting my to-do list all done, reformat, reinstall, re-configure, image the drive and then install Deep Freeze.

[Thauzar]

Being a student and having a laptop and a desktop, I wonder if I can install and keep up to date both computers with a single user licence from nod32. If yes they got a new client! Else I'll stay with SAV for another year.

[Zxian]

@Thauzar - One licence, one computer. That's how most licencing fees work. Btw... Opera 9.01 was released a while ago...you need to update your sig.

@Jeremy - Just be warned - rebooting every time you want to configure something new might get a little annoying. DeepFreeze was meant for workstations that people come to, sit down, use, and then leave - not really for home use computers.

[Jeremy]

Zxian, on Aug 8 2006, 04:05 PM, said:

@Thauzar - One licence, one computer. That's how most licencing fees work. Btw... Opera 9.01 was released a while ago...you need to update your sig.

@Jeremy - Just be warned - rebooting every time you want to configure something new might get a little annoying. DeepFreeze was meant for workstations that people come to, sit down, use, and then leave - not really for home use computers.

How come you only say these things to me on MSFN?
But yeah, I figure as long as I have a good Acronis backup, I'm good.

[Chozo4]

I must be the minority! Been using norton for the last ... 8 years without any problems or false positives.

Before you think 'j00 n00b. n0rt0n iz teh sux!'... I do *NOT* and never will use the newer bloatware which has become of norton either. Which of course I could fully agree as being pretty poor as it focuses more on a pretty GUI with one button scan all while trying to be more than just a virus scan. They end up spreading their priorities way too thin which will be the downfall in the end in my opinion. Personally, If I'm ever forced to use any newer version of Norton I'll gladly switch to something else.

Now... I haven't gone out and checked out many others other than norton since it does the job and does it well for me. It's not a resource hog and is not a memory hog at all either while scanning every single file and inside archives.

For those who complained (if any) about it sucking up resources when installed - if you remove the registry links that auto-load vxd's associated with auto-protect, you can free up those resources and any memory used from it. You'll effectively disable auto-protect if you don't need it running yet claim back those resources. I'm not sure if this still applies to the newer versions however.

... so anyway - Don't click this image link norton-dislikers. You just might see an old version of norton in it.

http://mechresource....oad/norton5.jpg
JPEG Image - 1024.768 @ 92k

This post has been edited by Chozo4: 11 August 2006 - 02:49 PM

[Jeremy]

Chozo4, on Aug 11 2006, 04:20 PM, said:

Windows 98 SE (nUSB v2.2e + USP 2.1a + KUP v0.2.7)
AMD 64 4000+ SanDiego 2.4ghz (OC 2600mhz 325x8 mult)
EPoX EP-9NDA3J Mobo w/ 2x512 OCZ-3200 DDR Dual (OC 217mhz 2-3-3-6@ 1T)
Nvidia GeForce 4000mx 128mb-ddr (OC 365c \ 565m)

Running Win98SE on an AMD 64 4000+........ *shakes head*

This post has been edited by Jeremy: 13 August 2006 - 04:19 PM

[OldSchool]

I use McAfee VirusScan. It comes with my America Online membership.

[braindedd]

NOD32 because it's the fastest and best detection rates I've seen.
Company I used to work for used Avast for it's boot scanning, which was a pretty neat trick ...

[Jeremy]

braindedd, on Aug 13 2006, 07:34 PM, said:

NOD32 because it's the fastest and best detection rates I've seen.
Company I used to work for used Avast for it's boot scanning, which was a pretty neat trick ...

Yeah, having the ability to scan a drive without any hooks to Windows files intact feels pretty superior, especially when using an awesome scanner like NOD32 and/or Kaspersky.

[Wijono]

I have been using Norton AntiVirus OEM Version 5.0 on my Win98SE for a few years.
After downloading and running the Virus Definitions (Intelligent Updater) on 27-JUL-2006, I got following "Drive access error" message when trying to do manual scan:

"Unable to read the boot record on hard drive #0. Check to make sure the drive is ready."
Then I clicked on "Continue" and another error message popped up stating:
"Unable to read the boot record on hard drive C:. Check to make sure the drive is ready."
Then I clicked "Continue" again, the next error message said:
"NAVW32 caused an invalid page fault in module NAVEX32A.DLL"
the scan was then exited.

After the Virus Definitions dated 02-AUG-2006, the "invalid page fault" error is gone, but then until now the "Unable to read the boot record" error still persist.

The DOS mode (NAVDX.EXE) works perfectly all right though, that is why the Startup scanning, which is in DOS mode is also functioning well, that includes boot records scanning as well.

So to be able to work with it under Win98SE, we need to clear Scan Boot Record & Scan Master Boot Record under the Options, then NAV will work near normal, i.e., it will skip scanning boot record under Windows GUI, but the rest is as per normal. DOS mode works OK.

I have done a bit of experimenting, if after doing the most recent Intelligent Updater, e.g., 20060814-017-i32.exe, then replace following 2 files from the older Definitions, for example:

NAVEX32A.DLL; 669 KB; August 21, 2005
TCDEFS.DAT; 12.2 KB; August 21, 2005

Then the Windows GUI will work normal, it will scan boot records with no problem. The trade off is that DOS mode will not work. The 20050821 definition is in fact the most recent that will work for the substitution mentioned, if we use the ones from 20050822, where the TCDEFS.DAT will be around 40KB, then the same error message will pop-up again.

Another general drawback of NAV is that the file size of Definitions update (Intelligent Updater) is huge, it is bigger than 12MB and is updated on daily basis (we don't need to do it every day though). The reason for the huge size is that every updater also includes AV Engines and is meant for all platforms.

With the problem I encounter above, I am now beginning to try the "AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition 7.1.394", which according to my opinion is quite good! What I like most is that its online definitions update is sort of incremental, so the size is quite small.

[freexwolf]

now i use nod32

i was usimg kasper and it's the best

but i chang it just to try nod32 and to see how good it is

[Jeremy]

freexwolf, on Aug 17 2006, 01:33 PM, said:

now i use nod32

i was usimg kasper and it's the best

but i chang it just to try nod32 and to see how good it is

yeah, they're both pretty much hand-in-hand.

[cyberloner]

Jeremy, on Aug 12 2006, 04:26 PM, said:

Chozo4, on Aug 11 2006, 04:20 PM, said:

Windows 98 SE (nUSB v2.2e + USP 2.1a + KUP v0.2.7)
AMD 64 4000+ SanDiego 2.4ghz (OC 2600mhz 325x8 mult)
EPoX EP-9NDA3J Mobo w/ 2x512 OCZ-3200 DDR Dual (OC 217mhz 2-3-3-6@ 1T)
Nvidia GeForce 4000mx 128mb-ddr (OC 365c \ 565m)

Running Win98SE on an AMD 64 4000+........ *shakes head*

i though win98 cannot handle over 512mb or 512mb but he is running 1 GB...
cool