i would go for Eset NOD32
I agree, Norton is very slow, and sometimes causes other problems. I don’t see why they don’t make their Corp version a public release for cheaper $$$. They would profit so much I think.
I’ve never used it so I couldn’t tell you if its worth its weight in gold based on personal experience.
What’s so special about the corp edition? It’s basicly the same thing (that includes the slowlyness etc).
Is zonelabs internet security any good? or should i get seprate antivirus and seprate firewall programs?
Zone Labs’s firewall ZoneAlarm is the worst POS software you can get, it replaces the TCP/IP stack (vital “driver” for Internet usage) with it’s own that’s extremely unstable. Use Kerio 2.1.5 (not 4) instead which is free and works a lot better.
As for Anti-Virus I’d guess that ZL’s software is below average unless it’s repacked/badged. Go with Kaspersky which looks to be the safest and one of the faster anti-virus programs, if it’s too expensive go with NOD32 which is slightly worse but still good.
I have to admit that I don’t see the point in their “IM Secure” software bu oh well, if there’s an exploit just upgrade or switch client to Miranda IM or similar.
Its completely revamped software, nothing like regular Norton editions, its a hell of a lot faster, and from perosnal usage of mcafeww, norton, nod32, etc…
I find it most resource friendly and to be the fastest.
Amazon doesn’t list the price nor carry it anymore, its out of stock for version 7.5.
They released version 8.0 so you might have to wait a while to purchase.
I am very pleased with Avast Antivirus.
The home edition is free and you get it here www.avast.com
At least last time I was in contact with corp edition it was just as slow and useless as the Home/Retail edition.
I cannot comment on older versions of it, I wa s introduced to corp verson as of 7.4/7.5 and I seen 7.0 but never physically touched the machine with it. Us techs weren’t allowed to do that on the particular job site when they had it… untrustworthy bastards
Personally, I use NOD32 for its lowest footprints, the fastest scanning speed, the unprecedent heuristics, and last but not the least the fact it has gained the maximum consecutive number of VB awards. I saw a graph of a comparative test on the Hungarian NOD32 website where NOD32 was far ahead of the “big players”. I love especially its HTTP and POP3 scanner which has already protected me from many new viruses even without needing to update.
Thanks for all your advices. I’ve selected AVG Free (beta version) mainly for it’s price even if clearly NOD32 seems to be a lot better.
Now, the (speed) result. Well, it’s like night and day, my system is more responsive than before (with NAV), and trust me that makes a serious difference
I hope that I will not regret my choice (although at this price …). When I see VB results, cleary AVG has failed a lot of times, BUT for the lasts months, it has passed the tests, it could be see as an improvement to a better performing AV software.
PS : I’m actually using Kerio Personnal Firewall (version 4.x), and I’m happy with it, but do you eventually known a better one as cheap. I saw that DiiZzY recommends Kerio but version 2.1.5 can you elaborate please ?
DiiZzY is absolutely right. If resource friendliness is your main concern, go for Nod32. A good and reliable piece of software indeed.
However, if maximum security is your concern, get a scanner with the Kaspersky engine, either from Kaspersky themselves (-> more resource friendly), or from other companies using the engine (often in combination with other engines, e.g. F-Secure). Kaspersky is especially unparalleled when it comes to trojan detection, it is better at detecting trojans than most specialised trojan scanners even. Furthermore, the unpacking engine is the best there is. Kaspersky will detect virii even if the most exotic packers were used to ‘hide’ the malicious code. This is one of the main weaknesses of NAV btw. (including Symantec Corp Edition).
Another recommendable AV software is McAfee (former Dr. Solomon’s AV), as far as the detection rates are concerned at least. The problem with MCAfee software in general is the extremely annoying spam with ads for their other products, and the Norton-like bloat…
P.S.: My guess is that DiiZzY recommends using Kerio 2.15 because it is lean, powerful and not bloated, just like the original Tiny personal firewall. The problem with Kerio 2.15 is that Kerio doesn’t update it anymore, and that there quite a few security holes in it already that can’t be fixed with a very restrictive ruleset either. It always makes sense to use security software that is updated regurlarly.
@ the ones who understand german… ;):
in this test you can (even as ppl who don’t speak german) click through and see in a table how much RAM the scanners need… and how good they detect viruses and things like that…
One of the best firewalls, at least considered to be by some experts, is ZoneAlarm (www.zonelabs.com). My personal experience was that the software is resource-demanding, and you can feel it on your system.
It was some years ago. I found a wonderful firewall and have been using it since: http://www.8signs.com/. Intelligent, smooth and effective. If you are interested in this topic and have time, please visit an interesting site, and at the same time you can check your system: https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2
Windows XP built-in firewall… well. Not enough.
It is better to use separate programs.
Norton: nomen est omen. In reality almost nothing is left of Norton, just the name . (Remembers the old times and Norton Commander).