Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
zephyr aka friendly hiker
Joined: 21 Jun 2009 Posts: 3370 | TRs | Pics Location: West Seattle |
|
zephyr
aka friendly hiker
|
Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:35 pm
|
|
|
Today I took my computer in to have a new hard drive installed with Win 7. I had been running XP forever and felt uncomfortable with the lack of MS support---especially since the announcement earlier about IE vulnerablilty, etc. I was getting more upgrades as well. There was a queue for the Service Dept of 3-4 days since others are in the same boat. Then the actual work would be another day or so. When we totalled up the price it became apparent that for the same amount of money I could get a more up to date machine with more RAM, new operating system, better video card, etc. and not have to wait several days. So I chose a new system.
When the salesman discovered that I was running Norton Symantec Anti-virus, he recommended switching to a different product. His opinion was that Norton used a lot of resources and seemed to be more of a hindrance than an asset. I have used this for a number or years and have had no complaint about virus protection, but my computer did bog down at times.
He recommended a product that he said I could get for free online by Avast. I am just starting to investigate this, but thought I would throw this out there and see if anyone else knew about this product or had similar concerns about Norton's anti-virus product. (I must add that several years ago, a fellow NW Hiker did suggest something similar, but I did not follow his advice at the time. I considered it, but life goes on and the Norton product automatically self-renews the subscription.)
Now that I have a chance to start over, I am definitely considering a change since the salesman seemed to have a good argument and he wasn't trying to get me to buy such a product from him. I had already decided to get my computer from him. He did add that if I felt more comfortable with an anti-virus that I was paying for, I should consider switching to Kapersky. I have heard of them, but no direct experience.
Thanks, ~z
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom Admin
Joined: 15 Dec 2001 Posts: 17857 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Tom
Admin
|
Wed Apr 30, 2014 11:16 pm
|
|
|
Avast. Been using it for years. Can't go wrong with it IMHO.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tom_Sjolseth Born Yesterday
Joined: 30 May 2007 Posts: 2652 | TRs | Pics Location: Right here. |
Kaspersky. Been using it for years. Can't go wrong with it. If you go in on it with others, you can get it for $20/yr ($60 for a three-user license). Plus it works on your Android and iPhone as well. Eugene Kaspersky is an antivirus pioneer who has been in the industry since the 1980s.
Avast is good, but Kaspersky is the best.
|
Back to top |
|
|
puzzlr Mid Fork Rocks
Joined: 13 Feb 2007 Posts: 7220 | TRs | Pics Location: Stuck in the middle |
|
puzzlr
Mid Fork Rocks
|
Thu May 01, 2014 1:53 am
|
|
|
I spent 30 years as a software engineer and have some familiarity with these products. Performance degradation from Norton, MacAfee and other commercial anti-virus products was a problem for many years, but computer hardware has gotten so fast that's less of an issue now. They were competing and adding features to look the best in comparison reviews, but you don't need a lot of the bloatware they added, and your service guy was being straight about that. Besides, recent Windows OSes as shipped + updates are WAY more secure than they were during the heyday for third-party anti-virus software. The most common intrusions these days are phishing and other social engineering attacks that trick you into giving up your password or other secrets. The tools are as not so good at preventing that because there's no malware involved.
I've heard good things about Avast and Kapersky, but I run my windows 7 box without any extra antivirus software. But I NEVER click on a link in email, even if it looks like it's from a trusted source. If someone sends me a nwhikers TR link I'll go through the trouble of searching for it myself instead of clicking the link.
|
Back to top |
|
|
tigermn Member
Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 9242 | TRs | Pics Location: There... |
|
tigermn
Member
|
Thu May 01, 2014 8:02 am
|
|
|
Tom wrote: | Avast. Been using it for years. Can't go wrong with it IMHO. |
Ditto. Have it installed on all my machines at home and have over the years. Never had a virus (knock on wood).
|
Back to top |
|
|
Cyclopath Faster than light
Joined: 20 Mar 2012 Posts: 7756 | TRs | Pics Location: Seattle |
|
Cyclopath
Faster than light
|
Thu May 01, 2014 8:23 am
|
|
|
I don't use antivirus software on my home computer. But then I make computer software for a living, so the last thing I want to do outside of work is be in front of a computer. I use mine to play music and to go through photos after a trip. Viruses (virii?) don't just come out of the blue, you have to run some malicious code to get one.
I'd recommend checking out Chrome or Firefox instead of IE.
|
Back to top |
|
|
tigermn Member
Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 9242 | TRs | Pics Location: There... |
|
tigermn
Member
|
Thu May 01, 2014 9:00 am
|
|
|
Another suggestion is to create a virtual machine for all of your web browsing, link clicking, bittorrent and such and never do any of this from your main OS installation.
That way if it gets hosed up you just nuke the VM and recreate it. Since I've never really had issues I personally have not resorted to this.
I read various reviews/rankings and such when I got my new laptop last year and ended up sticking with Avast. Besides the fact that I've not had a virus using it, it is also free. I couldn't see a reason to switch to something I had to pay for/didn't see any real benefits.
I think the computer came with Norton or something free for 30 days. I pretty much uninstalled that and went with Avast.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Daryl Big Shot Economist
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 Posts: 1817 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Daryl
Big Shot Economist
|
Thu May 01, 2014 9:43 am
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
zephyr aka friendly hiker
Joined: 21 Jun 2009 Posts: 3370 | TRs | Pics Location: West Seattle |
|
zephyr
aka friendly hiker
|
Thu May 01, 2014 9:46 am
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Magellan Brutally Handsome
Joined: 26 Jul 2006 Posts: 13117 | TRs | Pics Location: Inexorable descent |
|
Magellan
Brutally Handsome
|
Thu May 01, 2014 12:19 pm
|
|
|
Avast is fine for free. Kaspersky has everything in one package. Anti virus, anti ad, anti banner, a firewall, safe $. The list goes on. You can protect three machines for less than $50 a year. Look for it on sale, or buy a multi year contact.
|
Back to top |
|
|
Schroder Member
Joined: 26 Oct 2007 Posts: 6723 | TRs | Pics Location: on the beach |
|
Schroder
Member
|
Thu May 01, 2014 12:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
tigermn Member
Joined: 10 Jul 2007 Posts: 9242 | TRs | Pics Location: There... |
|
tigermn
Member
|
Thu May 01, 2014 12:34 pm
|
|
|
zephyr wrote: | There is one more quick related question. According to that wiki chart, the free version of Avast does not have firewall protection. So if I am using the free version, will my Win 7 have this sort of protection already in place? I am going to the store in a few minutes so will be offline for awhile. |
With Avast free version I've always just used the firewall that comes with Windows. Can't say how good it really is other than I have never had a problem.
I am certainly not adverse to spending money for a good product. I just haven't so far found a reason as Avast free seems to do the job. Maybe if one day my computer gets nuked I might feel different. The reality is though nothing is perfect. What one program catches another may miss.
I've owned Windows computers for many years all the way back to Windows 3.1 (at least that's the oldest OS I can remember offhand).
|
Back to top |
|
|
zephyr aka friendly hiker
Joined: 21 Jun 2009 Posts: 3370 | TRs | Pics Location: West Seattle |
|
zephyr
aka friendly hiker
|
Thu May 01, 2014 1:29 pm
|
|
|
Schroder wrote: | This place does comparisons on a regular basis:
AV-Comparatives |
That's a great page Schroder. Much easier to read than that wiki page I found. Thanks. Avast and Kapersky are both well-rated. And thanks, tigermn, I believe Iwill be okay with the inherent firewall protection in the new system.
I appreciate everyone's input. This has been very helpful. ~z
|
Back to top |
|
|
moonspots Happy Curmudgeon
Joined: 03 Feb 2007 Posts: 2456 | TRs | Pics Location: North Dakota |
|
moonspots
Happy Curmudgeon
|
Thu May 01, 2014 2:54 pm
|
|
|
Cyclopath wrote: | I'd recommend checking out Chrome or Firefox instead of IE. |
Yes, or even move to "Pale Moon", a Firefox derivative that has removed some of the extra stuff that's not usually needed, and slows FF down a bit.
"Out, OUT you demons of Stupidity"! - St Dogbert, patron Saint of Technology
"Out, OUT you demons of Stupidity"! - St Dogbert, patron Saint of Technology
|
Back to top |
|
|
hiker1 Member
Joined: 29 Aug 2009 Posts: 1624 | TRs | Pics Location: West Coast |
|
hiker1
Member
|
Thu May 01, 2014 3:06 pm
|
|
|
tigermn wrote: | With Avast free version I've always just used the firewall that comes with Windows. Can't say how good it really is other than I have never had a problem. |
Agreed. I could write the same.
I use Firefox nearly always.
(Although I don't like the v. 29 that just came out, kept v. 28, could just be personal preference.)
falling leaves / hide the path / so quietly
~John Bailey, "Autumn," a haiku year, 2001, as posted on oldgreypoet.com
falling leaves / hide the path / so quietly
~John Bailey, "Autumn," a haiku year, 2001, as posted on oldgreypoet.com
|
Back to top |
|
|
|